EU Censorship News

According to Wikileaks the recently leaked Danish website blocking list is compiled by the Danish police and the Save The Children group and is supposed to contain child pornography.

It has already been determined by a poster at Somebody Think of the Children that the list also includes a website for a Dutch trucking company - vanbokhorst.nl.

However, it  can now be confirmed that the list also contains several LEGAL pornographic sites.

USC 2257 is the US legal compliance notice that all US porn sites are required to display.

Using Google to search for "USC 2257" reveals that the very first site on the list contains the US statement providing age confirmation and contact details for the authorities to verify the records. And indeed the site appears to be legal and legitimate.

The suggestion is that the Danish Authorities may be extending their banning remit to include such material as Hustlers Barely Legal.

A coalition of German nutters has published an anti-game violence position paper that is being referred to as the Cologne Declaration.

The declaration was issued in response to the German Culture Council's recent recognition of video games as cultural assets.

The Cologne Declaration argues that violent games are harmful to children as well as to the building of a peaceful society.

Several prominent German social scientists have signed on to the edict, which specifically refers to Counter-strike, DOOM 3, Crysis, Call of Duty 4 and Grand Theft Auto IV as killer games and landmines for the soul.

The document revives the notion that shooting games were developed by the U.S. military in order to condition recruits to kill and asserts that violent games further the aims of the military-industrial-media complex. Researchers who have defended games are labelled as collaborators and accomplices of the video game industry by the declaration, which calls for the government to end state support for game development and ban violent games. The document concludes with:

Wikileaks has obtained and released a list of all 3,863 websites that are being censored by Danish Internet Service Providers as of February 2008.

The system is used to filter out child pornography, although Wikileaks points out it can be used to censor anything and claims most sites on the list are still censored (i.e must be on the current list), even though many have clearly changed owners or were possibly even wrongly placed on the list.

Wikinews asked if Wikileaks was worried about the criminal implications of linking to so much illegal content, but they were not. The said that it was politically untenable to prosecute them, pointing out that Wikileaks is hosted in many different countries across the globe.

We asked them if they were concerned about the possibility of censorship in the UK, Denmark, Finland etc.?

No, Wikileaks told us: We welcome it. Wikileaks said it was because it will demonstrate how censorship systems are abused.

Wikileaks added As an analogy, one might argue that everyone should have a loaded gun in the house to protect themselves against home invasions. This seems perfectly reasonable; however experience has shown that once the gun is in the house, it will find other targets.

An eccentric Russian performance artist who likes pretending to be a dog and biting members of the public has complained of censorship in France after police removed from a prestigious art fair in Paris several photographs of him cavorting with animals.

Police confiscated 30 photographs by Oleg Kulik. The pictures, taken in the late 1990s, show Kulik naked on all fours. In some of them he appears to simulate sex with animals.

Owners of XL, the Moscow art gallery, who were attending the international art fair, were questioned about the collection for several hours by police and complained of being handcuffed.

Martin Bethenod, head of the fair, denied the works were offensive. The art world had been deeply shocked by the raid, he said.

Photographs of Kulik in his kennel, in a pigsty and surrounded by cattle had previously been exhibited in France without any problem, he said, adding that the photographs had an unquestionable artistic status and that Kulik's art is represented in French national collections. The gallery, he noted, had put up a warning that some people might find the images distasteful.

The UK's House of Lords will show Geert Willders' controversial Islam film Fitna . So says Wilders following the European Parliament's refusal to show the short film.

The European Parliament rejected a request by the UK MEP Gerard Batten of the anti-European Independent Party to allow Fitna to be shown in Strasbourg to MEPs and journalists. Wilders called the ban "censorship" and compared the European Parliament to Saudi Arabia.

Wilders has recently shown Fitna at meetings in Jerusalem and New York. He said the film will also be on view in the House of Lords in January.

Christian democratic MEP Maria Martens was pleased by the decision not to show Fitna in the EP. The film has nothing to do with freedom of expression. This freedom does not give the right to offend.

Conservative MEP Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert on the other hand called the banning of Fitna unbelievably stupid because the film does fall within the boundaries of the law and Wilders has now got more publicity and attention than if he had been able to show his film.

