New livestreaming legislation fails to take into account how the internet actually works
The new livestreaming legislation in Australia was rushed through parliament without sufficient consultation or discussion, argues La Trobe University’s Andre Oboler in this crossposting from The Conversation.
In response to the live streamed terror attack in New Zealand last month, new laws have just been passed by the Australian Parliament.
These laws amend the Commonwealth Criminal Code, adding two substantive new criminal offences.
See, that’s what happens when you boot the man that virtually invented the Internet from the Prime Ministership.
For years, all over the world, internet companies have dragged their feet about taking down objectionable content. People who have been defamed find it impossible to get even the biggest companies to take down online slurs about them. Some people have even had to resort to hiring reputation-rescue companies who flood the web with neutral content about the defamed person just to drive down the chances of a potential boss or spouse finding the defamatory material in Google search results. Now it’s got to the stage of internet companies being a vehicle for terrorism, which is not far short of aiding and abetting.
If hosting plans hosting plans have no margin to cover monitoring and complaints management, the hosting plan needs to change or the company needs to go out of business.