British Isp's censoring users net connections

[alsenior]

It has been noted by administrators of Wikipedia that large major isp's appear to be routing traffic through a number of proxies with the aim of censoring certain sites.

Here is a list of the ip addresses used and who they belong to.

Affected IP Addresses

* 62.24.251.240 - ISP = Opal Telecommunications (TalkTalk) [#1]
* 62.24.251.241 - ISP = Opal Telecommunications (TalkTalk) [#2]
* 62.30.249.131 - ISP = Virgin Media
* 89.167.221.3 - ISP = Be Unlimited/O2/Telefonica
* 89.167.221.131 - ISP = Be Unlimited/O2/Telefonica
* 193.195.3.40 (- ISP = Demon Internet [#1]
* 193.195.3.41 - ISP = Demon Internet [#2]
* 212.134.155.210 - ISP = Easynet/UK Online/Sky Broadband
* 212.159.3.233 - ISP = Plusnet [#1]
* 212.159.3.234‎ - ISP = Plusnet [#2]
* 212.159.3.235 - ISP = Plusnet [#3]
* 212.159.3.236 - ISP = Plusnet [#4]
* 213.249.193.2 - ISP = Eclipse Internet / Kingston Communications

Am i affected by this.?

it must be noted that not all users of the above isp's are affected

You can test by loading the following wikipedia article.
**removed**
Sources :

Original slashdot article
Wikipedia Admin page

[Andy3536]

For what porpose, sneaky buggers.

I can't load the virgin killer page. I want to know whats on it now

[BlackDwarf]

I can't load it either. Am on Be*.

Hmm...

[Aez]

Censored for me on virgin media.

[MadduckUK]

404'd .. good job there's proxies

[Agent]

Dead on VM here too......not impressed.

[Perfectionist]

It hit Wikipedia Review fast...

[0iD]

Censored for me on virgin media.

Ditto that

However, I am old enough and sad enough to own an original copy of the Scorpions' Virgin Killer LP, which I hasten to add I purchased on its release. It is prettymuch an very unsavoury picture & imo the image should be censored.

[format]

I'm at my girlfriends house, it works on Sky BB.

[BlackDwarf]

Pfft, to be fair, its not hard to find the cover, its on bloody Amazon ffs!

Bit pretentious tbh. Its not a nice image, but, meh.

[NeedMoarFarms]

I can't load it. Googling virgin killer gives the image. Who are they trying to protect here...?

Don't really like this, not one bit. Just think of what this will lead to...

[0iD]

Pfft, to be fair, its not hard to find the cover, its on bloody Amazon ffs!

Bit pretentious tbh. Its not a nice image, but, meh.

Well i just looked at amazon .co.uk & .com & they don't show the naked child cover, thankfully.

For those not up on the issue, the original cover had a young girl, abt 8ish, naked, doing the splitz, with a crack in the class where 'that which should not be seen' is. If someone linked to it here the mods would get most aggrieved I imagine.

[Saracen]

.... If someone linked to it here the mods would get most aggrieved I imagine.

Erm, yup, by the sound of it.

It sounds like it's not hard to find, and the above opinion is without having bothered to go hunting for it. But from the description, it'd probably not be welcomed. The problem is, it may or may not be legal, and we don't want the responsibility of making a call on that and getting it wrong. So, unfair though it might be, I rather suspect we;d exercise a degree of censorship and ban it too.

And that might be what the ISPs are up to.

And of so, they're kinda between the rock and a hard place, just like we are. Anything remotely resembling child porn, or that might be be regarded as such, is a very touchy area. If an ISP bans it, they get moaned at for censorship. If they don't, they might get prosecuted under child porn laws.

Gives them a bit of a problem, doesn't it.

By and large, I don't want my ISP censoring my connection and deciding what I can and can't see. But certainly, if it's in the area of child porn, I'm quite happy for them to make sure I can't see it. That way, I'm less likely to end up with dodgy and illegal images, even accidentally. The question is, of course, do they draw the line in the right place. Where child porn is concerned, I don't have a problem with the drawing it in a place that's on the cautious side of the law. It might save me getting a dawn raid from some guys in blue with big boots and an attitude problem.

[jimbouk]

Snip, better safe than sorry eh?

[NeedMoarFarms]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...linesupplement

[manwithnoname]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12...sor_wikipedia/

pinch of salt, but the above article contains:

At it stands, the article includes an image of the album's original cover, which depicts a naked prepubescent girl. The cover was banned in many countries and replaced by another when the album made its 1976 debut. And apparently, the image is now on a blacklist compiled by the Internet Watch Foundation, a government-backed organization charged with fighting online child pornography in the UK and Europe.

So I can understand ISPs wanting to restrict/ban it, but they haven't implemented this very well, google images brings it up straight away*. What have the ISPs achieved here - if the image is on a blacklist surely block all or nothing.

*considering formating my HD or taking a sledgehammer to it.