You’re right. But YouTube doesn’t even try in relation to MA 15+ style content, as far as I can tell. That it, it seems that they only attempt to block material inappropriate for people under 18. I haven’t really checked, though.

In any event, MA 15+ content on YouTube wouldn’t be prohibited content even if their access system didn’t qualify as a valid restricted access system in relation to MA 15+ content.

The definition of ‘prohibited content’ in cl 20(1) of sch 7 to the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 (Cth) is such that it applies to MA 15+ content only if that content is provided for a fee. (That YouTube receives advertising revenue is not relevant.)

http://www.myvideo.de/

Lustige videos ? Interviews with porn stars appear to feature at the moment.

This is an excellent way for me to brush up on my German. I even managed to read the sign up document.

Although the world appears to the ill informed to be dominated by YouTube there are numerous video sharing sites around the globe – very few of them controlled by Google or large agencies.

I could even establish one on the my local black box web server (QNAP TS-209 Pro)

http://www.qnap.com/pro_detail_feature.asp?p_id=82

The technology isn’t complicated and I have software that can do this for me but I don’t do it as I have no need to serve up this form of content in a business oriented environment.

http://www.acma.gov.au/webwr/_assets/main/lib310563/ras_declaration_2007.pdf

I would argue that this instrument denies me my rights as an international citizen under Article 19 of the Declaration of Human Rights

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

Article 19.

•Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

——————

In the United States “artisic merit” is a defence. Clearly if the actors are discussing philosophy it has to contain the necessary elements of “artistic merit”.

In addition to being an Australian Citizen I am a citizen of the European Union and have registered my age in accordance with my citizenship of birth.

Not only is the Internet global in nature so are it’s citizens. People travel into this country and out of this country on a regular basis.

I can register my age with any content provider while outside Australia and as far as I can tell the age verification procedures used (if legal outside Australia) would be legal if accessing content within Australia if the legalities of registering my age had already been performed outside this country.

I notice that a prominent EFA member appears to be in China and has seemingly experienced blocks to the right to access content.

Searchi result from google.cn: “Your search results may not comply with relevant laws and policy and can’t be displayed.” #dontbeevil (18th. August 2009)

Here’s a sample MA15+ possibly

Nu ook sextape Lindsay Lohan. Hier voorproefje! (06:03)

http://www.garagetv.com/video-gallery/chucky1967/Nu_ook_sextape_Lindsay_Lohan_Hier_voorproefje_.aspx

I note there is a related video of a Japanese man peeling a banana. I haven’t rated that as yet.

The requirements for a RAS for MA15+ are in Sections 5 to 9 of Part 2 of the Restricted Access System Declaration 2007.

Sec 5 says all of sections 6 – 9 must be complied with, not just some of them.

Sec 6 says the system must require an access-seeker to apply, in writing or in electronic form, for access with a declaration that they’re at least 15 years old. Perhaps YouTube complies with that.

Sec 7 says that a warning must be provided about the nature of MA15+ content (which YouTube doesn’t do, at least not in the form understood by Australia’s classification system). Furthermore, safety information about how a parent or guardian may control access to MA15+ content by persons under 15 years of age must be provided, which YouTube manifestly does not do.

Sec 8 says that MA15+ content can’t be provided unless the system has verified, for each access, that compliance with secs 6 and 7 has been met. Maybe YouTube does that.

Sec 9 says that the RAS must include measures that will be taken to remove, without delay, an applicant’s access to MA15+ content if the applicant has been given access in contravention of Sec 8. YouTube absolutely does not do that, and I’m not aware of any other RAS that does that either. As far as I know, Youtube has no mechanism whatsoever to prevent an individual from viewing MA15+ content if they’re discovered to be under the age of 15.

So with secs 7 and 9 (minimally) not being met, my conclusion is that YouTube is not using a Restricted Access System that complies with section 14(1) of Schedule 7 to the BSA.

So the question then is, “Is YouTube’s content being sold for profit or as part of a profit-making enterprise?” Because if it is, all content on YouTube which is MA15+ should be prohibited by ACMA (because all of the other subclauses of sec 20(3)(c) are met in YouTube’s case)

– mark

http://www.leatherneck.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-52759.html