AUSTRALIA

Nothing has been finalised as of July 1997. The Commonwealth Government intends to give the Australian Broadcasting Authority the power to regulate on-line services. The key documents are:

CANADA

GERMANY

Commentary on the web by Wolf Graf von Schlieffen of the Institute fur Wirstschaftspolitik der Christian-Albrechts-Universitat zu Kiel

A new law likely to be introduced in two weeks and to take effect 1st of August 1997 focuses on the differences between the Internet and radio.

The essence of the new law is that, unlike radio stations, the internet service provider is not responsible for the contents of the pages sent via his/her server. He/she is not allowed to pass records of the data to authorities trying to make criminal investigations. According to this rule, the private company signature will be possible, allowing for banking and other commercial arrangements over the internet.

Special to the German situation is the existence of competing legislation, which makes the Federal level of government responsible for telecommunications, while the individual states regulate broadcasting. This may become increasingly significant point as the Multi-media evolve.

While enforcement is difficult on the internet is not seen as more so than in European TV and radio. In these areas the legislative borders are sometimes much smaller than the reach of FM stations. Here there are several layers of laws and self-organised decency agencies.

INDIA

Submitted by Dewang Mehta, Executive Director, of the National Association of Software and Service Companies (NASSCOM).

"Internet Services in India were until now provided by the government controlled Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited. Only recently, the government is in the process of announcing the ‘Internet Service Providers’ Policy in India. We expect this will provide a major fillip to Internet industry in India. On March 31, 1997, India had 40,000 connections. The total demand for the Internet in India for 1997 is envisaged at about 200,000 connections and a demand of about 1.5 million by the turn of the century. There are however, no regulation on "Internet content" in India. NASSCOM is opposed to any kind of censorship on Internet."

JAPAN

Submitted by Kazuhiko Yamada, Executive Director, Japan Information Service Industry Association (JISA)

"At the moment, there is no law to regulate Internet Content in Japan. Many groups are now starting to study the issue with the aim of revising the legal system for the future Information Society."

(List of interested parties and relevant web sites pending)

NEW ZEALAND

Submitted by Tony Tait, Executive Director Information Technology Association of New Zealand (ITANZ).

Last year a private members bill in the New Zealand Parliament called for ISPs to screen incoming data and edit out objectionable material etc. The Information Technology Association of New Zealand (ITANZ), and many other groups objected, pointing out it was quite impractical and would severely limit Internet information.

The Select committee reviewing this bill (to see whether it should be killed or not) has just announced that it is about to table a report on the subject to Parliament. We haven't seen this report but understand that it sensibly suggests that no new law is needed, rather perhaps some minor extensions to current legislation. Also it will encourage ISPs to complete their 'code of practice' and thus self regulate.

What follows is an excerpt from an Oct 96 ITANZ Bulletin article stating their position on the issue.

Investigation into the Content of On-Line Services, Australian Broadcasting Authority;
Information Society: Agenda for Action in the UK, House of Lords: Select Committee on Science and Technology.

It does not purport to be an exhaustive analysis of the subject but rather some general principles that may help New Zealand politicians keep on the right track.

The Internet challenges the traditional models for regulation of the media. There is no central control or ownership and any individual can create material and make it available on-line.

This dramatic new global communications medium brings with it some risks. Of particular concern is the perceived ease of access to material which is either pornographic or unsuitable for children. This is a serious issue and one which does not have a simple solution.

The IT industry is working hard to provide tools for parents to control the material that their children have access to. Sophisticated filtering software is currently available from a number of suppliers and an international industry consortium has developed the platform for Internet content selection (PICS) specification to facilitate labelling of on-line material. (See below)

As a contribution to the discussion ITANZ advocates the following general principles which will be sent to Members of Parliament as soon as the Telecommunications SIG has met to approve it.:

1. That PICS be accepted as an industry standard.

2. That content providers label their material based on an appropriate rating system.

3. That New Zealand Internet service providers conform to a voluntary code of practice.

4. The education of parents to take responsibility for restricting their children’s access to objectionable material.

In the end parents and care givers will have to protect their children from the hazards of the Internet just as they have to protect them from the many other hazards of life.

October 1996

Platform for internet content selection (PICS)- PICS promises to create a sort of do-it-yourself censorship that will allow everybody both freedom to speak and freedom not to listen.

Instead of creating a single rating system that applies the same set of values to all Web content, PICS encourages the creation of a variety of rating systems. Web sites can either rate themselves or they can ask to be rated by an agency. Rating systems can apply any desired criteria - from the amount of sex and violence a site contains to individual reviewers’ judgements on how entertaining it is. PICS is in effect a system for disseminating reputations throughout the global village.

Ratings can either be distributed with the document being requested or separately by contacting the rating service directly to see if it has a rating at the URL of the document in question. This second option means that third parties can rate those sites that might not necessarily welcome their judgements.

Whatever the source of the ratings, they enable surfers to anticipate what they are likely to see. By building the ability to read ratings directly into the browser, parents can automatically restrict their children’s access to appropriate sites.

PICS allows citizens to choose for themselves what they can experience, rather than have governments choose for them. The role of government in content regulation may change significantly.

UNITED STATES

(ITAA Submission pending)

A policy statement issued by Ira Magasiner, White House advisor on policy towards Electronic Commerce indicated the position encapsulated as: no censorship, the need to empower parents, and promote the use of filtering devices.

The Supreme Court has ruled that the Second Amendment of Freedom of Expression applied to the Internet.

OECD

A project is underway at the OECD to develop "an inventory for Internet content and conduct."

Less than a year ago the French minister for "Post & Telecommunications." proposed that the OECD undertake to develop a code of conduct for the Internet- a proposal which American Industry opposed. OECD have now opted for a different approach- to develop what they have chosen to call an "inventory." This is to include all the approaches by various governments to Internet content, including EC Directives, individual Government 'policy' or guidelines etc.

The US government is including in their delegation to these OECD project meetings representatives from American industry- many major companies are involved, including Microsoft, Netscape, and AOL.