[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: information about cenzorship in Slovenia



Fabian Keil wrote:
> Matej Kovacic <matej.kovacic@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>  
>> I would just like to let you know that Slovenian government (Slovenia is 
>> a member of European Union since last year) a week ago decided to block 
>> two on-line gambling sites, because they do not have a licence to 
>> operate in Slovenia.
>>
>> There are several problems with this, the major is that Office for 
>> Gaming Supervision sent a simple letter (not an official order!) to 
>> ISP's to block the site (what about "mere conduit" doctrine???) and 
>> major ISP's just did it. It is also funny, that European Court of 
>> Justice ruled in 2003 that across-border gambling like that is legal, 
>> because EU has free movement of services enacted (see case Gambelli). My 
>> personal opinion is that this cenzorship is illegal in many ways, but 
>> the problem is that ISP's dont want to oppose governemnt and they simply 
>> don't care about their users's rights.
> 
> What is illegal about asking some providers to block some sites?
> By the way, older members of the EU are (or were?) fond of
> DNS blocks as well. NRW, Germany for example.
> 
> Also my impression is that the European Court didn't rule that
> across-border gambling is legal in the whole EU, but that
> restrictions are only allowed if they happen in the public interest:
> 
> |If a member state introduces restrictions on private games
> |of chance, these must have the purpose of reducing the
> |opportunities for gaming.
> |
> |In particular, this purpose is not achieved â reasoned the ECJ â
> |if on the one hand a state prohibited private games of chance
> |whilst on the other promoting state lotteries and games of chance
> |in order to generate additional revenues for the Treasury. 
> <http://www.bwin.ag/2004/default.aspx?lang=en&id=5>
> 
> (I'm aware what bwin Interactive Entertainment AG does,
> but the description makes sense to me.)
> 
>> So I just wanted to let you know that illegal cenzorship is not just 
>> something which is happening in China. And I hope a lot of people in 
>> Slovenia know about Tor now and see it as good anti-cenzorship tool.
> 
> The Chinese government's censorship is done without
> breaking Chinese law isn't it? Of course it still sucks,
> but I don't see why it should be called illegal.
> 
> Fabian
Because it violates the Chinese Constitution. The Chinese Constitution
is really just a 'goddammed piece of paper' in that it is completely
ignored.  But on paper the censorship is illegal. In reality, the guns
are owned by the government.

-- 
They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security,
 deserve neither liberty or security
--Benjamin Franklin

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature