Notes
1. The OpenNet Initiative is a collaboration of four institutions: the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto, the Oxford
Internet Institute at Oxford University, the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School, and the
University of Cambridge. More information is available at http://www.opennetinitiative.net.
2. A number of countries are currently debating strategies and legislation to filter the Internet, including Norway, Russia, and many countries in Latin America.
3. Each set of tests is performed on different Internet service providers within the country.
4. The Internet filtering tests carried out in Russia in 2006 were limited to ISPs accessible in Moscow. These results
therefore do not necessarily reflect the situation in other areas of the country.
5. The blocking of two sites garnered most of the attention: one devoted to opposition to the September 19 coup
(http://www.19sep.com/) and another hosted by Thai academics (http://www.midnightuniv.org/).
6. The strategies for addressing alleged intellectual property rights violations can vary significantly from standard Internet filtering. Rather than blocking Web sites that continue to be available from other locations, efforts generally focus on taking down the content from the Web sites that have posted the material and on removing the sites from
the results of search engines. Moreover, takedown efforts are often instigated by private parties with the threat
of subsequent legal action rather than being initiated by government action. See www.chillingeffects.org for more
information.
Figure 1.7
Content filtering choices.
26
Robert Faris and Nart Villeneuve
1. The OpenNet Initiative is a collaboration of four institutions: the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto, the Oxford
Internet Institute at Oxford University, the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School, and the
University of Cambridge. More information is available at http://www.opennetinitiative.net.
2. A number of countries are currently debating strategies and legislation to filter the Internet, including Norway, Russia, and many countries in Latin America.
3. Each set of tests is performed on different Internet service providers within the country.
4. The Internet filtering tests carried out in Russia in 2006 were limited to ISPs accessible in Moscow. These results
therefore do not necessarily reflect the situation in other areas of the country.
5. The blocking of two sites garnered most of the attention: one devoted to opposition to the September 19 coup
(http://www.19sep.com/) and another hosted by Thai academics (http://www.midnightuniv.org/).
6. The strategies for addressing alleged intellectual property rights violations can vary significantly from standard Internet filtering. Rather than blocking Web sites that continue to be available from other locations, efforts generally focus on taking down the content from the Web sites that have posted the material and on removing the sites from
the results of search engines. Moreover, takedown efforts are often instigated by private parties with the threat
of subsequent legal action rather than being initiated by government action. See www.chillingeffects.org for more
information.
Figure 1.7
Content filtering choices.
26
Robert Faris and Nart Villeneuve