A press conference showing of Geert Wilders' anti-Islam/anti-immigration film Fitna has been cancelled by order of European party leaders.

UKIP MEP Gerard Batten had invited Wilders to the parliament to show the film and give a talk. Now he will just give a talk.

A demonstration was held on 5 December outside Paris's Palais de la Justice to protest against the heavy-handed treatment of the former publisher of the left-wing French daily newspaper Libération, Vittorio de Filippis.

De Filippis was arrested early in the morning of 28 November at his home in the outskirts of Paris. De Filippis was insulted in the presence of his 14-year-old son before being handcuffed behind his back and taken in a police van to the basement ‘holding pen' of the Palais de Justice. During his wait to be charged, he was strip-searched. His ordeal lasted for five hours.

His crime? During de Filippis' brief tenure as publisher of Libération, from June to December 2006, a reader's comment was left on the newspaper's website concerning a libel case being brought by Xaviel Niel, founder of the internet company Free, against the newspaper. As publisher of the newspaper at the time de Filippis is considered responsible for all editorial content, even one left by a member of the public. Libel, in France, is a criminal offense.

Whilst it caused uproar from political parties on both sides of the spectrum, and Frédéric Lefebvre, a spokesman for the UMP, President Sarkozy's party, called the arrest and interrogation ‘surreal', the response from the government has been muted. Interior Minister Michèle Alliot-Marie, in a faint echo of Jacqui Smith's protestations over Damian Green's recent arrest, merely said that The police officers followed procedures and were simply acting on the orders of the investigating judge handling the case.

The European Court of Human Rights held that the publication of a cartoon representing the attack on the twin towers of the World Trade Centre, with a caption which parodied the advertising slogan of a famous brand: We have all dreamt of it… Hamas did it, provoked a certain public reaction, capable of stirring up violence and demonstrating a plausible impact on public order in a politically sensitive region, namely the Basque Country.

Therefore the conviction did not violate Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention on Human Rights in respect of the applicant's conviction for complicity in condoning terrorism.

The drawing was published in the Basque weekly newspaper Ekaitza on 13 September, 2001, two days after the attacks of September 11.

Following publication of the drawing, the Bayonne public prosecutor brought proceedings against the cartoonist Denis Leroy and the newspaper's publishing director on charges of complicity in condoning terrorism and condoning terrorism.

In January 2002 the court convicted them of these charges and ordered them to pay a fine of EUR 1,500 each, to publish the judgment at their own expense in Ekaitza and two other newspapers and to pay costs.

Denis Leroy then appealed to the European Court.

Summary of the judgment

The Court considered that the applicant's conviction amounted to an interference with the exercise of his right to freedom of expression. This interference was prescribed by French law and pursued several legitimate aims, having regard to the sensitive nature of the fight against terrorism, namely the maintenance of public safely and the prevention of disorder and crime. It remained to be determined whether this interference was necessary in a democratic society.

The applicant complained that the French courts had denied his real intention, which was governed by political and activist expression, namely that of communicating his anti-Americanism through a satirical image and illustrating the decline of American imperialism. The Court, however, considered that the drawing was not limited to criticism of American imperialism, but supported and glorified the latter's violent destruction. In this regard, the Court based its finding on the caption which accompanied the drawing, and noted that the applicant had expressed his moral support for those whom he presumed to be the perpetrators of the attacks of 11 September 2001. Through his choice of language, the applicant commented approvingly on the violence perpetrated against thousands of civilians and diminished the dignity of the victims.

Although the domestic courts had not taken the applicant's intentions into account, they had examined whether the context of the case and the public interest justified the possible use of a measure of provocation or exaggeration. In this respect, it had to be recognised that the drawing had assumed a special significance in the circumstances of the case, as the applicant must have realised. He submitted his drawing on the day of the attacks and it was published on 13 September, with no precautions on his part as to the language used. In the Court's opinion, this factor - the date of publication - was such as to increase the applicant's responsibility in his account of, and even support for, a tragic event, whether considered from an artistic or a journalistic perspective. In addition, the impact of such a message in a politically sensitive region, namely the Basque Country, was not to be overlooked; the weekly newspaper's limited circulation notwithstanding, the Court noted that the drawing's publication had provoked a certain public reaction, capable of stirring up violence and demonstrating a plausible impact on public order in the region.

