Posted 05/31/09 at 02:45:32 PM by Justin Kerr

In an unprecedented attempt to maintain some form of creditability, the Wikipedia arbitration committee has unanimously voted to crack down on the Church of Scientology by banning all IP address assigned to the organization and its associates. The conclusion of this case marks the longest running dispute proceedings in the websites history, and the full ban goes into effect immediately. The ruling also represents the single largest ban handed down by the encyclopedia monolith, an accomplishment that I doubt the Church will be adding to their entry any time soon.

The accusations made by the Wikipedia board include several counts of failing to maintain impartiality, and using the service to promote its own personal agenda. Multiple editors from the same IP range were logged in and were accused of coordinating their efforts to force through changes. This type of behavior is clearly prohibited in the terms of service, and also prevents people from using the wiki to publish original research that cannot be properly supported.

During the dispute it was argued by the Church that those editing from Scientology IPs were acting without direction from the Church itself, however, a former member of the Scientology Office of Special Affairs suggests otherwise. "The guys I worked with posted every day all day," Tory Christman tells The Reg. "It was like a machine. I worked with someone who used five separate computers, five separate anonymous identities...to refute any facts from the internet about the Church of Scientology."

So did Wikipedia handle this properly, and more importantly, do you still trust their neutrality.

Read More

Posted 03/17/09 at 11:08:25 AM by Paul Lilly

According to the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), this and other blacklisted hyperlinks will cost webmasters $11,000 a day if published on a website. The hefty fine applies to any site containing a banned URL, which was demonstrated last week when the AMA threatened the host of an online broadband disccusion forum after a user posted a link to a banned anti-abortion website.

According to The Syndney Morning Herald, the ACMA's blacklist doesn't significantly impact web browsing by Australians, but that could change if the Federal Government implements its mandatory internet filtering censorship plan.

The newest site added to the ACMA's blacklist includes Wikileaks, who drew the ACMA's ire after it published a leaked document containing Denmark's lists of banned websites. Wikileaks had also posted Thailand's censorship, noting that both lists have expanded from child porn to other material including political discussions.

"We note that, not only do these incidents show that the ACMA censors are more than willing to interpret their broad guidelines to include a discussion forum and document repository, it is demonstrably inevitable that the Government's own list is bound to be exposed itself at some point in the future," Electronic Frontiers Australia said. "The Government would serve the country well by sparing themselves, and us, this embarrassment."

The Australian Government's internet censorship trials are due to begin shortly, however none of the major ISPs have been invited to participate. O_o

Read More