Fees on Demand…YouTube set to start charging for its channels and become liable to the expensive ATVOD censorship regime for Video on Demand

Read more ATVOD Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from pocket-lint.com

The Financial Times is reporting that Google will launch paid subscription channels on YouTube sometime very soon. Channels will be priced from about £ 1.30 a month. The idea would allow traditional broadcasters to offer content to viewers YouTube has been interested in creating more high-quality channels for some time now. Recently it awarded grants of $1million to several UK bidders who pitched channel ideas. There is one interesting side issue here, because at some point YouTube will become, in the eyes of the UK government – and likely others – a broadcaster. When that happens, the firm is going to have to obey UK censorship laws and make sure that under-18s are protected from unsuitable content. Pocket-lint understands that the money YouTube gave to its channel partners to start channels was paid in advance specifically to avoid the need to be censored by ATVOD and Ofcom. ATVOD’s censorship fees are very expensive and the money is mostly spent dreaming up ways to suffocate the UK adult internet business. YouTube is currently outside of the grasp of ATVOD as user content is specifically excused from their censorship under European law. However material from commercial channels which may be TV programmes is not exempt from TV censorship once it is under editorial control and uploaded by the channels themselves.

Internet Censors…House of Lords Committee recommends measures to move internet video to Ofcom style heavy handed TV censorship

Read more UK Parliament Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from openrightsgroup.org See House of Lords Communications Committee recommendations from publications.parliament.uk

The House of Lords’ Communications Committee are looking for ‘voluntary’ participation in Ofcom’s content regulation, but these kinds of voluntary arrangement are rarely truly voluntary. Usually the government threatens legislation if the required ‘volunteering’ doesn’t take place. These are the key paragraphs from the House of Lords Communications Committee recommendations : 204.  Ofcom should investigate the option of non-broadcast providers of TV-like services, such as Netflix and the content providers mentioned in Box 1, being invited to comply with an appropriate set of standards (the Broadcasting Code suitably amended for their environment) in return for some form of public recognition or kitemark. (Para 53) 211.  We urge the Government to ensure that cooperation on the regulation of converging media content, such as the category of TV and TV-like material, is included as part of the discussions between the EU and the US about the establishment of a free trade agreement. (Para 94) 221.  Specifically, Ofcom should be required, in dialogue with UK citizens and key industry players, to establish and publish on a regular basis the UK public’s expectations of major digital intermediaries such as ISPs and other digital gateways, specifically with regard to protecting UK audiences and their families when accessing content through digital intermediaries’ services, covering for example: The scope of their responsibilities (given they are not always in direct control of the content to which they provide access); Appropriate processes for receiving complaints and subsequent redress; Any specific measures, such as access controls, content classification systems, or other actions which the UK public might expect them to take in protecting children from harmful material. (Para 141)

Bat Signal Calls for Internet Action Against US CISPA Law…Will the Internet Defence League also help fight against the proposed UK news and internet censor?

Read more Internet News at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from bbc.co.uk See also internetdefenseleague.org

Anti-censorship campiagners have switched on an internet signalling system to help co-ordinate protests about a draft law in the US. The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (Cispa) looks set to erode privacy in the US by exposing people’s browsing habits and surveillance of internet usage. The bat signal system tells followers to start displaying protest materials such as website banners and petitions. Plans for the signalling system emerged in early 2012 following protests and website blackouts in opposition to two other draft laws in the US, the Stop Online Piracy Act and the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act. The web action was widely seen as influential in the campaign that saw both those laws shelved. In a bid to harness the wave of activism those protests started, social news sites such as Reddit and Fark joined up with rights groups and many others to launch the Internet Defense League (IDL). Instead of reacting on an incident-by-incident basis, the IDL monitors threats to online privacy and let supporters know when to ramp up protests. The IDL also said it would create protest materials such as website banners, petitions and information about how to contact politicians, so people can voice their opposition in a co-ordinated manner. The question is, will the bat signal be turned on to help fight against the news and internet censor proposed for the UK.

