NationStates Jolt Archive


Britian blocks parts of Wikipedia for 'Child Porn'

Xomic
07-12-2008, 02:45
Wikinews has learned that at least six of the United Kingdom's main Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have implemented monitoring and filtering mechanisms that are causing major problems for UK contributors on websites operated by the Wikimedia Foundation, amongst up to 1200 other websites. The filters appear to be applied because Wikimedia sites are hosting a Scorpions album cover which some would call child pornography. The Scorpions is the band behind "Rock You Like a Hurricane" and produced a number of controversial album covers.

The measures applied redirect traffic for a significant portion of the UK's Internet population through six servers which can log and filter the content that is available to the end user. A serious side-effect of this is the inability of administrators on Wikimedia sites to block vandals and other troublemakers without potentially impacting hundreds of thousands of innocent contributors who are contributing to the sites in good faith.

The filtering is in response to the Internet Watch Foundation's list of websites that host or contain content that have been reported to contain inappropriate images of naked children. The IWF considers those images to be child pornography.

Contributors or individuals attempting to view an affected image or file, depending on their ISP, may get a warning saying, "we have blocked this page because, according to the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF), it contains indecent images of children or pointers to them; you could be breaking UK law if you viewed the page.". Other ISPs provide blank pages, 404 errors, or other means of blocking the content.

"The Protection of Children Act 1978 as amended in the Sexual Offences Act 2003, makes it an offence to take, make, permit to be taken, distribute, show, possess with intent to distribute, and advertise indecent photographs or pseudo-photographs of children under the age of 18. The ‘making’ of such images includes downloading, that is, making a copy of a child sexual abuse image on a computer, so, in the UK, accessing such content online is a serious criminal offence," says the IWF on their website in an article updated on November 28. The IWF says that there are at least 800 to 1,200 websites on the list of those who host or contain offensive material. The list is not public and the IWF never notified Wikimedia Foundation about blocking of Wikipedia content. The affected page does not display any message informing the user about blocked content on most ISPs, instead, a technical error message is shown. However, Demon redirects users to a block message on the IFW's site explaining that the page was blocked as the organisation suspects child porn or links to it to be present. The IWF states that "we do not notify site owners that their websites are on our list."

The concern for Wikimedia is for some images like an album cover from a 1976 record of the Scorpions titled 'Virgin Killer'. It displays an underage girl, posing nude, with a lens crack crossing over her genitals, but nothing blocking out her breasts. The girl appears to be around 10-years old. In the U.S. the band later replaced the image with one of the group. The cover was uploaded to Wikipedia in 2006, but Wikinews learned that on May 9, 2008 at (21:17 UTC), despite a result of 43 to 12 in favor of 'keep' on a deletion request, the image was deleted, but later restored a day later. Earlier on December 6, the image was put back up for a deletion request, but it was later closed as Wikimedia "does not censor".

Another image that is questionable could be a screenshot from the 1938 film Child Bride. Its goal was to bring to light the attempts at banning child marriages. In the article on Wikipedia, a screenshot appears of then 12-year-old Shirley Mills partially naked after skinny dipping. In the photo, at least one of her breasts can be seen.

Other albums featuring nudity below the age of 16 have previously caused controversy; Blind Faith attracted criticism as did Houses of the Holy. Multiple companies have gone public stating that they implement the recommendations of the Internet Watch Foundation. Not all of these are known to have implemented measures against Wikimedia sites; the major UK ISPs thought to have affected Wikimedia sites are, O2/Be Unlimited, Virgin Media, Easynet, Plusnet, Demon, and Opal Telecommunications (TalkTalk).

Wikinews has contacted Wikimedia's legal counsel, Mike Godwin and the IWF for a statement, but so far neither have replied. (http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/British_ISPs_restrict_access_to_Wikipedia_amid_child_pornography_allegations)

In all my years on Wikipedia, I've seen dozens of article's images accused of being 'child pornography', but I never thought anything would really come of it.

I have to admit this is pretty stupid, I'm the first one to stand against child pornography, but this is ridiculous.
Ifreann
07-12-2008, 02:56
What about that Nirvana album cover? Doesn't owning that album make one a sex offender in the UK? Ditto selling it?
Pure Metal
07-12-2008, 03:00
i'm with Plusnet but wikipedia seems to be fine
Ryadn
07-12-2008, 03:21
If it was a recent release, I could understand the controversy. Since the album cover in question is 32 years old, I think anyone who wanted to see the photo has, anyone who still wants to can easily, and this is a great posturing waste of time.
Call to power
07-12-2008, 03:30
omfg virgin gives me a blank page :eek2:

I've been drinking so I guess I will be the first to mention that I can get on 4chan should the need arise how odd
Redwulf
07-12-2008, 04:42
If it was a recent release, I could understand the controversy. Since the album cover in question is 32 years old, I think anyone who wanted to see the photo has, anyone who still wants to can easily, and this is a great posturing waste of time.

I'm not arguing that the image is child porn, but what does the age of the image have to do with it? 32 year old child porn would still be child porn.
German Nightmare
07-12-2008, 04:49
What about that Nirvana album cover? Doesn't owning that album make one a sex offender in the UK? Ditto selling it?
Especially since that picture is showing a baby with exposed genitals. :eek2:

Seriously, what a load of crap.

