Parents at the network e. V., vehemently opposes the planned amendment of the youth media protection state contract (JMStV). Reason: From our point of view is the amendment to a disabled attempting to suggest apparent security in the network by the State. But the fact is that already the first attempt at the so-called anti-child pornography law is miserably. With a huge media effort and transparent polls, the law before the last federal election was whipped and put on hold after the election by the legislative procedure. At the moment all parties argue, whether that stop “is sign an effective protection against child pornography or not. The fact is also that the law so far convincing little.
And now the second attempt: all providers should take their network offers of an age rating and if provided with appropriate protection mechanisms, so that children and young people, for which this content should not be accessible, also cannot make use of these. What should that look like in practice? First, the provider should take their offerings of even an age classification. Gorgeous! And who controls this self-assessment and under what criteria? Times a small example: imagine for a moment, in an elementary school teaching of sexual education would take place child-friendly and gentle. We accept this school would have a blog or a forum and a student writes a short report about these lessons. How many concerned parents would demand storm running and an age restriction against this content? Now at least as many parents who forbid their children participate in this lesson. “So: what is now age” or harmful to minors? Also, all bloggers, private providers and clubs to identify their content.
So far so good. What will become of the many small providers, who prepare content with much effort and domestic work. “That cost very much money, brings the editors except honor” anything. These are now a
An appropriate representation of the requested resource could not be found on this server. This error was generated by Mod_Security.