No Respect for Free Expression…MP George Galloway initiates parliamentary motion calling for the censorship of Twitter

Read more UK Parliament Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from parliament.uk

EDM 1190 Twitter and the Detection of Crime Primary sponsor: Galloway, George: That this House notes that Twitter is now a very widely used mode of social networking; further notes that Twitter is a US-based enterprise whose primary motivation is to maximise its profits; further notes that Twitter is now used for a variety of criminal activities including sending malicious communications; further notes that Twitter refuses to co-operate with the UK authorities in general and the police in particular in trying to detect the source of criminal communications unless it is a matter of life and death , to be determined by Twitter; believes that this failure to co-operate with the detection of the sources of criminal behaviour is reprehensible; and calls on the Government to impose sanctions on Twitter until it agrees to fully co-operate with the UK authorities and police in the detection of crime. As of 16th march, no other MPS had signed the motion

Ed’s Programme Guide…The Government looks set to extend broadcast levels of TV censorship to all internet TV channels that present themselves in a TV’s EPG

Read more UK Government Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from parliamentlive.tv

On 12th February 2013, the government minister for Culture, Communications and Creative Industries, Ed Vaizey, appeared before the House of Lords Communications Select Committee to give his opinions about media convergence. One interesting point was that the government intends to extend internet censorship in the upcoming Communications white paper. The government looks set to extend the onerous TV censorship regime administered by Ofcom to all channels appearing on a TV’s Electronic Programme Guide. At the moment, internet TV channels are not subject to Ofcom’s suffocating TV censorship. Vaizey feels that ‘viewers expect’ anything that looks like a TV channel which presents itself for channel hopping in the EPG to be subject to the same strict censorship as broadcast TV. However channels presenting themselves via an app interface, seem likely to be let off the hook and censored according to the less strict censorship of the Video on Demand censor, ATVOD. So anything featuring biased news such as Fox News, or else hardcore porn will have to stay off the EPG, and stick with being available only as an app. Vaizey’s thinking is that viewers will not expect the same strict censorship for a channel that is more obviously internet based.

Tell us about the Spying Capabilities of Skype?…Open Letter to Skype from Concerned Privacy Advocates, Internet Activists, Journalists and Other Organizations

Read more Liberty News at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See skypeopenletter.com

