Connect with us

International

UK Porn Ban Will Take Effect in July

Published

on

  • The UK announced on Wednesday that it will implement a new law effectively banning people from viewing online pornography unless they have explicitly proven they are 18 or older.
  • The law, which is set to go into effect July 15, will require pornography providers to implement a “rigorous” age-verification process, and punish websites that fail to comply by withdrawing payment services or blocking the websites entirely from being viewed in the UK.
  • While the government has promised data security and privacy protections, opponents of the law have said it could lead to the creation of a database of UK porn viewers that could be susceptible to scammers stealing identification documents or leaks exposing other private information.

UK to Ban Porn

A new law in the UK set to go into effect in July will ban people from accessing online porn without first verifying that they are over 18.

The government officials confirmed Wednesday that the UK will become the first country in the world to implement a “rigorous” age-verification process for online pornography. The law will come into force on July 15.

Once the law goes into effect, internet pornography websites will be required to check that all users are at least 18-years-old. Websites that do not comply with the new law will risk having their sites blocked for all UK users or risk having their payment services withdrawn.

“Adult content is currently far too easy for children to access online,” said Margot James, the Minister for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport. “We’ve taken the time to balance privacy concerns with the need to protect children from inappropriate content.”

However, an email sent from James’ office containing a press release about the ban allowed the addresses of all 300 recipients to be seen by other people. James described the incident as a data “error,” but many were quick to express skepticism over the ministry’s ability to enforce data security when their press release addressing the issue was itself a breach of data privacy.

The shape and form that the age verification checks remain vague at this time. According to a press release from the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC), the body that will enforce and regulate the law:

“There will be a number of age-verification options available, so a user can choose what’s right for them […] Age-verification solutions range from the use of traditional ID documents online (for example, credit cards or passports) to mobile phones where the adult filters have been removed. Users can also use digital IDs or buy a card over the counter in a shop where the verification is face to face.”

Privacy Concerns

BBFC also stated in the press release that they plan to implement a “voluntary” age-certification program called the Age-verification Certificate (AVC), in order to better ensure privacy and data security.

Under the AVC program, providers that choose to become certified will receive a green ‘AV’ symbol which indicates that “rigorous security checks have been met and the provider has a high standard of data protection.”

While the government seems keen on ensuring data security protections, some people are concerned that the law could result in the creation of a database that contains private identification information of the UK’s porn viewers.

Jim Killock, the Executive Director of Open Rights Group, warned that such a database could pose a huge privacy risk if the BBFC goes forward with its “voluntary” verification system and does not impose a mandatory one.

“The idea that they are ‘optional’ is dangerous and irresponsible,” Killock said.“Having some age verification that is good and other systems that are bad is unfair and a scammer’s paradise – of the government’s own making.”

“Data leaks could be disastrous,” Killock continued.“The government needs to shape up and legislate for privacy before their own policy results in people being outed, careers destroyed or suicides being provoked.”

Is the Law Too Lax?

Others have criticized the new legislation as potentially ineffective, noting that there will likely be a number of ways for people to skirt the law.

People who want to bypass the restrictions can just go to platforms that are not covered by the rules. A good number of websites fall under this category because of a provision in the law that says more than a third of a website’s content has to be pornographic to quality as a pornography provider.

Under that exception, sites like Twitter, Reddit, and Imgur will not be regulated. Perhaps the biggest loophole is that the law does not apply to platforms that host pornography and do not charge fees or make money from advertisements or by other means.

Others are critical of how effective the verification checks will be. For example, if getting around a check requires a login that has been verified, it can be expected that those already-verified logins will be shared easily.

Additionally, because the law only applies in the UK, those who live in the UK can also flout the law by using a VPN so it appears their internet connection is in another country. This allows them to access that countries version of the website that does not have the ban.

The UK’s new ban comes a week after the government released a document proposing a set of rules which could penalize social media companies like Twitter and Facebook for allowing users to access harmful content including child abuse, terrorist content, cyberbullying and trolling, encouraging self-harm, and spreading disinformation.

In addition to punishing social media companies by holding them legally accountable for content that is deemed harmful, the government also said it was looking into ways it could slap tech companies with heavy fines, block access to websites, and hold company executives personally liable for not limiting harmful content.

Critics of the proposed rules have argued that they could lead to censorship and have unintended ramifications for tech companies. Like the pornography ban, the proposed rules are aimed at regulating social media and internet safety.

See what others are saying: (The Independent) (BBC) The Guardian)

International

95-Year-Old Woman Dies After Police Tases Her in Nursing Home

Published

on

The officer involved was suspended with pay and charged with assault.


A 95-year-old Australian woman whom police tasered in a nursing home last week has reportedly died from her injuries.

Clare Nowland, who had dementia and required a walking frame to stand up and move, was living at the Yallambee Lodge in Cooma in southeastern Australia.

At about 4:15 a.m. on May 17, police and paramedics responded to a report of a woman standing outside her room with a steak knife.

