European child abuse image law a step closer
The European Parliament's Civil Liberties Committee has passed a draft law to remove all child sex abuse images hosted in EU countries.
The law says that if images are hosted outwith the EU they should be blocked by individual member states.
The Committee made some changes - the law previously made removal of images mandatory.
Now the law says that, if the material is hosted outside the community, countries "may take the necessary measures in accordance with national legislation to prevent access to such content in their territory". Members of the European Parliament also said such blocks must use transparent procedures, inform users of the reason for the block and allow an appeals process.
The law also sets minimum sentences for those found guilty of 22 child abuse offences. New offences such as "grooming" have also been created. Employers get the right to obtain information on employees' previous sex offences.
Internet Service Providers, or at least those represented by EuroISPA, were objecting to parts of the law which made removal of images compulsory.
But we guess their lobbying paid off. President of EuroISPA Martin Hutty said today: “Removal of the content at source is the real solution to the problem.
"The European Union should use its diplomatic relationships with third countries hosting such material to enhance international procedures to delete the illegal content and successfully prosecute criminals.”
The Parliament and Council now have to agree the details of the law, which they hope to do in the first half of the year. Nation states then have two years to bring their own laws into line with those of the European Union.
The Parliament believes the problem is getting worse and that around 200 abusive images are uploaded every day.
"Employers get the right to obtain information on employees' previous sex offences."
I haven't got any previous sex offences, but given that urinating in public can get you on the SOR I hope they don't just give "yes, he's on it" or "no, he's not" results. That could lead to a lot of trouble when trying to find a job!
Even if I had, say, been done for screwing a 15 year old what has that got to do with my employer? Would it affect me as a programmer? Design engineer? Construction worker? Accountant? Journalist? Blacksmith?
How about an edgier case- Given that I'm male and something in the region of 110% of the people I work with are male (engineering! woo!) would rape (of a woman) make any significant difference to my ability to do the job asked? Almost certainly not. It's not a pleasant crime, but once you've been through the penal system and your punishment is over haven't you repaid your debt to society? If you were still thought a risk you'd be under near-constant watch or still in prison.
I may be wrong- feel free to flame away if you think I am and please comment if you think I've got it right.
*New offences such as "grooming" have also been created.*
Ok.... sounds fine in principle but isn't this open to interpretation ?
Unless someone has previous "form" or there is clear intent then what is "grooming" ?
Sounds like a conversation which to one person is completely innocent could be seen to someone else (typically paranoid parent ?) as much less so. Maybe there's an business opening for "age verified" online chat too ! (more so than there allways was anyway).
So is the start of the slippery slope? We allow the state to block "nasty content", under the TOTC ( think of the children ) banner which no one argues with, then the state changes the definition of what constitutes "nasty content".