dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
AT&T and AOL Block Child Porn Newsgroups
Join NY AG's crusade against child pornography...
by Karl Bode 09:21AM Friday Jul 11 2008 Tipped by FFH See Profile
In June, Verizon, Time Warner Cable and Sprint announced they'd struck a deal with the New York Attorney General, agreeing to block access to newsgroups that contain child porn, as well as quickly delete any child porn from their servers. AOL and AT&T today announced they too would be purging servers of such content and blocking access to newsgroups, though the newsgroup blocks appear to go a little further than necessary:
quote:
Like the three previously announced providers, both AT&T and AOL are going beyond newsgroups known as Usenet containing child pornography. AT&T spokesman Marty Richter said the company would disabled all those with addresses starting with "alt.binary," which is where child-porn images are often exchanged. But not all such groups have child pornography.
NY Attorney General Andrew Cuomo also today unveiled a new website aimed at tackling child porn. Cuomo complained that ISPs can't "drag their feet when it comes to protecting our children and instead must quickly purge child porn from their servers."


149 comments .. click to read

Recommended comments



clickie8

join:2005-05-22
Monroe, MI

2 recommendations

reply to Matt3

Re: Good


Well, if kids will be kids, then maybe the problem isn't porn, but kids. I say ban kids. Really, it's for their own protection since there are so many ways they can get into trouble.


FFH
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5

3 recommendations

reply to Glaice

Re: Boo hoo

said by Glaice:

He's probably a pro-AT&T/pro big business/paid shill like TK Junkmail is
Every time the accusation of industry shill is trotted out, this will be the reply:

"This mode of reasoning is a logical fallacy known as ad hominem: attacking the person presenting the argument, instead of pointing out a flaw in their actual argument. It's a fallacy because even if the criticism of the person is true, his argument may still be valid. You can only tell if the argument is valid by examining the actual argument to see if it is actually valid.

Attacking the person instead of the argument they present is intellectually lazy. It's a substitute for thinking. It's also 100% flawed reasoning: you don't arrive at the conclusion from the argument presented."
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page


danclan

join:2005-11-01
Midlothian, VA

2 recommendations

reply to Jodokast96

Re: Good

said by Jodokast96:

Maybe it could be clarified in ALL of these articles that all they are doing is dumping the stuff that is held on THEIR servers. That in effect means they are providing the content, regardless of who actually put it there. The ISP's DO have the responsibility to police that. They are not blocking access to third-party servers. It's really not very different than if it were posted on YouTube. If YouTube left it up there, they'd be just as resonsible. The difference is that YouTube would have it removed as soon as it was found or complained about. The ISP's in this case weren't doing that, and got caught by the AG.
you have no idea what you are talking about with respect to usenet or the internet and its implementation.

You are so wrong on so many points here my head hurts and i cant bring myself to write the novel it will take to correct the mistakes.


Rombus
Premium
join:2007-04-11
Goodwater, AL

2 recommendations

reply to Matt3
said by Matt3:

Is everything black and white in your world or are you just being apathetic?
Just going to point out how hypocritical this statement is with your first comment:

Good, alt.binary is full of nothing but porn, warez, movies, and music anyway.


JSY
Premium
join:2000-04-05
Elmhurst, NY

2 recommendations

Mixed Feelings

I'll tell you why I am really mixed on this. It's not so much of what's legal or illegal, but rather the fact that once again, the internet is being shaped into what government or higher authorities what us to see. This easily opens the door for ISPs to go ahead and start blocking any material they deem to contain questionable material - well beyond alt.binaries.xxx What's next? You already saw it expand in this article - it went from child pornography to everything in alt.binaries.

And you all must be out of your mind if you think this "solves" anything. If alt.binaries are blocked around the word - you don't think that people won't just create new newsgroups to hold this material? Now, that is going to be pretty because you'll start to have IPS now have to determine what needs to be blocked rather than a blanketwide alt.binaries block. What if binaries pop up in different named groups? I mean, right now - binaries exist in a lot of groups that are not part of the alt.binaries realm. Will ISPs start to govern those? What about the same material that are on websites? Someone above said you might as well block the internet because the age verification crap doesn't work and that is only for those sites that even have that, and using the logic of these ISPs and the AG, you'd have to start considering that. Age verification doesn't work. Congress enacted that law that restricted internet gambling (more or less) because age verification was a crock - and that was with credit card verification.

The fact is that if you open the door, you give the opportunity for more blockage and if you don't think that is a problem that we'll ever see, then you need to get your head out of your ass and think outside the box and how this affects the whole internet rather than just thinking that this affects child pornography and the RIAA/MPAA.

The only reason Cuomo is all up on this is so that he can make his mark. Spitzer had his mark with the financial industry. Cuomo needs his.


Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus

join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY

2 recommendations

Hello Vote For Me


Smiling Andrew
Hi there I am Andrew Cuomo New York Attorney General I just got a useless agreement from AT&T and AOL to block child porn. You fools out there will think I have done something that will make a huge difference. Just keep thinking this and vote for me in the next election.
--
Send a prayer to Allah, eat Beans.

extreme100
Premium
join:2002-06-07
Coloma, MI

2 recommendations

The real problem is...

The real problem is not porn on usenet, it really doesn't harm anyone. If you don't like it, don't seek it out.

The real problem is the sickos that force helpless little kids to have sex. The only real solution is to catch and euthanize them.

You can block all the content you want but the pedophiles will still be out there doing what they do.
--
Comcast has spoiled me rotten!


Jodokast96
Stupid people really piss me off.
Premium
join:2005-11-23
Erial, NJ
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL

2 recommendations

reply to hopeflicker

Re: Good

Maybe it could be clarified in ALL of these articles that all they are doing is dumping the stuff that is held on THEIR servers. That in effect means they are providing the content, regardless of who actually put it there. The ISP's DO have the responsibility to police that. They are not blocking access to third-party servers. It's really not very different than if it were posted on YouTube. If YouTube left it up there, they'd be just as resonsible. The difference is that YouTube would have it removed as soon as it was found or complained about. The ISP's in this case weren't doing that, and got caught by the AG.

brawney
Premium
join:2002-03-02
Frederick, MD
kudos:1

2 recommendations

People will complain about censorship... but the guy who owns the news stand on the corner can decide that he doesn't want to provide child porn so why can't the ISP?


Matt3
All noise, no signal.
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12

2 recommendations

Good, alt.binary is full of nothing but porn, warez, movies, and music anyway. Let the leechers who want access to that pay an external usenet provider.