<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>LawFont.com &#187; susanne</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.lawfont.com/author/susanne/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.lawfont.com</link>
	<description>an analysis of law, technology, economics, and policy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Aug 2011 08:57:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>ISP-level internet content filtering &#8211; the report</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/08/04/isp-level-internet-content-filtering-the-report/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/08/04/isp-level-internet-content-filtering-the-report/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 06:43:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>susanne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP/IT Blogs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[p2p]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=651</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 28 July, the Australian Communications and Media Authority released its report which sets out the findings of the closed environment testing of ISP-level filters conducted in 2008. The Closed Environment testing report followed hot on the heels of the Developments in Internet Filtering Technologies and Other Measures for Promoting Online Safety report released in [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/08/04/isp-level-internet-content-filtering-the-report/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>die hard and still live free?</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/10/24/die-hard-and-still-live-free/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/10/24/die-hard-and-still-live-free/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2007 07:44:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>susanne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP/IT Blogs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Telco]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2007/10/24/die-hard-and-still-live-free/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here&#8217;s the latest activity regarding communications related national security legislation brought to you courtesy of the Senate Bills List dated 15 October&#8230; Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (Terrorist Material) Bill 2007:Amends the Classification, (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 to require publications, films or computer games that promote terrorist activity to be [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/10/24/die-hard-and-still-live-free/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Telecommunications (Interception and Access)Amendment Bill 2007</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/09/26/telecommunications-interception-and-accessamendment-bill-2007/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/09/26/telecommunications-interception-and-accessamendment-bill-2007/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 08:15:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>susanne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Telco]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2007/09/26/telecommunications-interception-and-accessamendment-bill-2007/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Further to my previous posts, the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment Bill 2007 was passed by the Senate on 20 September 2007. It went through without a definition of &#8216;telecommunications data&#8217;. The Democrats and the Greens expressed their concerns about the bill generally and its impact on privacy and the vagueness of the term &#8216;telecommunications [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/09/26/telecommunications-interception-and-accessamendment-bill-2007/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Communications Legislation Amendment (Crime or Terrorism Related Internet Content) Bill 2007</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/09/26/communications-legislation-amendment-crime-or-terrorism-related-internet-content-bill-2007/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/09/26/communications-legislation-amendment-crime-or-terrorism-related-internet-content-bill-2007/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 08:04:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>susanne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP/IT Blogs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2007/09/26/communications-legislation-amendment-crime-or-terrorism-related-internet-content-bill-2007/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Communications Legislation Amendment (Crime or Terrorism Related Internet Content) Bill 2007 was introduced into the Senate at the beginning of this week. Senator Eric Abetz had this to say in his Second Reading Speech: &#8220;The Government&#8217;s recent review of the E-Security National Agenda found that the e-security landscape has changed significantly with the emergence [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/09/26/communications-legislation-amendment-crime-or-terrorism-related-internet-content-bill-2007/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>you say data, i say data&#8230;Telco Intercept Amendment Bill introduced into the Senate&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/08/29/you-say-data-i-say-datatelco-intercept-amendment-bill-introduced-into-the-senate/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/08/29/you-say-data-i-say-datatelco-intercept-amendment-bill-introduced-into-the-senate/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Aug 2007 02:15:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>susanne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP/IT Blogs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2007/08/29/you-say-data-i-say-datatelco-intercept-amendment-bill-introduced-into-the-senate/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Senate Legal and Constitutional Committee report on the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment Bill 2007 was tabled in parliament on 7 August. Get the report here. The legislation was intoduced into the Senate on 16 August 2007. Given the changes that this Bill introduces to the current arrangements for interception capability, and access to [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/08/29/you-say-data-i-say-datatelco-intercept-amendment-bill-introduced-into-the-senate/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Television Industry Code of Practice &#8211; Proposed Amendment</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/08/16/television-industry-code-of-practice-proposed-amendment/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/08/16/television-industry-code-of-practice-proposed-amendment/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:23:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>susanne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broadcasting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2007/08/16/television-industry-code-of-practice-proposed-amendment/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The commercial FTA networks, through Free TV, are pushing for a change to the Commercial Television Code of Practice in advance of the imminent Federal election. The changes, which are the subject of public consultation, would allow the commercial FTAs to sell an additional minute of political advertising&#8230; The additional advertising will be broadcast between [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/08/16/television-industry-code-of-practice-proposed-amendment/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>C7 judgment handed down this afternoon&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/27/c7-judgment-handed-down-this-afternoon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/27/c7-judgment-handed-down-this-afternoon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 06:58:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>susanne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Antitrust]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broadcasting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judgments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/27/c7-judgment-handed-down-this-afternoon/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The much anticipated judgment in the C7 matter has been handed down today&#8230;it&#8217;s a wopping 1230 pages/7MB. Get it here. In a very small nutshell, Channel 7 did not prove its pleaded case and was thus unsuccessful. The issue of costs is still to be worked out. His Honour Justice Sackville estimates costs in excess [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/27/c7-judgment-handed-down-this-afternoon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>AG release: LABOR STATES FAIL TO ACT ON MATERIAL ADVOCATING TERRORISM</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/27/ag-release-labor-states-fail-to-act-on-material-advocating-terrorism/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/27/ag-release-labor-states-fail-to-act-on-material-advocating-terrorism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 04:56:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>susanne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/27/ag-release-labor-states-fail-to-act-on-material-advocating-terrorism/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here&#8217;s the latest from Cth AG Phillip Ruddock in respect of the agreement he was trying to broker with the States on the &#8220;Material Advocating Terrorism&#8221; terrorism changes to the classification regulatory regime. Only NSW and SA agreed to support the changes. As the AG makes clear in the press release set out below, he [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/27/ag-release-labor-states-fail-to-act-on-material-advocating-terrorism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;sometimes words have two meanings&#8230;&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/26/sometimes-words-have-two-meanings/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/26/sometimes-words-have-two-meanings/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2007 05:32:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>susanne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/26/sometimes-words-have-two-meanings/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The â€˜war on terrorâ€™ has created the conditions for a new era of content regulation in the form of censorship of film and literature, broadcasting content standards and restrictions on the media in respect of national security matters. This week David Marr commented on the Attorney-General&#8217;s recent daubing (sorry I am sticking with the &#8220;unifinished [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/26/sometimes-words-have-two-meanings/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>correction</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/19/correction/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/19/correction/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2007 23:36:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>susanne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/19/correction/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In my last post I referred to the Electronic Frontiers Foundation rather than Electronic Frontiers Australia, Inc (EFA). Electronic Frontiers Australia made the submission to the Senate Committee reviewing the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment Bill 2007. My sincere apologies for any confusion caused &#8211; it was a typo on my part.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/19/correction/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