Skype is a voice, video and chat communications platform with over 600 million users worldwide, effectively making it one of the world’s largest telecommunications companies. Many of its users rely on Skype for secure communications–whether they are activists operating in countries governed by authoritarian regimes, journalists communicating with sensitive sources, or users who wish to talk privately in confidence with business associates, family, or friends. It is unfortunate that these users, and those who advise them on best security practices, work in the face of persistently unclear and confusing statements about the confidentiality of Skype conversations, and in particular the access that governments and other third parties have to Skype user data and communications. We understand that the transition of ownership to Microsoft, and the corresponding shifts in jurisdiction and management, may have made some questions of lawful access, user data collection, and the degree of security of Skype communications temporarily difficult to authoritatively answer. However, we believe that from the time of the original announcement of a merger in October 2011, and on the eve of Microsoft’s integration of Skype into many of its key software and services, the time has come for Microsoft to publicly document Skype’s security and privacy practices. We call on Skype to release a regularly updated Transparency Report that includes: Quantitative data regarding the release of Skype user information to third parties, disaggregated by the country of origin of the request, including the number of requests made by governments, the type of data requested, the proportion of requests with which it complied — and the basis for rejecting those requests it does not comply with. Specific details of all user data Microsoft and Skype currently collects, and retention policies. Skype’s best understanding of what user data third-parties, including network providers or potential malicious attackers, may be able to intercept or retain. Documentation regarding the current operational relationship between Skype with TOM Online in China and other third-party licensed users of Skype technology, including Skype’s understanding of the surveillance and censorship capabilities that users may be subject to as a result of using these alternatives. Skype’s interpretation of its responsibilities under the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), its policies related to the disclosure of call metadata in response to subpoenas and National Security Letters (NSLs), and more generally, the policies and guidelines for employees followed when Skype receives and responds to requests for user data from law enforcement and intelligence agencies in the United States and elsewhere. Other companies, such as Google, Twitter and Sonic.net already release transparency reports detailing requests for user data by third parties twice a year. We believe that this data is vital to help us help Skype’s most vulnerable users, who rely on your software for the privacy of their communications and, in some cases, their lives. Sincerely, The Undersigned Organizations Abine, Access, AIDS Policy Project, ASL19, Asociacion de Internautas, Aspiration, Bolo, Bhi, Calyx Institute, ChokePoint Project, Crossbear Project, Cryptocat ,Crypto.is, Cyber Arabs/IWPR, DFRI, Digital Rights Foundation, Digitale, Gesellschaft, DotConnectAfrica, DISC Development, Egyptian Initiative for Personal Right,s Electronic Frontier Foundation, The Engine Room, Expression Online Coalition, Front Line Defenders, Free Network Foundation, Global Voices Advocacy, GreatFire.org ,The Guardian Project, Hermes Center for Digital Human Rights, Internet Protection Lab, The Julia Group, May First/People Link, Nachtpult, OpenITP, Open Media, Open Technology Institute, Progressive Global Commons, Public Sphere Project, Radical Designs, Reporters Without Borders, TagMeNot, Tech for Freedom, Telecomix, Thai Netizen Network, Tibet Action Institute, Zwiebelfreunde.

Suffocating UK Business…Ofcom fine Playboy TV 100K for not implementing impossibly restrictive child protection rules on its website

Read more Ofcom Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See press release from media.ofcom.org.uk

Ofcom has fined Playboy ฃ 100,000 for failing to protect children from supposedly seriously harmful pornographic material. Two websites owned by Playboy (Playboy TV and Demand Adult) allowed users to access hardcore videos and images without having the required controls in place to check that users were aged 18 or over. Unlike other pornographic websites, Video on Demand websites are regulated by Ofcom and the Authority for Video On Demand (ATVOD). Ofcom concluded that Playboy’s failure to protect children from potentially accessing these sites was serious, repeated and reckless. There are a number of controls that websites can use to verify the age of users. This includes asking for credit card details before any adult content is made accessible. Credit cards, unlike debit cards, are not available to under 18s. Unfortunately for UK business, a large proportion of potential customers do not hold credit cards. And of those that do, few are willing to type in the onerous details required just to take a look round the site to see if they are interested in subscribing. Some don’t want the hassle, and some don’t trust porn websites enough to hand out credit card details to sites they have not even been able to have a look round yet. Surely it would at least be possible for debit cards to introduce a flag to indicate that the holder is known by the bank to be over 18. Playboy TV and Demand Adult had breached UK rules by having by only have a warning and a self declaration of age in place. Both sites had hardcore imagery available before subscribing and both sites accepted debit cards for full access to video on demand. Ofcom claimed that due to the serious nature of these breaches, the following financial penalties have been imposed on Playboy: Demand Adult: ฃ 65,000 Playboy TV: ฃ 35,000 Thankfully there are plenty of foreign businesses to support that are able to provide customers with what they are seeking.

