Re: information about cenzorship in Slovenia
Hy Matej,I'm just curious about how Slovenian Goverment (technical issue) had blocked the gambling site. I'm asking this because in Italy the law enforcement blocked the site only reconfiguring the original site on all public DNS where consumer (ADSL and dial/up) are authenticate itself (so: the DNS specified by DHCP from AAA to CPE). So, the site www.foo-bar.com (supposing gambling site) are 1.2.3.4 IP resolved by DNS and every DNS in the world are resolved correctly. In Italy that name are resolved instead in 11.22.33.44 that is a anti/gambling site directly on lawenforcement facility.I see two big issue about this solution:1) when a computer authenticate on internet (dial in from ADSL or dial/up) the DNS address cam be other one, only specified it by manual configuration (on my computer I've a DNS server that use all root server around the world). In special case, with easy configuration, can be a foreign DNS. 2) the gambling site can be rename the site name (transforming from www.foo-bar.com in www.f00-bar.com).I agree with your comment about that, internally in Europe, gambling site is legal. The same about buy a car, make a insurance, using a bank. But Im see that there are many interest about making this only on a paper... :) CesareOn 9/16/06, Matej Kovacic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi,I would just like to let you know that Slovenian government (Slovenia isa member of European Union since last year) a week ago decided to blocktwo 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 forGaming Supervision sent a simple letter (not an official order!) toISP's to block the site (what about mere conduit doctrine???) and major ISP's just did it. It is also funny, that European Court ofJustice 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, butthe problem is that ISP's dont want to oppose governemnt and they simplydon't care about their users's rights.But this also opened a great possibilities to inform people about Tor as an anti-cenzorship tool, and of course I did it. :-))So I just wanted to let you know that illegal cenzorship is not justsomething which is happening in China. And I hope a lot of people inSlovenia know about Tor now and see it as good anti-cenzorship tool. BTW, we had similar example of cenzorship before (seehttp://matej.owca.info/privacy/PHR04_slovenia.pdf, page 7 - udba.net case).bye, Matej
Re: information about cenzorship in Slovenia
Matej Kovacic [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 – reasoned the ECJ – |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=enid=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 -- http://www.fabiankeil.de/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: information about cenzorship in Slovenia
Fabian Keil wrote: Matej Kovacic [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 – reasoned the ECJ – |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=enid=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 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
information about cenzorship in Slovenia
Hi, 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. But this also opened a great possibilities to inform people about Tor as an anti-cenzorship tool, and of course I did it. :-)) 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. BTW, we had similar example of cenzorship before (see http://matej.owca.info/privacy/PHR04_slovenia.pdf, page 7 - udba.net case). bye, Matej