Consequently, the Court considered that the grounds put forward by the domestic courts in convicting the applicant had been “relevant and sufficient”.

In conclusion, having regard to the modest nature of the fine imposed on the applicant and the context in which the impugned drawing had been published, the Court found that the measure imposed on the applicant had not been disproportionate to the legitimate aim pursued. Accordingly, there had not been a violation of Article 10.

I decided to fire off some more questions to the Southern Irish State Film Censor, John Kelleher.

Here are a few news articles covering some of the film censorship developments over recent times.

This one is particularly interesting, and depressing. At least the censors hired by the BBFC aren't selected on a party political-jobs for the boys basis.

I said to the Irish Censor, about a year ago, that the assistant censors were largely female, and married (or had children) or were older, and that all three of these factors had been shown to give a predisposition towards censorship.

He had the nerve to question my basis for saying that!

5 minutes spent reading the public research on either the BBFC or Ofcom websites would convince anybody of that, quite apart from it being plainly obvious to anyone who has talked about these issues to these different groups or just has a grasp of real life.

Of course I was on the wrong tack, what I didn't know back then was that the assistant censors were largely picked for their present or past membership of the Fianna Fáil political party!

In addition, despite the appeal by Shauna's Adult shop over Anabolic Initiations No.5 to the Supreme Court still not having been resolved, the police here are still seizing adult dvds on the basis that they don't have a certificate from IFCO which IFCO refuses to grant, of course.

This article says that it's IFCO sending them in.

But the censor told me that they were just called in by the police to adjudge whether a seized video was something that would be classifiable or not, ie just an expert witness which is also the BBFC official line.

Other articles:

• 750-pornographic-dvds-seized-in-dublin
• gardai-seize-8000-adult-movies-in-raids
• This article mentions 76,569 illegal dvds seized in 2007 and 62,724 so far in 2008, although it's not clear whether these figures mainly comprise hardcore dvds or pirate Disney movies etc.

There is now a new act, the catchily named Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2008 . It is available online as a pdf

The sections to do with censorship are sections 9 and 10.

It amends the law on cinema certification and dvd certification, reaffirming as it does so, a ban on a cinema certificate if the film contains blasphemy , something I raised with the censor as they clearly just copied the phrases used in the Censorship of Films 1923 Act.

The (Irish) Video Recordings Act 1989 in contrast talks about stirring up religious hatred which isn't quite as bad, or out of date as a concept if still objectionable on free expression grounds.

This new law was reported in the press:

• new-powers-set-to-tackle-illegal-dvd-trade
• This supine, non-critical article about the name change was published.
  film-censor-ditches-nanny-state-image

I have received a reply from the censor but I want to follow up some of his answers so I'll send you more when I have it.

Italian politicians, commentators, and gay rights groups are taking Italian state television to task for airing the 2005 film Brokeback Mountain without two scenes depicting sexual encounters between its male lead characters, reports the Associated Press.

The Oscar-winning film tells the story of two cowboys who fall in love and have a years-long secret affair. Protesters say that the unaired scenes — in which the two lead characters, played by Jake Gyllenhaal and the late Heath Ledger, kiss and have passionate sex in a tent — are central to the film's plot and would never have been cut from the film if they involved heterosexual characters.

RAI TV said in a statement that the cut version of the film, provided by the distributor to be shown during prime time, had been aired by mistake. No one had checked for an uncut version for the late-night airing in question, it said.

But some protesters said that the scenes should have stayed in no matter when the film was shown.

I don't believe it was an oversight, I believe it was preventive censorship, said gay rights advocate and former lawmaker Vladimir Luxuria, adding that cutting the key scenes was like showing the Mona Lisa without its head.

It is grotesque that RAI censored scenes that have the same content as those seen in most prime-time movies, conservative lawmaker Benedetto Della Vedova was quoted as saying by the Corriere della Sera newspaper. Luigi Vimercati, a center-left lawmaker, told the paper he would take up the issue in parliament.

JThe EU will have a new Safer Internet Programme as of 1 January 2009.

Following the overwhelmingly positive vote on 23 October in which the European Parliament expressed its support for the new Safer Internet Programme, the Council of Ministers has adopted the new Programme. The €55 million  programme will cover the period 2009-2013.