Trending Censorship…French minister for political correctness calls for the censorship and moderation of Twitter

Read more EU Censorship News at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from mashable.com See article from guardian.co.uk See  Najat Belkacem-Vallaud speech [translated by Google] original article from lemonde.fr

A series of insulting hashtags on Twittersseems to have prompted France’s minister for political correctness into calling for the censorship of Twitter. #SiMonFilsEstGay ( If my son is gay ) trended on Twitter for days in France recently. Before that, #unjuifmort ( a dead Jew ), #unbonjuif ( a good Jew ) and #SiMaFilleRame’neUnNoir ( If my daughter brings home a Black ) have come to the attention of the authorities. Now Najat Belkacem-Vallaud, Minister of Women’s Rights, said that Twitter must begin to censor hate speech. She argued that this sort of speech is illegal according to national law in the French newspaper Le Monde: At a moment when the government is implementing an action plan against violence and discrimination committed for reasons of sexual orientation or gender identity, I want, without prejudice to any legal action, to call upon Twitter’s sense of responsibility, so that it can contribute to the prevention and the avoidance of misbehavior like this. I want us to be able to work together, along with the most important associated agencies, to put in place alerts and security measures that will ensure that the unfortunate events that we have witnessed in recent weeks will not occur again. Belkacem-Vallaud adds that freedom of expression cannot be used with impunity, because homophobia and racism can quickly lead to violence. Children who are homosexual are put at risk when such discussions are spread without moderation on the Internet. Jason Farago in the Guardian explains how the French minister is going beyond mere prosecution for those who post such tweets and now wants Twitter to take steps to help prosecute hate speech by reform[ing] the whole system by which Twitter operates , including her demand that the company put in place alerts and security measures to prevent tweets which French officials deem hateful.

Insults Beyond Offensive…DPP updates guidelines to prevent internet users from being prosecuted for trivial insults

Read more UK News at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from bbc.co.uk

New guidelines could see fewer people being charged in England and Wales for offensive messages on social networks. The Director of Public Persecutions said people should only face a trial if their comments on Twitter, Facebook or elsewhere go beyond being offensive. He claimed the guidance combats threats and internet trolls without having a chilling effect on free speech. The guidance comes after a string of cases of prosecutions for jokes, and trivial insults, including the prosecution of a man who tweeted a joke threatening to blow up an airport. Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer said the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) had now dealt with more than 50 cases relating to potentially criminal comments posted online. He said the interim guidelines, which come into force immediately, clarified which kinds of cases should be prosecuted and which would only go ahead after a rigorous assessment whether it was in the public interest to prosecute. The guidance says that if someone posts a message online that clearly amounts to a credible threat of violence, specifically targets an individual or individuals, or breaches a court order designed to protect someone, then the person behind the message should face prosecution. People who receive malicious messages and pass them on, such as by retweeting, could also fall foul of the law. However, online posts that are merely grossly offensive, indecent, obscene or false would face a much tougher test before the individual could be charged under laws designed to prevent malicious communications. Starmer said that many suspects in this last category would be unlikely to be prosecuted because it would not be in the public interest to take them to court. This could include posts made by drunk people who, on sobering up, take swift action to delete the communication. Starmer said: These interim guidelines are intended to strike the right balance between freedom of expression and the need to uphold the criminal law. The interim guidelines thus protect the individual from threats or targeted harassment while protecting the expression of unpopular or unfashionable opinion about serious or trivial matters, or banter or humour, even if distasteful to some and painful to those subjected to it. Although the interim guidance is now in force, its final form is subject to a consultation that runs until 13 March 2013.

Playing the Nutters’ Game…Nintendo implement an internet watershed and ban access to 18 rated game info until 11pm

Read more Website News at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from eurogamer.net

Nintendo of Europe is blocking access to 18-rated content on the Wii U eShop at certain times of day, system messages suggest. For most of the day users are unable to access trailers for 18-rated Wii U games or buy 18-related content. Nintendo of Italy replied to a user who asked about being blocked: Dear customer, we would like to let you know that Nintendo has always aimed to offer gameplay experiences suited to all age groups, observing carefully all the relevant regulations regarding content access that are present in the various European countries. We have thus decided to restrict the access to content which is unsuitable to minors (PEGI) to the 11pm – 3am time window. Eurogamer has just tested this and it appears to be true. We were unable to access Assassin’s Creed 3 information or buy ZombiU digitally.