Project: Fuck Censorship Data Retention

Party Improvement Todo
21

OK, call for “final” proof read/edit pass etc before handing over for marking up into website form…
If anyone feels there’s anything that needs to be added, now is the time to add it in :slight_smile:

(ensuring it is all kept as simple and as ‘entry level’ as possible though)

22

My only suggestion for change (if it is still correct) is under “What is so bad about data retention” under honey pot point. My understanding is under the first tranche of laws passed in October last year, that any breach of this information cannot be reported on as it is a ‘National Security issue’, thus we would never even know if our data was stolen and who by?

1 Like
23

My thoughts…

I wouldnt put “gleefully goose-stepped” in there, the document should be damning enough just sticking to the facts without resorting to such insults.

"and Australians will pay for this increased surveillance through taxes and additional phone and Internet charges."
I believe they deferred the decision on how to pay for it. Does it happen often, it seems strange to me, but im not close to such things. If it is unusual we should mention it to highlight its poor decision making process and lack of well thought out details. (there is also a topic about “What does it cost” that this could link to)

"The Abbott government, with the ALP, have colluded and voted together to pass a Data Retention regime."
The government and opposition have formed a unity ticket to pass the Data Retention Legislation, avoiding the need to negotiate with the crossbenches and limiting their ability to negotiation on extra safegards or limiting the bills scope. (or something about avoiding extra scrutiny)

"This treats all citizens as if they are criminals, guilty by default"
This treats all citizens as guilty until proven innocent, it undermines the trust relationship between our government and its people (if they dont trust us, why should we trust them)

I got a bit confused between the need for the “why does it matter” subheading and the “what is so bad about data retention”

"But I have nothing to hide?"
Article 12. on the Universal declaration of Human Rights says
’No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.'
Will there be effective oversight to avoid ‘arbitrary interference’ ?

1 Like
24

thanks guys

final draft is here: http://thatsgoingontheinternet.com/avoidsurveillanceDRAFTDEV/
this will not be the final url, it will live under the ppau site (so dont bandy about the above on social media etc)

Any general wording tweaks i’d rather leave for a future edit/revision round/process unless you wish to send me specific text content to paste in/replace.

at this stage, looking for any last minute deal breakers, inaccuracies etc

Note that email/PGP etc has been removed for now. Some problems have been raised in regard to the tools and methods recommended by the EFFs SSD pages which we drew from. Rather than rewrite all that we’ll just leave it for now… ppl can make a case to add it later when various things have been updated.

25

There is some duplication and fragmentation in “So what will it cost” that should be cleaned up, my suggestion for this section are as follows
NOTES

  1. i was told when in another party not to use their names as it “Humanises them” (take it or leave it)
  2. I broke the links
  3. my spellcheckler is broken
  • Estimates of how much Mandatory Metadata Retention will cost everyday Australians varies greatly
    • The Prime Minister has suggested $400 million.
    • iiNet however estimates $130 per customer per year.
    • Costings by PricewaterhouseCoopers for the A-G Department says up front costs are estimated at between $188.8 million and $319.1 million (they refused to publish the full report).
    • The government Attorney-General claims less that $4 per customer per year.
  • The details of funding arrangements, and government commitment to partially fund the scheme is unclear.
  • It could have a very negative effect on the ability of small ISPs or internet services to compete.
  • It amounts to a surveillance tax on every Australian, whether it be via increased internet costs, or taxpayer dollars.
  • The financial costs are but one minor cost, the cost to our freedoms, privacy and civil liberties are far more grave.
26

Oh dear, thanks for catching that.
There were two versions of the same content under that section, and somehow I missed that fact. (I’d pasted the new one in and forgotten to delete the old)

The top half was old content, bottom half was the revised.
I have now replaced both with your revision. Thanks for that.

27

Also if anyone has any suggestions for what we should name the folder/url/subdomain for this, please sound off.

Basically it will reside either at
http://XXXXXX.pirateparty.org.au/
or
http://pirateparty.org.au/XXXXXX

where we need to figure out what to name “XXXXXXX”

pirateparty.org.au/avoidsurveillance ?
pirateparty.org.au/protectionguide ?
pirateparty.org.au/protectyourself ?
pirateparty.org.au/thedataretentionprotectionsection ? :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

Open to suggestions, would love to get this live sooner rather than later. :smile:

28

pirateparty.org.au/metadata
pirateparty.org.au/metadatabill
pirateparty.org.au/mandatorymetadataretention
pirateparty.org.au/mmr

“metadata” was a term everyone had explained and argued about in the MsM over this bill, so i think that is something people will recognise now.

29

Now live here: https://pirateparty.org.au/dataretention/

(it was the “pirateparty.org.au/metadata” & “pirateparty.org.au/mandatorymetadataretention” suggestions above that made me realise it should just be /dataretention)

Huge thanks to everyone that contributed!

1 Like