British ISPs restrict access to Wikipedia

Krieg

The following notice has appeared on Wikipedia today when many UK users attempt to edit content:

"Wikipedia has been added to a Internet Watch Foundation UK website blacklist, and your Internet service provider has decided to block part of your access. Unfortunately, this also makes it impossible for us to differentiate between different users, and block those abusing the site without blocking other innocent people as well."

According to discussions on the Wikipedia administrators noticeboard, this is because a transparent proxy has been enabled for customers of Virgin Media, Be/O2/Telefonica, EasyNet/UK Online, PlusNet, Demon and Opal. This has two effects: users cannot see content filtered by the proxies, and all user traffic passing through the proxies is given a single IP address per proxy. As Wikipedia's anti-vandalism system blocks users by IP address, one single case of vandalism by a single UK user prevents all users on that user's ISP from editing. The effect is to block all editing from anonymous UK users on that list of ISPs. Registered users can continue to edit.
The content being filtered is apparently that deemed to meet the Internet Watch Foundation's critera for child pornography – in one case, this involves a 1970s LP cover art which, although controversial, is still widely available.

Reports on the admin noticeboard say that this filtering is easy to circumvent, either by using Wikipedia's secure server or by sending a request to find the page via parameters in the URL. However, no fix has been found – nor is one expected – for the proxy address problem.

"This is the first I've come across UK wide internet censorship, and I'm shocked. I had no idea until now that like China, we too have built a great firewall - only we keep quiet about ours.", user Hahnchen said, on the noticeboard.

Source:
http://community.zdnet.co.uk/blog/0,1000000567,10009938o-2000331777b,00.htm
http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/British_ISPs_restrict_access_to_Wikipedia_amid_child_pornography_allegations

Im kind of shocked by this. Never heard of the IWF until now but I think its obvious they are just exercising their power. I look at it as a kind of catch 22 situation, Wikipedia should not be hosting the image as I don't think there is a need for it, If its written in the article then I don't think it requires the picture of naked 13 yo girl. But, Im pro-net neutrality and I think its ridiculous that any organization should have this kind of power. In the case where there are child porn sites, they should be taken by domestic authority

Opinions?

digitally-yours

I am on talk talk and its working fine.
Also checked it through mobile and I can access it no problems.

In this current climate they must be mad to do it.

brianthebard

What album is it?

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

They showed child porn? That is pretty bad and it is a catch 22... I don't think the authorities should ban the site as this is not it's primary or even secondary purpose. The parties involved should be prosecuted and be made of an example of. yea?

Krieg

brianthebard wrote: »

What album is it?

Band: scorpions
Album: Virgin Killer

Basically the cover has a naked 13 year old on her knee's and cracked glass illusion (somewhat) covering her downstairs region

Boskowski

Reyansh Plain Product wrote: »

They showed child porn?

No they didn't. They showed a somewhat controversial album cover from the early seventies with a nude prepubescent girl on it. Although I guess this can be called inappropriate I can't figure what idea of 'porn' some people have these days. Fkn idiots.

watty

See 3 thread on Broadband.
Long standing problem for those editing from 3.

Mark200

Krieg wrote: »

Source:
http://community.zdnet.co.uk/blog/0,1000000567,10009938o-2000331777b,00.htm
http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/British_ISPs_restrict_access_to_Wikipedia_amid_child_pornography_allegations

Im kind of shocked by this. Never heard of the IWF until now but I think its obvious they are just exercising their power. I look at it as a kind of catch 22 situation, Wikipedia should not be hosting the image as I don't think there is a need for it, If its written in the article then I don't think it requires the picture of naked 13 yo girl. But, Im pro-net neutrality and I think its ridiculous that any organization should have this kind of power. In the case where there are child porn sites, they should be taken by domestic authority

Opinions?

It says on that wikinews page that the album cover is also on amazon too.


I think it's ridiculous that the ISPs are filtering it.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Ridiculous!

MizzLolly

Was there a thread about this only yesterday? Or have I finally lost it? :eek:

Krieg

MizzLolly wrote: »

Was there a thread about this only yesterday? Or have I finally lost it? :eek:

I tried doing a search but didn't find anything. My apologys if this is a rehashed thread.


I was just thinking, why haven't they gone after nirvana's nevermind album cover?

Creamy Goodness

Krieg wrote: »

I tried doing a search but didn't find anything. My apologys if this is a rehashed thread.


I was just thinking, why haven't they gone after nirvana's nevermind album cover?

because then they'd have to go after every single pampers ad since the dawn of time.

lostexpectation

an irish iso is doing this too? 3

Krieg

Creamy Goodness wrote: »

because then they'd have to go after every single pampers ad since the dawn of time.

hehe, quite true

Faith

God bless Sky, they just don't care what we do!

