While the Australian Broadcasting Amendment (Online Content) Act, which was passed by the Federal Government in June 1999, recognises an adults right to be free to choose the content they want to view
While the Australian Broadcasting Amendment (Online Content) Act, which was passed by the Federal Government in June 1999, recognises an adults right to be free to choose the content they want to view, it also has forced Internet Service Providers to develop a code of practice, under which they must provide Web filters to anybody who wants them.
However, for every anti filter advocate there is someone who believes that Australias laws do not go far enough. There has been criticism that our new privacy laws do not follow the United States example and spell out strict rules for how sites deal with children and protect their personal information. In fact, there are no provisions in the new Privacy Act for the protection of children online and it is unlikely that Australia will follow the US and pass a Childrens Online Privacy Protection Act.
The debate has proven a boon for filter software developers, such as Net Nanny, Cyber Sentinel and Cyber Patrol, some of whom have landed lucrative deals with major ISPs to bundle their products with an Internet access package. However, the filter companies are now finding themselves under fire because their products dont do what they claim. In fact, there is not a single filtering solution on the market that provides 100 per cent protection, and most dont even come close. Several of them have been criticised for being more effective at blocking valuable sites than the porn, hate and violence they are supposed to. Even more disturbing are accusations that their lists of banned sites are politically or religiously motivated and critics of their software often find their sites added to the list.
And it is not just the free speech advocates who are up in arms.
There has been international protest over attempts to filter the net and the quality of the software being used to do it.