From the WikiNews article on the Scorpions' album (http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/British_ISPs_restrict_access_to_Wikipedia_amid_child_pornography_allegations): "It displays an underage girl, posing nude, with a lens crack crossing over her genitals, but nothing blocking out her breasts. The girl appears to be around 10-years old."
First of all, which breasts? There are none.
And wouldn't that also mean every kid on the beach not wearing a top would make an indecent exposure? Should the parents be fined? And what about those other adults who are on the beach, too?
Then, her genitals are not displayed - and whether or not going topless on a picture should be considered falling under the "indecent photographs" part of the Protection of Children Act (1978) is up to discussion, in my opinion.

And then there's the question of how far censoring art should honestly go. I mean, come on, are we going to cover up every little cupid (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cupid) out there? And why not apply the same standards to boys and girls while we're at it, huh?

I mean, seriously, I'm all for protecting children and persecuting those who make, download, and distribute pornographic pictures of minors.

Yet those pictures in question are not porn, nor should they be regarded as such!

By the way - is the Scorpions' discography on their official homepage treated like-wise? And if not, why not?
Sparkelle
07-12-2008, 04:58
If its child porn then how come I can legally purchase it at a music store?
South Lorenya
07-12-2008, 06:02
Christianity centers around a device for torturing people to death, so they should ban every christiuan site too. >_>
Thumbless Pete Crabbe
07-12-2008, 06:24
Christianity centers around a device for torturing people to death, so they should ban every christiuan site too. >_>

Images of torture devices aren't illegal in Britain, are they? :tongue:
South Lorenya
07-12-2008, 06:30
I don 't think they let you upload MPAA-protected movies there, even the ones that area reeeeeally bad....
The Cake is a Lie
07-12-2008, 06:40
If it was a recent release, I could understand the controversy. Since the album cover in question is 32 years old, I think anyone who wanted to see the photo has, anyone who still wants to can easily, and this is a great posturing waste of time. Is that in dog years? Or is 1992 further away than I thought?
Wilgrove
07-12-2008, 06:46
Remember boys and grls, Big Brother knows what best. Don't question Big Brother!
Ryadn
07-12-2008, 07:12
Is that in dog years? Or is 1992 further away than I thought?

The concern for Wikimedia is for some images like an album cover from a 1976 record of the Scorpions titled 'Virgin Killer'

...?
Epeiros
07-12-2008, 12:56
What about that Nirvana album cover? Doesn't owning that album make one a sex offender in the UK? Ditto selling it?

Kurt Cobain would only agree to censor it if a sticker were placed over the genitals saying "If you're offended by this, you must be a closet paedophile."

Ironic huh?
Collectivity
07-12-2008, 13:03
Just as well they don't ban excessive underlining Xomic or this posting would be a goner.
Laerod
07-12-2008, 13:10
Gee, and I thought the German wiki page getting blocked for slander was ridiculous...
UNIverseVERSE
07-12-2008, 13:10
i'm with Plusnet but wikipedia seems to be fine

Ditto. Still, it looks like it's time to find another ISP, or move up to business class or something which won't try to do things for my own good.
No Names Left Damn It
07-12-2008, 14:18
Is that in dog years? Or is 1992 further away than I thought?

It was 1976.
German Nightmare
07-12-2008, 19:26
Remember boys and grls, Big Brother knows what best. Don't question Big Brother!
Oceania sucks! Long live Eurasia!!!
Soleichunn
07-12-2008, 21:33
Oceania sucks! Long live Eurasia!!!

Pfff, Eastasia is where it's at!

Anyway, mass surveilance isn't what the problem with this, it's mass censorship.
Xomic
07-12-2008, 21:35
Just as well they don't ban excessive underlining Xomic or this posting would be a goner.

The quote is a link to the original article.
Skallvia
07-12-2008, 21:39
Yeah thats total crap...

In the words of the Late-Great Kurt Cobain: "If you're offended by this, you must be a closet pedophile."
One-O-One
07-12-2008, 21:42
Pfff, Eastasia is where it's at!

Anyway, mass surveilance isn't what the problem with this, it's mass censorship.

Mass surveillance IS a problem in the UK.

This is ridiculous, nudity =/= porn. My parents have pictures of me and all my sibling nude when we were children, something I imagine is replicated a lot. Nudity doesn't amount to porn, and if you think a picture of a child is porn just because they're nude, it's probably you that has the "suggestive" problem.

Hell, Wikipedia is the one thing my school doesn't block.
*Turns on some Houses of the Holy
Soleichunn
07-12-2008, 21:54
Mass surveillance IS a problem in the UK.

Well I'm in favour of MS, though only if it's applied against everyone and is open to the public and censorship being limited would be a part of that.

My comment was just talking about this situation, where the censorship is the problem.
greed and death
07-12-2008, 21:55
Wow can it be that the brits are more prude then the Americans???

let me rewrite history so the puritans left England because they were too prude.
Knights of Liberty
07-12-2008, 22:28
No, seriously, thats weak.
Epeiros
07-12-2008, 22:32
Bah. All it takes is one or two dumbfuck child abusers, and suddenly the media accuses everyone and everything of being a paedophile. Bloody Daily Mail/Express.
Gauthier
07-12-2008, 22:44
Honestly, if semi-nudity, let alone complete nudity by itself was pedophilia then almost anyone who'd ever taken shirtless baby pictures would be a registered Sex Offender.

Overreactive Political Correctness much?
Neesika
07-12-2008, 23:02
That particular album cover is fairly disturbing, to be honest.

But I don't support censoring it.
Dimesa
08-12-2008, 01:50
Goofy stuff, but it achieved what it set out to do originally, no doubt. Attention, even now.