I had no problems accessing that page anyway. I used to be with Telewest but it turned to absolute shít when it became Virgin Media, so I switched to Sky. I'm not surprised they're part of the crowd blocking it.

floydmoon1

what about the cover of nirvana nevermind:
thats on wikipediahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:NirvanaNevermindalbumcover.jpg

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

What about classical art...?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Kiss_(1873).jpg

Capt'n Midnight

Editing of this article by new or unregistered users is currently disabled due to vandalism.

that's what it says on the album page

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/22/Virgin_Killer_alternate_cover.jpg/200px-Virgin_Killer_alternate_cover.jpg

SirLemonhead

I knew exactly what album this was when child pron and 1970s was mentioned. I'd be sorta embarrased to own the version of that album with that cover. Scorpions really do have some crazy album covers...

Terry

[NSFW] http://www.google.ie/images?q=scorpion+virgin+killer&sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1B3GGGL_enIE303IE303 [NSFW]

Phototoxin

so we're all paedos now ? Great... :eek:

IvySlayer

I don't see why people are going mad over this. Sure, some sick person might take 'advantage' of it, but that's a risk you take. I'm going to buy the CD to listen to the music, there is an artistic view to it.

God be with the day that shirtless kids will be banned from TV. Watershed TV has gone ridiculous with the standards IMO.

One naked child and there is beheadings! Well, not beheadings, but banning people from a site which millions use for information over one page!

Blazer

Faith wrote: »

God bless Sky, they just don't care what we do!

I had no problems accessing that page anyway. I used to be with Telewest but it turned to absolute shít when it became Virgin Media, so I switched to Sky. I'm not surprised they're part of the crowd blocking it.

That's because they're tracking everything you're doing on the internet.
Waiting until it's a real quiet news day,,, then tip off the cops and be there to capture it all live on sky
We'll then see every 20 minutes...breaking news "Sky help capture sicko" etc

Kold

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

What about classical art...?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Kiss_(1873).jpg

I came.

This sort of carry-on is a bit like the Victorians painting clothes onto clasical Greek & Roman statues and more recently Tom & Jerry cartoons being censored as being "racist".

Where will all this stop, are we going to have our entire historical archives of everything censored to "todays" values.

Book burnings etc...

IvySlayer

Deleted User wrote: »

This sort of carry-on is a bit like the Victorians painting clothes onto clasical Greek & Roman statues and more recently Tom & Jerry cartoons being censored as being "racist".

Where will all this stop, are we going to have our entire historical archives of everything censored to "todays" values.

Book burnings etc...

It's a cat chasing a mouse....

IvySlayer

IvySlayer wrote: »

It's a cat chasing a mouse....

When I watched it in the sixties, tom sometimes had something explode in his face and ended up looking like a golliwog!, not anymore.

Kold

I've downloaded a load of those racist cartoons for my own studies. The copyright have mostly expired on them which makes them useful for video work. Whitewashing is b*llocks.

Goddammit. I can't find the video I wanted to embed on youtube which probably means that they've taken it down to be PC. Was an animation to Leadbelly's Pick a Bale of Cotton. Censorship gone mad.

GuanYin

Have they banned the articles with the cover of Nirvana's Nevermind too?

I mean come on, that's gay jewish baby porn right there!!!! :eek:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:NirvanaNevermindalbumcover.jpg

Here are a few examples!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqDdBTlEcuA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4wCvOY2wPg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvBUGPvnSI0

Overheal

GuanYin wrote: »

Have they banned the articles with the cover of Nirvana's Nevermind too?

I mean come on, that's gay jewish baby porn right there!!!! :eek:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:NirvanaNevermindalbumcover.jpg

Now are we talking about the fact that the baby is circumcised or that its chasing after money?

Either way thats not Jewish: just American.

GuanYin

Overheal wrote: »

Now are we talking about the fact that the baby is circumcised or that its chasing after money?

Either way thats not Jewish: just American.

The kid was interviewed in Rolling Stone as a 15 year old. As far as I remember he's Jewish.

Xavi6

GuanYin wrote: »

The kid was interviewed in Rolling Stone as a 15 year old. As far as I remember he's Jewish.

Yeah Spencer Elden is Jewish

Donald-Duck

MizzLolly wrote: »

Was there a thread about this only yesterday? Or have I finally lost it? :eek:

I posted it 2 days ago so you haven't lost it:P

Donald-Duck

Should be renamed Wikipedio now

BaconZombie

At least it is not as bad as Aus:

Cartoon porn kids are people, judge says in Simpsons porn case

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,24767202-2,00.html

Donald-Duck

BOFH_139 wrote: »

At least it is not as bad as Aus:



http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,24767202-2,00.html

Sounds good to me.

thebman

Won't boards now be banned for the content/links on this thread?

