The British Government vs. The EU: Internet filtering
Regis Magnae
Posts: 6,810 Forum Member
✭
Apparently a proposal was recently made in the EU that internet filtering should not be automatically applied to broadband and mobile phones.
This, of course, flies straight in the face of Cameron's push for such things in the past five years.
In regards to broadband internet, such a rule would be a return to status we had only a couple of years ago, and even if such a rule did come into effect, it would probably not prevent the prompting to chose filters or not.
In regards to mobile phones, however, the change would be significant, as filters have been automatically applied to them for a decade.
The UK government has, of course, declared every intention to fight any attempt to prevent its filtering plans.
This, of course, flies straight in the face of Cameron's push for such things in the past five years.
In regards to broadband internet, such a rule would be a return to status we had only a couple of years ago, and even if such a rule did come into effect, it would probably not prevent the prompting to chose filters or not.
In regards to mobile phones, however, the change would be significant, as filters have been automatically applied to them for a decade.
The UK government has, of course, declared every intention to fight any attempt to prevent its filtering plans.
0
Comments
I also recall some in the EU calling for inter filtering after the Paris Charlie Habibo Attacks...
I wish you had told us that before the election, everybody would have voted for labour instead.
Labour would have done the same on this matter, though. Politicians aren't the ones in the driving seat; ATVOD is.
I think he genuinely believes we've forgotten his beloved Labour Party's equally abject record in this regard, and the fact that despite objecting to everything else Cameron does by default, when it comes to control and surveillance of the internet they can't kiss his backside tenderly enough.
Given both the Tories, and Labour support this filtering nonsense this is exactly the sort of thing I mean when I've said before that the EU effectively 'saves us' from the more extreme views of our own government.
To be fair, a proper constitution would have the same effect.
Maybe, but it would depend on who drafts the thing, and who is responsible for 'enforcing' it.
Didn't the supreme court in the US find their mass-surveillance 'constitutional'? I seem to remember something like that anyway.
I've always considered the EU, being a 'third party', to be a good safety net protecting us from all this rubbish.
I simply don't trust our establishment, but there you go. Too many incidences of nepotism, cronyism, corruption, crimes and cover-ups.
If our own establishment are responsible for constructing a 'British Bill of Rights' and deciding themselves whether things are constitutional or not that wouldn't make us much better than an oligarchy-state like Russia.
I somehow doubt the British Bill of Rights will include net neutrality. The Tories/bbfc etc. have not known what to do about porn since the invention of the moving image.
The idea of internet filters amuses me slightly because they're so pointless. Your average teen would no doubt figure out how to get round them in seconds.
So the right to be forgotten rule that prevents people from finding information easily on the internet, doesn't have the same impact as internet filtering turned on by default? I think a strong argument could be made for the impact of the right to be forgotten ruling could be much stronger, especially since the EU complained about provides revealing who had asked and who hadn't.
The EU has tried to make that apply worldwide, I'd argue no party has the highground here at all...