They encountered Nowland, then reportedly tried to negotiate with her for several minutes, but she didn’t drop the knife.

The five-foot-two, 95-pound woman walked toward the two officers “at a slow pace,” police said at a news conference, so one of them tasered her.

She fell to the floor and reportedly suffered a fractured skull and a severe brain bleed, causing her to be hospitalized in critical condition.

Nowland passed away in a hospital surrounded by her family, the New South Wales police confirmed in a statement today.

After a week-long investigation, the police force also said that the senior constable involved would appear in court next week to face charges of recklessly causing grievous bodily harm, assault occasioning actual bodily harm, and common assault.

NSW police procedure states that tasers should not be used against elderly or disabled people absent exceptional circumstances.

Following the incident, community members, activists, and disability rights advocates expressed bewilderment and anger at what they called an unnecessary use of force, and some are now questioning why law enforcement took so long to prosecute the officer involved.

See what others are saying: (Reuters) (The New York Times) (CNN)

Continue Reading

International

U.K. Police Face Backlash After Arresting Anti-Monarchy Protesters

Published

on

London Mayor Sadiq Khan said that some of the arrests “raise questions” and “investigations are ongoing.”


The Public Order Act

A controversial protest crackdown law in the U.K. is facing criticism after dozens of anti-monarchy protesters were arrested during the coronation ceremony in London over the weekend.

The law, dubbed the “Public Order Act” was passed roughly a week ahead of the coronation for King Charles III. It gives police more power to restrict protesters and limits the tactics protesters can use in public spaces. It was condemned by human rights groups upon its passing, and is facing a new round of heat after 52 people were arrested over coronation protests on Saturday.

In a statement, the Metropolitan Police said protesters were arrested for public order offenses, breach of the peace and conspiracy to cause a public nuisance. The group said it gave advance warning that its “tolerance for any disruption, whether through protest or otherwise, will be low and that we would deal robustly with anyone intent on undermining the celebration.”

It is currently unclear how many of those arrested were detained specifically for violating the Public Order Act, however, some of those arrested believe the new law was used against them.

“Make no mistake. There is no longer a right to peaceful protest in the UK,” Graham Smith, the CEO of anti-monarchy group Republic tweeted after getting arrested. “I have been told many times the monarch is there to defend our freedoms. Now our freedoms are under attack in his name.”

An Attempt to “Diminish” Protests

During a BBC Radio interview, Smith also said he believes the dozens of arrests were premeditated. 

“There was nothing that we did do that could possibly justify even being detained and arrested and held,” Smith claimed. 

“The whole thing was a deliberate attempt to disrupt and diminish our protest.”

Yasmine Ahmed, the U.K. Director of Human Rights Watch, also tweeted that the arrests were “disgraceful.”

“These are scenes you’d expect to see in Russia not the UK,” she wrote. 

When asked about the controversy, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak told reporters officers should  do “what they think is best” in an apparent show of support for the Metropolitan Police. 

For his part, London Mayor Sadiq Khan said he is looking into the matter.

“Some of the arrests made by police as part of the Coronation event raise questions and whilst investigations are ongoing, I’ve sought urgent clarity from Met leaders on the action taken,” Khan tweeted.

See what others are saying: (The Guardian) (CNN) (The Washington Post)

Continue Reading

International

Foreign Nationals Make Mad Dash out of Sudan as Conflict Rages

Published

on

The conflict’s death toll has surpassed 420, with nearly 4,000 people wounded.


As the 10-day-long power struggle between rival generals tore Sudan apart, foreign governments with citizens in the country scrambled to evacuate them over the weekend.

On Sunday, U.S. special forces landed in the capital Khartoum and carried out nearly 100 American diplomats along with their families and some foreign nationals on helicopters.

An estimated 16,000 Americans, however, remain in the country and U.S. officials said in a statement that a broader evacuation mission would be too dangerous.

Christopher Maier, the assistant secretary of defense for special operations and low-intensity warfare, said in a statement that the Pentagon may assist U.S. citizens find safe routes out of Sudan.

“[The Defense Department] is at present considering actions that may include use of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities to be able to observe routes and detect threats,” he said.

Germany and France also reportedly pulled around 700 people out of the country.

More countries followed with similar efforts, including the United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Canada, China, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, and Indonesia.

Yesterday, a convoy carrying some 700 United Nations, NGO, and embassy staff drove to Port Sudan, a popular extraction point now that the airport in Khartoum has closed due to fighting.

Reports of gunmen prowling the capital streets and robbing people trying to escape, as well as looters breaking into abandoned homes and shops, have persuaded most residents to stay indoors.

Heavy gunfire, airstrikes, and artillery shelling have terrorized the city despite several proposed ceasefires.

Over the weekend, the reported death toll topped 420, with nearly 4,000 people injured, though both numbers are likely to be undercounted.

See what others are saying: (The Guardian) (The New York Times) (The Washington Post)

Continue Reading