D
o
n
n
a
M
H
u
g
h
e
s |
|
With increasing public outrage at the amount of pornography and prostitution on
the Internet, the Internet industry has moved to protect itself from governmental
regulation by promising self-regulation. Several tiplines are funded by the Internet
industry. They present the public with the reassurances that illegal material will be
removed from the Internet. Several of the tiplines that are joint efforts with governments
seem to be more diligent in their efforts to eliminate illegal material. But a closer look
shows that sometimes the Internet industry supported tiplines provide more lip service
than action.
Internet Meldpunt Kinderporno
Internet Meldpunt Kinderporno or Internet Hotline
Against Child Pornography is based in the Netherlands (http://www.meldpunt.org;
meldpunt@meldpunt.org). The hotline, which opened in June 1996, was the first of its kind
in Europe. Founded by the Dutch Foundation of Internet Providers (NLIP), the Dutch
Internet Users, the National Criminal Intelligence Service (CRI), and the National Bureau
Against Racial Discrimination and run by volunteers, the hotline is a practice in
self-regulation of the Internet. The members of the hotline do not take an active role in
searching the Internet for child pornography. The hotline serves as a place for Internet
users to report illegal material when they come across it.
The Netherlands is known for its libertarian views and laws concerning
pornography and prostitution, and these attitudes are reflected in the soft approach and
procedures of Internet Meldpunt Kinderporno. When the hotline receives a report of
child pornography on the Internet, they contact the authors or sender and request that the
illegal material be removed. Only if the predator or pimp doesn’t reply or refuses to
remove the material does the hotline notify the police.[243] The self-regulation model is
also limited to public areas of the Internet where the hotline staff can investigate
reports. The hotline does not investigate private areas of the Internet, such as email, or
highly dynamic areas, such as chat rooms.
In their first publication, Internet Meldpunt Kinderporno
acknowledged that their effort was not based on moralist judgements, but was done to
prevent future censorship. From the beginning, the goal was self-protection of the
Internet industry, not the protection of children.
"Some people may regard the hotline as a moralist movement against indecency on
Internet. That we are not. …Instead of being a censor, the hotline must be
regarded as an initiative against censorship. By having an active preventive policy, the
hotline tries to minimize repressive actions against entire newsgroups or areas of
Internet. There is an ongoing trend of repression against Internet, providers are being
persecuted and forced to block off large parts of the Net. The hotline tries to be a
positive and constructive answer that may prevent an overreaction from governments and
providers. It directly targets the poster of illegal child pornography instead of whole
areas of information and communication." [244]
Initially, the hotline took action only on material that was from Dutch
territory. Eventually they felt compelled to take some action against foreign distributors
of child pornography.[245] Internet Meldpunt Kinderporno issued their
first annual report in 1997. In their first year they received 256 reports.
Statistics of Year One (June 1996-June 1997)
Internet Meldpunt Kinderporno (Internet Hotline Against Child Pornography) [246]
| Locations of Child Pornography |
Number |
Resolution |
| Web Sites |
17 |
Eleven were determined not to violate the
criminal code; 6 cases removed, 2 cases reported to police |
| Netherlands Newsgroups |
32 |
Invalid email addresses prevented warnings; 14
cases reported to police, 2 arrests, 1 case being investigated |
| Reports from abroad |
7 |
Material originated mostly from Japan,
seriousness of material warranted 7 reports to police |
| Internet Relay Chat (IRC) |
16 |
IRC user’s identity and material do not
remain on the Internet, so no investigation possible |
| Email |
82 |
Seventy-two reports referred to 2 mass
mailings: "Child fun" (child pornographic videos) did not originate in the
Netherlands, US FBI traced the sender and arrested the person; Pakistani boys were offered
in a mass mailing that originated in the Netherlands. Police were able to trace sender who
"received a great deal of trouble." In a third case, the sender was traced by
police and arrested. |
| Bulletin Board Services (BBS) |
4 |
One case checked, material not illegal |
| Other |
98 |
These reports did not include enough
information to trace the posting or web site. |
| Total |
256 |
|
The Internet Meldpunt Kinderporno concluded that the amount of
child pornography on the Internet originating in the Netherlands was "not
substantial." The Hotline claimed it was 100 percent effective.[247]
Predators and pimps on the Internet like the Dutch approach because it gives them an
opportunity to disappear if they get caught before police action will be taken. The
following quote is from a pedophile who wrote to the PedoWatch Web site to complain about
their harsh policy of immediately turning over information about predators to law
enforcement officials, "I feel the Dutch way is quite a good way. The poster gets
warned once. If he doesn’t remove his shit, then he’ll gets warned again. Still
not removing? Ok, let’s call in the police. This works."[248] Wouldn’t
every criminal like a warning first?
