UK IP Censorship

Financial Times, 6 May 1996

Internet provider to launch censorship

By James Mackintosh in London

Unipalm Pipex, the biggest provider of Internet access to
British businesses, has acceded to government calls for
voluntary censorship in a significant boost to ministerial
attempts to restrict access to electronic pornography.

Pipex is to block much of the worst child pornography from
subscribers and will also be supplying new software to allow
companies to limit the parts of the Internet - the 
international computer network - accessible by staff.

The decision is likely to have far-reaching implications for
the Internet in Britain because Mr Peter Dawe, managing
director of Pipex, is also political officer of the Internet
Service Providers' Association, the body negotiating a
voluntary code of conduct with the government.

Until recently Mr Dawe was opposed to any form of censorship.
But he has now decided to stop supplying discussion groups -
which are devoted to pictures of young children.

The software package will allow subscribers to block parts of
the Internet considered unsuitable, making them accessible
only with a password. As a result, parents will be able to
control which parts of the Internet are available to children,
and managers to ensure staff are not breaking the law.
However, Mr Dawe emphasised the impossibility of completely
blocking offensive parts of the Internet.

Pipex - the UK arm of UUNet of the US - does not expect a
backlash from users over the censorship. Mr Dawe said he was
sure Pipex's corporate users "would be horrified" at what is
available on the Internet. He said that if pornographic
pictures were found on office computers, companies could be
open to prosecution.

Cambridge-based Pipex, which claims more than 60 per cent of
the UK's corporate Internet users, selected which news groups
to block after seeking the advice of police at Scotland Yard
in London. The Obscene Publications Squad confirmed that child
pornography on the Internet had already become a serious
problem. "The majority of the people we deal with have used
news groups," he said. Child pornography had become available
to people who a few years ago would not have known how to find
it.

The approach Pipex has taken fits with the government's
preferred option of a voluntary code of conduct for Internet
providers, leaving censorship matters to users.

---

On Mon, 6 May 1996 anonymous-remailer@shell.portal.com wrote:

> Financial Times, 6 May 1996
> 
> Internet provider to launch censorship
> 
> By James Mackintosh in London
[...]
> 
> Pipex - the UK arm of UUNet of the US - does not expect a
> backlash from users over the censorship.

Let's see to it that they're wrong.

[ObFUCKING-STATIST: while the article is newbiegarbled, as far as I can
tell, they're only blocking specific newsgroups, and not any IP routes,
which would be worse. IMO, ISPs have the right to block certain
newsgroups, as long as they tell customers what they're doing. HOWEVER, if
Pipex is as big an uber-ISP and news feeder of ISPs as UUNet is here, then
they've clearly gone over the line as far as I'm concerned. I don't care
if AOL blocks alt.sex.kiddie-porn, because the kiddie-porners can simply
move to a real ISP; but the big players have more of an obligation to act
as content-neutral common carriers.]

-rich

Rich Graves <llurch@networking.stanford.edu> writes:
> On Mon, 6 May 1996 anonymous-remailer@shell.portal.com wrote:
> > Pipex - the UK arm of UUNet of the US - does not expect a
> > backlash from users over the censorship.
>
> Let's see to it that they're wrong.
>
> [ObFUCKING-STATIST: while the article is newbiegarbled, as far as I can
> tell, they're only blocking specific newsgroups, and not any IP routes,
> which would be worse. IMO, ISPs have the right to block certain
> newsgroups, as long as they tell customers what they're doing. HOWEVER, if
> Pipex is as big an uber-ISP and news feeder of ISPs as UUNet is here, then
> they've clearly gone over the line as far as I'm concerned. I don't care
> if AOL blocks alt.sex.kiddie-porn, because the kiddie-porners can simply
> move to a real ISP; but the big players have more of an obligation to act
> as content-neutral common carriers.]

UUNET in the US also blocks Usenet newsgroups it doesn't like.  They're real
unethical and dishonorable scumbags. Should we invent a protocol to encrypt the
Newsgroups: header and hide the newsgroups that David Lawrence (spit) censors?
:-)

---

Dr. Dimitri Vulis
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

Anonymous said:
> 
> Financial Times, 6 May 1996
> 
> Internet provider to launch censorship
> 
> By James Mackintosh in London
> 
> Unipalm Pipex, the biggest provider of Internet access to
> British businesses, has acceded to government calls for
> voluntary censorship in a significant boost to ministerial
> attempts to restrict access to electronic pornography.

[ deletia ]

Well, time to start posting dirty pictures to rec.arts.tv.uk.

-- 
Matt Smith - msmith@unislc.slc.unisys.com
"Nothing travels faster than light, with the possible exception of bad news, 
which follows its own rules." - Douglas Adams, "Mostly Harmless"
Disclaimer:  I came up with these ideas, so they're MINE!