The controversy arises in Australia because “prohibited content” also includes adult content.  Specifically, this means any X-rated material (e.g. hardcore pornography), or R-rated material (other adult content) not subject to controlled access.

Under Australian Commonwealth law, Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and Internet Content Hosts (ICHs) must delete content deemed “objectionable” or “unsuitable for minors”.  Laws at State and Territory level mean those who create or provide such material are also liable to prosecution.

This year, a bill proposes to go further and prohibit suicide-related material.  This has sparked a strong reaction from civil liberty campaigners, many of whom are also opposed to the initial legislation.  Electronic Frontiers Australia commented:

“The proposed offences threaten freedom of political communication, freedom of the press and rational adults’ right to have access to information.”

In the US, the Child Online Protection Act (COPA) was effectively overturned by a Supreme Court ruling in June 2004. The act entailed fines and jail sentences for those allowing material “harmful to minors” to reach children.  The Supreme Court considered the bill “likely” to violate the US Constitution’s amendment on freedom of speech.

China and Iran are among the most extreme cases of Internet censorship.  These countries’ governments order ISPs to remove not only adult material, but also political content.  A Harvard study found that none of the top ten Google listed search results for “Tibet”, “Taiwan China”, and “equality” were accessible in China.  And Iran was widely accused of suppressing debate before its 2004 election by blacklisting reformist websites.