Internet Watch Foundation
In 1996, Internet Service Providers in Great Britain
launched the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF), another self-regulatory approach. The
Internet Watch Foundation aims to "enhance the enormous potential of the Internet
to inform, educate, entertain and conduct business." They recognize that illegal
and offensive material on the Internet will harm their financial self-interest in the
growth of the Internet. They launched the Internet Watch Foundation to hinder "the
use of the Internet to transmit illegal material, particularly child pornography,"
and encourage "the classification of legal material on the net in order to enable
users to customize the nature of their experience of the Net to their own
requirements."[249] Their goal is to tame and organize the Internet for maximum
public acceptability and Internet Service Provider profits.
The Internet Watch Foundation’s first annual report was released
in March 1998. In the first year the IWF received 781 complaints about 4,300 items on the
Internet, resulting in the removal of 2,000 images from UK servers. Ninety-five percent of
those images were of child sexual abuse (child pornography). IWF monitors 40 Usenet
newsgroups out of the total 27,000 newsgroups on the Internet. The report said that only 6
percent of the child pornography originated from British Internet sites, while 63 percent
came from the United States and 19 percent came from Japan. Two hundred reports of child
pornography on web sites outside the UK were referred to the relevant country’s
authorities.[250]
In their second annual report, in February 1999, they reported
that in 1998 they received 2,407 reports of illegal or offensive material. They judged 447
of these cases to be potentially illegal material. Of that number, 124 were cases on which
they had previously taken action. The number of items referred to in all reported cases
was 14,580. Action was taken on 10,548 items; 541 were reported to the Metropolitan Police
because the items originated in the UK; 9,176 items were referred to the child pornography
unit of the National Criminal Intelligence Service because they were located on servers
outside the UK; and 9,498 items were referred to the Internet Service Providers. Of 464
referrals for potentially illegal materials, 430 were child pornography, 22 were adult
pornography, and one was a financial scam. Of the 6,214 items on which they took action,
5,665 were found on Usenet newsgroups, 527 on web sites, 4 in chat rooms, 4 in email
messages, and 14 were from offline sources. Only approximately 12 percent of the
potentially illegal material originated in the UK. Almost one half of the material
originated in the United States, 11 percent from Japan, and 14 percent from Europe.[251]
The Internet Watch Foundation is working to create a rating system and
a filter for Internet sites to protect children from viewing pornography. This rating
system is not aimed at ending sexual exploitation or slowing the online sex industry, of
course. It is only attempting to organize the content of the Internet so parents can
prevent children from viewing pornography, but still make pornography and sex shows
readily available to buyers.
CyberTipline
The CyberTipline is the Internet industry’s
self-regulation attempt in the United States. It was formed at the end of 1997 when the
Internet industry came under pressure from the US government and general public to do
something about children’s increasing risk of exposure to pornography on the
Internet. Vice-President Al Gore warned, "If there is not an effective
industry-led solution, you might as well prepare yourself for a massive, nationwide
backlash that will stunt the growth of this exciting resource."[253] Internet
service providers (ISPs) who provide service to 95 percent of home Internet users joined
in an agreement to enforce existing laws against child pornography. They agreed to remove
child pornography from their own bulletin boards and services. The CyberTipline first
operated as a telephone hotline, then later a web site, where people can report incidents
of child sexual exploitation, including child pornography. Partial funding for the hotline
came from the US Congress. The CyberTipline is run by the National Center for Missing and
Exploited Children with an annual budget of US$600,000 (1-800-843-5678;
http://www.missingkids.com/cybertip). The hotline allows Internet users to report
incidences of child sexual exploitation on the Internet, such as online contact of
children by predators, possession, manufacture or distribution of child pornography, child
prostitution and child-sex tourism.[254]
The CyberTipline includes a standardized reporting form that forwards
information to the FBI, the US Customs Service, the US Postal Inspection Service and local
law enforcement officials.[255] The program is run in cooperation with the FBI. The
hotline got 150 responses the first day.[256]
Zero Tolerance Policy
Promised
At the end of 1997 an Online Summit was held in
Washington, D.C. A number of Internet service providers made a commitment to a "zero
tolerance" policy for child pornography. The Internet Alliance, the leading trade
association for the Internet industry, and the Commercial Internet Exchange Association,
and the Association of Online Professionals, the organizations for ISPs, made the
following pledge in December 1997:
"When child pornography is appropriately brought to our
attention, and we have control over it, we will remove it. Subject to constitutional and
statutory privacy safeguards, we will cooperate fully with law enforcement officials
investigating child pornography on the Internet. We will not allow this valuable new
medium to be exploited by child pornographers and child predators."[257]
The agreement involved Internet service providers representing 95
percent of the home Internet use market.[258]
Independent Tiplines and Vigilantes
|