Quote:
Originally Posted by mr ploppy
No. But at the same time, entirely futile. It is what happens now they have a precedent that worries me. Remember the anti-terror laws? I doubt many people would have expected to have their cameras confiscated and inspected for taking photos in tourist locations. For some reason they glossed over that part when they were rushing it through.
|
What also bothers me is the vehicle they are using to do this. The technology for blocking the site is intended for child pornography. The site has already promised to break that block - and I'm sure that shortly after the tech used to break the block will be available online. I feel that the ISP's ability to block child pornography will be seriously compromised by this. If the judge wanted to block the site he should have required a different vehicle.