| reply to A1
Re: Amazon And the IWF now has them in its sights as well:
»www.guardian.co.uk/technology/20···ship-iwf
The Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) ... might yet add Amazon US to its list of "blocked" sites for hosting the picture.
That could be disastrous for Amazon if it prevents people in the UK accessing its pages on the week that is expected to be the busiest online before Christmas.
The Scorpions image was deemed to be "1 on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is the least offensive", said Robertson. The image was judged to be "erotic posing with no sexual activity". It depicts a young naked girl with her genitals obscured by a crack in the camera lens.
Robertson declined to say whether Amazon would be the next to be blocked. She confirmed that the Amazon page containing the offending cover was referred to the IWF today, but that no decision would be taken while the review of the original decision was in progress.
She could not say how long the review of the original decision will take. Typically it takes about 24 hours for a URL to go from initial referral to being added to the blacklist.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? |
| I actually hope they do block it. This would help shine a light on these asinine actions by the UK Government and the "watch dogs". It might create a worldwide media frenzy when Amazon and Wikipedia get blocked for a few weeks.
If you want to minimize the problem (it will never go away completely) then you have to go after the people who create real CP. They are the ones who actually harm the children and deserve to be punished. Going after Art and photos that are clearly not meant to be pornographic does nothing but harm this "crusade". |
