Just days after I wrote “There are enough people opposed to mandatory filtering that a leak of the list can almost be guaranteed to happen here, if for nothing else then to humiliate the government in retaliation for censoring the internet“, Wikileaks has delivered the current ACMA non-mandatory blacklist up for public scrutiny.

Note: The Wikileaks website appears to have gone down so I’ve included a mirror of the blacklist in txt format here. This list only goes up to August 2008 whilst the wikileaks site had links added March ’09

Currently the voluntary blacklist is attached to various opt-in filtering software and by reverse engineering one of these programs is most likely how they got the list. Had Stephen Conroy’s mandatory filter been in place, every single page on the 2000+ strong list would not be accessible, including Wikileaks itself.

One of the biggest questions now that the list has been released has been raised by Colin Jacobs from the EFA;

Many of the sites clearly contain only run-of-the-mill adult material, poker tips, or nothing controversial at all. Even if some of these sites may have been defaced at the time they were added to the list, how would the operators get their sites removed if the list is secret and no appeal is possible?


After the media caught on and ran with the ACMA $11,000 fine debacle, the ACMA has since amended it’s review and has “modified its replies to complainants to omit the URLs of prohibited content.”

In regards to sites being blacklisted, this is currently where we are:

• Anybody can send a complaint to the ACMA about any site
• If the ACMA decides on a whim that the site will be added to the banned list
• The original complainant receives an email advising them the site has been blacklisted and no details of the site are included. If the complainer has submitted multiple sites they have no idea of knowing which site has been added.
• If you link to the blacklisted site or discuss it from within Australia online, you face fines of up to $11,000 a day.
• If you own one of the sites on the list you have no recourse for appeal or notification that your site is on the list (before the list was leaked).

Before today and with the exception of a few websites who’s acceptance onto the blacklist letters from the ACMA were made public, nobody had any idea of the scope or size of the ACMA blacklist. Thus reporting websites for hosting links to or discussion on blacklisted websites was nigh on impossible. With the leak of the list that all changes.

Of note on the list is the online gaming giant Party Poker. Now i’m pretty sure that Party Poker have never hosted any kiddie porn and a google search reveals 41,400 results for the mention of party poker on ‘Australian websites’ and 117 directly linking to it.

I wonder how long it would take to submit 41,517 websites to the ACMA for inclusion on the blacklist for discussing Party Poker, a blacklisted site?

At time of publication it seems the ACMA must be getting hammered and they have removed their online submission forms;

ACMA’s online content complaint forms are currently offline for maintenance.

If you have found material on the internet or your mobile phone that you believe is prohibited, please email online@acma.gov.au with information


Somebodythinkofthechildren has highlighted another website, Abbywinters.com (WARNING: Not safe for work), which is currently on the blacklist;

AbbyWinters, which is owned by Victorian company GMBill, complies with 18 U.S.C. 2257 Record-Keeping Requirements, meaning all models are over 18 years of age. In my opinion most of the material on the site would be rated no higher than X18+, which is legal to purchase and view in Australia.


There you have it, a legal company operating from within Victoria, Australia has a site on the blacklist. How the hell can it be illegal to view their site from within Australia but legal to allow their parent company to operate from inside of Australia itself?

Amateurphotos.com.au (also not safe for work) being on the blacklist illustrates the level of hypocrisy ACMA is full of. Just days ago ACMA threatened Whirlpool with $11,000 a day fines unless they removed links to an offshore blacklisted website, yet here is an .AU website that is still running today that is on the blacklist.

Forget about parent companies, how is it possible amateurphotos.com.au are still in business and running in Australia if they are on the blacklist themselves? What an absolute JOKE!

Amateurphotos.com.au share the list with other .AU websites such as a Queensland Dentist (WTF?) and Startcorp, a web hosting company.

I’ll be sure to check with my dentist beforehand to make sure they don’t have any child porn lying around before I visit.

Surely now with the release and irrefutable proof that the Australian government is incapable of maintaining a list  of purely illegal websites the ACMA, Conroy and the rest of the Government will be forced to concede that the filter has been a disaster from the start.

The blacklist leak is what we’ve been waiting for, it’s hard concrete evidence that the proposed mandatory filter is not just for child porn and will be used to curtail the greater online freedoms of Australians.

Apparently not, Stephen Conroy has released a statement defending the list;

The Communications Minister, Stephen Conroy, said the leak and publication of the ACMA blacklist would be “grossly irresponsible” and undermine efforts to improve cyber safety.

Under existing laws the ACMA blacklist includes URLs relating to child sexual abuse, rape, incest, bestiality, sexual violence and detailed instruction in crime.


Can someone please explain to me how blacklisting PartyPoker or Abbeywinters.com is in the interests of cyber safety and how those two sites in any way relate to “child sexual abuse, rape, incest, bestiality, sexual violence and detailed instruction in crime“?

ACMA themselves have begun their fight to justify censorship by threatening police action;

ACMA said Australians caught distributing the list or accessing child pornography sites on the list could face criminal charges and up to 10 years in prison.


Stand up for your online freedom Australia, more is at stake here then what most people realise.




Update 19/03/2009 5:53pm

Senator Conroy has flatout denied that the leaked list is the actual ACMA list. In a statement released on his website Conroy states:

I am aware of reports that a list of URLs has been placed on a web site. This is not the ACMA blacklist.

The published list purports to be current at 6 August 2008 and apparently contains approximately 2400 URLs whereas the ACMA blacklist for the same date contained 1061 URLs.

There are some common URLs to those on the ACMA blacklist. However, ACMA advises that there are URLs on the published list that have never been the subject of a complaint or ACMA investigation, and have never been included on the ACMA blacklist.

ACMA is investigating this matter and is considering a range of possible actions it may take including referral to the Australian Federal Police. Any Australian involved in making this content publicly available would be at serious risk of criminal prosecution.


Anyone would think we were in communist China trying to discuss Tibet. Conroy and his cronies are going to have to learn that heavy handed threats and denials aren’t going to keep information from spreading; they can’t control the internet.




Update 20/03/2009:

Wikileaks have just leaked the March 18th, 2009 official ACMA list, read about it here.

Related posts that might interest you:

1. Wikileaks Wages War against ACMA and Conroy
2. ACMA: Linking to blacklisted sites will cost you $11,000 a day.
3. Conroy can't guarantee only child porn will be filtered
4. ACMA chief Chris Chapman scapegoats media
5. How Stephen Conroy can protect Australian children