A few more interesting details regarding the role of the IWF:
The wording makes clear it exercises both the regulatory and
enforcement functions of its provisions. Should "full members" fail
to comply according to their requisites, the threat of notifying the
"relevant LEA" of the ISP's non-compliance is clearly stated ...
Or should it be better said ... threatened. See excerpted quotes
below.
A caveat. Upon last check at the IWF web site, several ISPs which are
now seemingly complying with IWF guidelines, no doubt in fear of IWF
sanctions, are NOT listed as full members, although further research
may reveal they are indeed subsumed under a broad parent company.
"Upon receipt of notifications from the IWF all Full Members agree to
act within a reasonable time to take down the relevant content."
"All Full Members agree to abide by the IWF newsgroup policy
recommendations detailed above and ensure that they regularly check
the updated newsgroup lists."
"Failure to Comply
"The IWF will check Full Members' compliance with take down
notifications for all web based content and respond to third party
complaints that notifications have not been acted upon with regard to
Usenet content.
Any complaints with regard to failure to comply should be made to the
IWF Secretariat via: secretariat@iwf.org.uk
If a Full Member fails to take down the relevant content within a
reasonable time following an IWF notification and, following an
investigation by the IWF executive, fails to provide reasonable
grounds for doing so, the Full Member will receive a formal warning
and a report may be filed with the relevant LEA."
Any agency can, and will, exercise whatever power is granted them,
whether through authority, complacency, or fear.
VV
|
|