A recent article reports that the discussion paper on whether Australia should introduce an R18+ rating for video games is not likely to be released.

Australia is the only Western country without an R rating for computer and video games. If a game is deemed unsuitable for MA15+ by the Office of Film and Literature Classification, it is refused classification and cannot be sold. Titles including 50 Cent, Bulletproof, Postal 2, Leisure Suit Larry, NARC, Singles, Blitz: The League, and Manhunt have all been refused classification in recent years. In 2008 alone, four game titles have been banned: Silent Hill, Fallout 3, Dark Sector and Shellshock 2. (Edit: as Liam points out, Fallout 3 was edited in response to the Australian ban, and has since been released in a cut down form here and worldwide.)

According to recent surveys, the average age of gamers in Australia is around 30 years old. The lack of an R18+ rating for games hurts both Australian adults and Australian developers.

An R18+ classification would require the unanimous support of all Attorneys-General, and in the past moves to change the current classification have been blocked on the vote of a single state Attorney-General. This appears to have happened once again. EFA has now launched a campaign to help Australian gamers to lobby their Attorney-General. It is our hope that public discussion on this issue will not be stifled by the unsupported views of one politician.

EFA's Chair, Dale Clapperton, was interviewed on Channel 7's Sunrise program on 29th October about the government's proposed mandatory filtering policy. A phone-in survey on the program revealed that 80% of respondents were opposed to the censorship plan.

by Dale Clapperton

A question that has been asked a lot recently is this: can Labor implement their 'clean feed' proposal without legislative amendments?

Much turns on the answer to this question.  To get any legislation through the Senate at the moment, Labor require the support of either the Coalition, or all seven of the other Senators (five Greens, plus Steve Fielding and Nick Xenophon).  If the Coalition oppose the legislation, any one of those other Senators voting against it will ensure its defeat.  The Coalition look like they will oppose it, and Senator Scott Ludlam from the Greens was hostile to it in a Senate committee hearing earlier this week, so at this point there appears to be a decent chance that legislative reforms to implement 'clean feed' wouldn't get through the Senate.

(more...)

There has been a great deal of publicity in recent days about a letter written by Mark Newton, a network engineer with a leading Australian ISP, to a government Minister concerning the Australian government's proposed mandatory Internet censorship scheme.

The letter resulted in an apparent attempt by the office of the Communications Minister, Stephen Conroy, to lean on Newton's employers to have him silenced. Nothing could better illustrate the weakness of the government's case than this clumsy attempt to silence critics.

Mark's letter is a well-researched commentary on some of the problems and potential unintended consequences of the government's proposal. We commend it to our members and supporters.

The letter from Mark Newton

Sydney Morning Herald article: Filtering out the fury: how government tried to gag web censor critics

EFA's No CleanFeed campaign

by Nic Suzor

Today I attended a briefing session on ACTA (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement ) hosted by the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT). I felt it was a good meeting, and I really got the sense that DFAT were interested in public participation. There was a good deal of frustration on both sides of the fence – participants expressed serious concerns about the lack of transparency in the negotiating process, and DFAT consistently repeated that they were bound by confidentiality agreements and could not divulge details of the draft text of the agreement. Participants in the Tokyo round of negotiations agreed that the full text of the agreement will only be made available after negotiations have been concluded and the text finalised. Understandably, there were a number of members of the audience who were hesitant to accept any of DFAT's assurances as to the content of the agreement without access to the negotiation documents.

Overall, whilst I think that the process is far too secretive, DFAT appear to have gone a long way to make available what they can, and they seem genuinely interested in hearing from interested parties in Australia. Unfortunately, input will be limited (blind) until negotiations are complete and the text finalised, but DFAT assures us that they are considering the issues thoroughly and there will be genuine opportunity to debate whether or not to sign at the end of the process.

(more...)

Electronic Frontiers Australia (EFA) today expressed alarm at the news that the Government's “Clean Feed” Internet censorship plan will not allow Australian adults to opt-out.

The filter, which will be mandatory for all Australians, was initially touted as a “cyber-safety” measure for homes with children. However, recent comments by experts have revealed the existence of a second, secret black list, that would apply even to homes that managed to opt out of the child-safe filtering scheme.

(more...)