Page 2 of 2

Posted: Tue Jul 25, 2006 9:22 pm
by Trakitroki
Such a response in any court of law would probably be regarded as your inability to know the difference between right and wrong. As for IRC responsibility for content that is not the issue. The issue is the need for official identification which can be used to look up criminal records by the system automatically as a means of filtering out sex offenders and sexual predators which even hard working parents can not do.

Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2006 3:37 am
by Pills
Unless sex offenders get specific IP addresses when they connect to the internet, it is impossible.

Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2006 5:40 am
by Trakitroki
Identification of an individual is not the same thing getting the IP address of the client system. Any ID such as a social security, drivers license, or credit card which is officially tied to an individual can be used. The ID is simply added to the user profile and subsequently submitted to a law enforcement server for validation and to check it against a sexual offender and predator database by the system. Sorry but it is sexual offenders and predators that have forced us to accept the benefit of Big Brother watching over us. Besides anytime you make a deposit of $10,000 or more your real name gets sent by the I'm a spammer! to law enforcement anyway and there are a growing number of other events that now require all sorts of businesses and government agencies to do the same thing. Checking out sexual offender and predator status is one that is okay with me.

Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2006 10:59 am
by munky
correction: if any court found an IRC network liable for all the content that flowed over it, you wouldn't see many content providers left on the internet. it would also kill msn/aim/yahoo/icq. all online forums would be closed.

taking pills example again: if someone from sweden on efnet.ru said something to someone from australia on umich.edu, what is to happen? is [insert chat medium here] supposed to require valid forms of government identification to connect to the network? how is anyone under 18 supposed to chat? why should a an australian user have to register to comply with a US law when he is chatting with a swedish user? even if he is a sex offender, he is not a US registered sex offender, so it still wouldn't stop anything.

like i said before, you're suggesting an overly oppresive and impractical technological fix for a socialogical problem.

Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2006 2:01 pm
by Trakitroki
Again the issue is not content (although system administrators have a nasty habit of banning users on the basis of content) And again it is a matter of which side of the law you personally choose to support. Its the same situation with alcohol purchase. There will always be people who will attempt to thwart the law. In the case of sex offenders and predators and other criminal types you can count on it. Hence the need for ID.

Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2006 3:47 pm
by orange1
Casidy wrote:Again the issue is not content (although system administrators have a nasty habit of banning users on the basis of content) And again it is a matter of which side of the law you personally choose to support. Its the same situation with alcohol purchase. There will always be people who will attempt to thwart the law. In the case of sex offenders and predators and other criminal types you can count on it. Hence the need for ID.
But who's law?
What if Taiwan doesn't require people to register as sex offenders. So, we're obeying Taiwanese law. Is that good enough for you? Or should we go for Chinese law? Get thrown in jail for bad mouthing the government. Maybe something in between, some Norwegian law. Use the network to download as many movies and songs as you like, because it's perfectly legal.

Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2006 7:17 pm
by Trakitroki
The International legal issues that have not already been resolved are for diplomats, lawyers and politicians to resolve and have no bearing on having an identification entry in the IRC profile listing page. Criminals will always have some excuse for not having an identification entry on the profile page. By providing a working entry the EFnet IRC can demonstrate its position against crime.

Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2006 9:03 pm
by Pills
Casidy wrote:Again the issue is not content (although system administrators have a nasty habit of banning users on the basis of content) And again it is a matter of which side of the law you personally choose to support. Its the same situation with alcohol purchase. There will always be people who will attempt to thwart the law. In the case of sex offenders and predators and other criminal types you can count on it. Hence the need for ID.
Are you going to ban the minors from the store that sells alcohol? THAT's your analogy.

I've said it once, and I'll say it again: there is no way we can ID people that connect to the network without the people having specific IP#s. If you want to pay for static IPs for sex offenders then, by all means, be my guest.

Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2006 10:32 pm
by Dario
Casidy wrote:The International legal issues that have not already been resolved are for diplomats, lawyers and politicians to resolve and have no bearing on having an identification entry in the IRC profile listing page. Criminals will always have some excuse for not having an identification entry on the profile page. By providing a working entry the EFnet IRC can demonstrate its position against crime.
Please learn what the technology is capable of before suggesting solutions to problems.

IRC does not contain a profile listing page.

There is no real Identification on IRC that cannot be spoofed. Go Google term if you do not understand what it is.

If you wish to keep pedophiles off of IRC ensure they are not allowed computers, computer access as part of sentencing.

Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2006 11:55 pm
by HM2K
Troll?

This topic is not worth discussing.