2008/12/9 David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/dec/09/wikipedia-censorship-iwf-re...
This is apparently the *first* IWF decision *ever* to require review.
Well, it's probably the first decision of theirs anyone has ever noticed.
My prediction: they've been turned to mincemeat every media interview they've done on the subject, we've looked like stars. Everyone despises them. They aren't standing up too well under scrutiny. So I suspect they'll quietly unblock Wikipedia and not block again without at least telling us first.
I agree.
The censorship mechanism will stay in place
- the ISPs feel they aren't free not to sign up to this "voluntary"
scheme - and probably be refined to see if they can block sites like us again without breaking everything as they did this time.
And I support that - blocking child porn on the internet is a good thing. What I'd like to see is a little more oversight in the system and them notifying blockees (they'll probably say they can't do that because the child porn people would then know to move their site, and there is a point there, but I don't see a workable alternative - they'll just have to work harder to find out where they've moved to).
It is possible the IWF will try to make the decision stand. In which case, party on.
In that case, the pressure will move to the ISPs, and the ISPs don't have the advantage the IWF has due to being a "Won't somebody think of the children?!" charity. People will be reluctant to criticise such a charity, but no-one has any qualms about criticising ISPs.