An Ethical Discussion of the Australian Communications Decency ActOverviewWhat is the Australian CDA? (referred to in Australia as the Online Services Act of 1999)How it Works2) If the ABA agrees that the complaint has merit, it refers the case the the Office of Film and Literature Classification.3) The OFLC rates the offending content using its ratings system for movies and videos4) If the content is Refuse Classification (RC) or deemed Sexually Explicit (X) it can be ordered removed by the ABA if it resides within Australian jurisdiction.Its HistoryWhy is it interesting?Pros of CensorshipCons of CensorshipISP ResponsibilityImplications for US PolicymakersThe EndAn Ethical Discussion of the Australian Communications Decency ActJustin MandelComputer Science 99Dartmouth CollegeMarch 2, 2000Overview•What is the Australian CDA?•The History of its implementation•Why it presents an interesting ethical case study•The Pros and Cons of Censorship•The ethics of holding ISPs responsible•Implications for US politicians and policymakers.What is the Australian CDA?(referred to in Australia as the Online Services Act of 1999) Law enacted January 1, 2000 that requires all ISPs to ban domestic and foreign content including pornography, that is deemed “sexually explicit,” “overly violent,” or “otherwise offensive” by the Australian Broadcasting Authority (ABA)How it Works1) An Australian citizen sends a complaint via email, fax, or snail mail to the ABA2) If the ABA agrees that the complaint has merit, it refers the case the the Office of Film and Literature Classification.3) The OFLC rates the offending content using its ratings system for movies and videos4) If the content is Refuse Classification (RC) or deemed Sexually Explicit (X) it can be ordered removed by the ABA if it resides within Australian jurisdiction.Its History•Law passed the Australian Parliament on June 30, 1999, Enacted January 1, 2000•Passage driven by desire to protect children from offensive material•As of today, the ABA has received fewer than 50 complaints•At least 6 sites ordered to be taken down•Most simply move their content to US--based servers to comply with the lawWhy is it interesting?•Comparison to United States Communications Decency Act of 1996 which was struck down by the US Supreme Court•Gives government enormous power in deciding what citizens can see•Is uncensored information an individual right or a government obligation?Pros of Censorship•Protects children•Parents and companies can be assured that children and employees are not viewing pornography•Contributes to a moral culture•Eliminates hate speechCons of Censorship•Individual rights are more important than protecting children•People can decide for themselves what is moral•Pornography does not make you a bad person•Are we missing the point?ISP Responsibility•Uniqueness of Australian Law resides in the responsibility of ISPs for content that’s not necessarily theirs.•Can ISPs be expected to block all “indecent” material if the internet enables companies to constantly change their location?•Is protecting children more important than individual choice?Implications for US Policymakers•Does the Australian CDA answer any of our questions? Does it achieve its goal?•Is “decent” content a cultural issue?•Are ethical issues such as censorship cultural and regional issues?The