A new Eurobarometer survey shows that 60% of European parents are worried that their child might become a victim of online grooming and 54% that their children could be bullied online.

The proposed new programme will co-fund projects to:

• Increase public awareness: empower young people, their parents and teachers to make responsible choices online by advising them on relevant precautions to take.
   
• Provide the public with a network of contact points that could be reached either via a website or a phone number, for reporting illegal and harmful content and conduct, in particular on child sexual abuse material, grooming and cyber bullying.
   
• Foster self-regulatory initiatives in this field and involve children in creating a safer online environment.
   
• Establish a knowledge base on new trends in the use of online technologies and their consequences for children's lives by bringing together at European level technical, psychological and sociological expertise.

The € 55 million budget for the new Safer Internet Programme will be distributed as follows: 48% should serve to raise public awareness, 34% to fight against illegal content and tackle harmful conduct online, 10% to promote a safer online environment and 8% to establish a knowledge base.

Italian president and media baron Silvio Berlusconi has said that he would use his country's imminent presidency of the G8 group to push for an international agreement to regulate the internet.

Italy's G8 presidency begins on January 1. The holder country is responsible for organising and hosting the G8's meetings and setting the agenda.

Berlusconi didn't explain what he meant by regulate the internet , but the mere mention of it has prompted dismay among Italian commentators. Berlusconi owns swathes of the Italian mass media.

The left-wing newspaper L'Unita wrote: You can not say that it is not a disturbing proclamation, given that the only countries in the world where there are filters or restrictions against internet are countries ruled by dictatorial regimes: those between China, Iran, Cuba, Saudi Arabia.

La Stampa reports Italian bloggers are planning to protest against any move by the president to tighten government control over the web tomorrow. They plan to display anti-Berlusconi banners on their websites.

Any G8 move next year to regulate the internet led by Berlusconi is likely to attract criticism. He has often been accused of using his power to try to silence dissent. He lost a long-running libel battle against The Economist earlier this year after it said he was not fit to run Italy and was this week suing American critic Andrew Stille for defamation*.

A delegation from the European Parliament urged Turkish officials to make the necessary legal arrangements to enhance freedom of expression and eventually lift the ban on access to YouTube.

Banning YouTube, Google's blogging site, the websites of a teachers' trade union, Richard Dawkins and even a Turkish dictionary stands alongside more than 40 cases against writers and journalists even since the reform of the so-called anti-Turkishness article of the penal code, Richard Howitt, the vice president of the European Parliament's Human Rights Sub-Committee, said in a written statement on Friday.

The British Euro MP called for the ban to be overturned at a meeting with Turkish Justice Minister Mehmet Ali Sahin in Ankara on Thursday, the statement added.

Howitt criticized the ban, saying that around 1,000 websites are blocked in Turkey and this places the country alongside some of the world's worst nations for cyber censorship. As a modern country looking forward to European Union membership, Turkey should be embracing new communications rather than putting itself in the same bracket as some of the world's pariah states, Howitt added in the statement.

Ten politically appointed censors were each paid an average of €30,000 a year for watching films.

The Assistant Classifiers earned a total of €1.2m in pay and expenses over the last four years for travelling to Dublin to watch movies and deciding whether or not they should be banned, or for what age group they are suitable.

Assistant film classifiers earn €182 a day plus travel and subsistence for their work of classifying videos, said the Fine Gael justice spokesman Charlie Flanagan.

Of the 10, many of whom have no apparent qualifications in the area of film, a number have been Assistant Classifiers for 15 years.

Among them is former Fianna Fail Dail candidate Olga Bennett, the Fianna Fail Meath activist Tony Stapleton, former Kildare Fianna Fail county councillor PJ Sheridan and the former Fianna Fail TD Marian McGennis. Former Fianna Fail senator Tom Fitzgerald, who was a close associate of Charles Haughey, has been in the job for the last six years. A more recently appointee is Green activist Elizabeth Davidson.

In this new age of quango busting, where departments were supposed to look forensically through their books, it was amazing this convenient retirement home, where ex Fianna Fail politicians and one Green activist get paid to spend the day watching films, had escaped unscathed, said Flanagan: The minister should give this particular perk an X-rating and abolish it.