This morning I open my Fürther messages and prompt me jumping an opinion (by Dieter Schwab) on page 2, entitled "Signal against child pornography" in the eye ( online version call )
The statements in it are simply wrong so I just had to write a comment. Let's see if he published is ...
Concerning "signal against child pornography" by Dieter Schwab, on 26.03.2009
with the request for publication, as in the current article were presented false facts.
Dear Mr. Schwab,
basically your belief is correct. Child pornography is bad and the abuse of children must be prevented at all costs. It is therefore imperative that discussions on Internet censorship with facts and not propaganda to lead the family and the Interior Ministry.
is completely correct and logical your call for the capture of the perpetrators. They claim that producers and distributors of child pornography for German Sit authorities reach abroad. This is factually incorrect. The significant majority of child pornography sites on existing lists of marks (Sweden, Denmark, Australia) is on U.S., European and especially German servers. The criminal reach of the operator of this site is guaranteed and a shutdown of illegal content easily available (as in the remainder of the child protection body care child, www.carechild.de , showed impressive three weeks ago )
Then you claim that the censorship model the Scandinavian countries had successfully established. Call it successfully, even if just on the filter lists 1% illegal sites are listed, but the rest is blocked and thus legally wrong? About the value of the pages you do not discuss, it is simply wrong to block legal content and that this in all countries, a censorship infrastructure have happened is a sad fact.
Furthermore, you can appeal by Ms Zypries on a sound legal basis can not understand. Are you aware can be the filter of the entrance to what? A government agency would have the power to remove any page for German citizens from the visible web - and you claim that constitutional concerns are not appropriate? I would be glad if more politicians with a would give such a backbone to restrain the progress of repressive laws. Also thank the providers must be said that they do not just jump on the Zensurzug. All Internet users should notify their providers that they terminate their contract in case of illegal censorship in order to push forward the constitutional process.
Finally, you claim that the proposed filter method would not work around for everyone. I do not think it particularly complicated a number of twelve points in the settings of the Web browser type in - because that would be quite sufficient with the proposed DNA-blocking.
The so-called market for child pornography, which is now long no longer conducts over the Internet, will not shrink through filters. Children can not thus protected from abuse. It is absolutely incomprehensible that the government wants to create a censorship infrastructure to consider the prosecution of the perpetrators rather than as a top priority!
Sincerely, John
Schöck
0 comments:
Post a Comment