Quote:
Originally Posted by nffc
Why not?
It's the internet, there are no laws governing the internet as an entity. The only applicable laws are the laws where the site is based/hosted, in this case the US. WP have already stated this particular image is legal under US law and so are not obliged to remove it (It has also been suggested the image is legal in the UK anyway though it is dubious under an exemption for art), hence they have not done so.
What next? It's not about protecting the child in the image (they did consensually pose for it and probably get paid a significant sum for doing so) since the image is old. It's not even really about the issue of child porn or Wikipedia.
It's more the point that an unelected, unaccountable body can control what we view on the internet. So let's say someone complains about something else to the IWF. They remove it. Where do you draw the line? What about them editing content they don't want UK users to see? That's something you see in North Korea and China not the UK.
Not to mention the fact they have done this totally inappropriately. They should be getting a court of law to prove this image is illegal under UK law and getting the court to order Wikipedia remove it. But if they do that, what about the host of other sites showing the image? Amazon, eBay, other etailers? Should we censor them? At the end of the day an internet encyclopedia having an image about an album - as well as the controversy over its cover - is a poor medium to censor.
Take a look at the wider picture and you'll see the bigger deal. As I said, this is not about child porn, Wikipedia or anything - though this has kinda triggered the controversy. It's about censorship. Looking at the base of this, it was only a matter of time before something triggered this, if not this, it would have been something else.
|
Governments are governments..they want to legislate for everything in an effort to protect their citizens..and you ignore the effects terrorism has had on censorship at your peril.
You can go on about the larger picture all you want..you won't keep governments out of the internet just because you wish it..also you can't insist that governments protect your interests on the internet and yet that they shouldn't interfere in the freedom that you want to enjoy in cyberspace.
You can't have your cake and eat it any more.