:eek:

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Anyone old enough to remember the fax that went around in the early 90s....

"Mom, she lost her pacifier..."

Kold

BOFH_139 wrote: »

At least it is not as bad as Aus:



http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,24767202-2,00.html

That's actually just retarded. But Australia have started banning websites now haven't they? I'd hope their government isn't kept in at the next election.

Run_to_da_hills

Looks like Global Internet censorship could be imposed on us from G8 sources if certain members had their way.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/03/berlusconi_g8_internet/

Ziggurat

Donald-Duck wrote: »

Sounds good to me.

That a fictional character can now be treated as a real person? Sounds ridiculous to me.

On topic: I can't say I'm surprised. The Internet Watch Foundation are known for being your usual anti-pedo sorts, i.e. attack anything even vaguely related to paedophilia and damn the innocent people caught up in it.

Moriarty

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Looks like Global Internet censorship could be imposed on us from G8 sources if certain members had their way.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/03/berlusconi_g8_internet/

How do you say 'a series of tubes' in Italian, I wonder..

Nothing will come of it

Blisterman

I'm on Virgin Media, and I can't access the Virgin Killer wikipedia page.
Hmm.. pretty ironic for a company which has, in the past made use of several innuendos in its advertising related to virgins.

Anyway, I sent a letter of complaint to Virgin Media. It's a slippery slope, once you start censoring the internet. We don't want to end up like in China.

EDIT: Just recieved a call from Virgin Media. They basically repeated what the earlier new article said, and said that they weren't ever planning on lifting the ban. I asked "Isn't stopping child porn a matter for the police to deal with?" And they said that they were cooperating with the police to stop it.

I just hope they draw the line there.


On a side note, Scorpions, great band, but what were they thinking with that cover in the first place? I wouldn't consider it porn, but I'd be embarrassed to have that in my collection.

Donald-Duck

Quinine wrote: »

That a fictional character can now be treated as a real person? Sounds ridiculous to me.

On topic: I can't say I'm surprised. The Internet Watch Foundation are known for being your usual anti-pedo sorts, i.e. attack anything even vaguely related to paedophilia and damn the innocent people caught up in it.

I think its more the point that 8 year olds being gang raped in cartoon porn is still considered acceptable by some. So I'd compeltely agree with them getting rid of it.

Mr. CooL ICE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQkGnpi44TI

DeVore

Wait till they see the t-shirt for "Music in a Minor Key"



DeV.

Terry

The horny bitch.
I wonder did she get off on that. She can get off too because cartoons are people too.

Ziggurat

Donald-Duck wrote: »

I think its more the point that 8 year olds being gang raped in cartoon porn is still considered acceptable by some. So I'd compeltely agree with them getting rid of it.

You'd have a point if it were actual 8 year olds, actually being raped. But it's just fiction and any sane person has the capacity to distinguish between fantasy and reality.

I'm not trying to be contradictory just for the sake of it, I'm genuinely interested in seeing where this is going.

Red Sleeping Beauty

There's a copy of the album being sold out of Belgium if anyone's interested in it . For completist purposes of course. Clicky

I think this is absurd anyway. It's not pornography, you don't see genitalia, there was no abuse involved and the fecking thing is over 30 bloddy years old!!!


From the wikipedia article :

The image was designed by Steffan Böhle,[7] who was then the product manager for RCA Records.[6] Francis Buchholz was the bassist for the band and, in an interview conducted in early 2007, recollects that the model depicted on the cover was either the daughter or the niece of "the guy who did the cover design."[8] The photograph was taken by Michael von Gimbut.[9]

The image was reported to the FBI in May :

In May 2008, the US-based social conservative site WorldNetDaily reported the cover image on Wikipedia to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. An officer of the Concerned Women for America, a conservative Christian advocacy group, commented, "By allowing that image to remain posted, Wikipedia is helping to further facilitate perversion and pedophilia."[15] The May controversy prompted extensive discussion among Wikipedia contributors and was reported in the website's internal newsletter, which noted that "relevant content policies and community practices" state that "Wikipedia is not censored, and barring a legal imperative the decision to display or remove the offensive image rests with Wikipedia's users."[16] EContent magazine subsequently reported that the discussion page associated with the article declared "Prior discussion has determined by broad consensus that the Virgin Killer cover will not be removed", and asserted that Wikipedia contributors "favor inclusion in all but the most extreme cases".[

The Internet Watch Foundation's website looks like a piss take or something from the IT Crowd!
"The UK Hotline for reporting illegal content"

I'm expecting some sort of Batman character to pounce on the paedos or slide down a batpole .

Kold

I'd rather legalise child pornography than see these measures taken to where they lead.