Deutsch
Italiano
Русский
Polski
中文博客
台灣部落格
日本語Zooomr’s Stand on Censorship
by Thomas Hawk | 13 June 2007 | Announcements | 43 Comments
A lot of controversy has been flying lately with regards to censorship on the internet. Earlier today, the BBC, Slashdot, etc. reported on a shareholder resolution that was rejected by Yahoo management. The shareholder resolution was very well written and articulate and documented where an internet company ought to stand with regards to censorship. Unfortunately Yahoo leadership urged their shareholders not to approve this resolution and it was in fact defeated.
Although Zooomr is just a two man start up we believe that taking an anti-censorship stand is important. And so today Kristopher and I decided that we would formally adopt the anti censorship proposal that Yahoo rejected pretty much word for word. We believe that censorship is wrong and we are willing to put this in writing. We hope that you will support Zooomr in our stand against censorship. We think you deserve not to be censored, but we also believe that world with less censorship is a better one than a world with more.
So reprinted below is the shareholder resolution that Yahoo rejected today. This is the one we are adopting at Zooomr:
” Whereas, Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are fundamental human rights, and free use of the Internet is protected in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which guarantees freedom to “receive and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers”, and
Whereas, the rapid provision of full and uncensored information through the Internet has become a major industry in the United States, and one of its major exports, and
Whereas, political censorship of the Internet degrades the quality of that service and ultimately threatens the integrity and viability of the industry itself, both in the United States and abroad, and
Whereas, some authoritarian foreign governments such as the Governments of Belarus, Burma, China, Cuba, Egypt, Iran, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Vietnam block, restrict, and monitor the information their citizens attempt to obtain, and
Whereas, technology companies in the United States that operate in countries controlled by authoritarian governments have an obligation to comply with the principles of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, and
Whereas, technology companies in the United States have failed to develop adequate standards by which they can conduct business with authoritarian governments while protecting human rights to freedom of speech and freedom of expression,
Therefore, be it resolved, that Zooomr today adopts the following policies to help protect freedom of access to the Internet which would include the following minimum standards:
1) Data that can identify individual users should not be hosted in Internet restricting countries, where political speech can be treated as a crime by the legal system.
2) The company will not engage in pro-active censorship.
3) The company will use all legal means to resist demands for censorship. The company will only comply with such demands if required to do so through legally binding procedures.
4) Users will be clearly informed when the company has acceded to legally binding government requests to filter or otherwise censor content that the user is trying to access.
5) Users should be informed about the company’s data retention practices, and the ways in which their data is shared with third parties.
6) The company will document all cases where legally-binding censorship requests have been complied with, and that information will be publicly available.”
With your help we can make the world a better place for photo sharing. Power to the people. The best photographs in the world have yet to be taken.
Free hosting for porn? Are you crazy? Seriously, isn’t that going to suck up any and all bandwidth?
The times we’ve (http://www.photagious.com/) ran into porn it’s been accompanied by huge an influx of traffic.
Awesome!!
Just one more reason why Zooomr > *
hmmm… interesting… censorship stance… so does this mean that Zooomr will not censor anything?
Boiler, legally binding stuff we will have to. Say valid DMCA takedown requests for instance. If someone steals somebody’s photos and doesn’t own copyright then that’s a legally binding issue. Child porn stuff like that is also legally binding. We do have a mechanism in place to put a screen over certain adult photos to try to balance community with those who would rather not see porn, but anyone can click through. The photos are still there and we don’t consider them censored.
It’s going to be tough to hold to this. We know that. But we also know that too many other sites out there are over censoring and think that it’s important to make a stand. Maybe in the end it will be a mistake, but I believe in the goodness of community to largely get it right.
Applause for the stance Kristopher, Thomas. High road was definitely the right election.
That makes sense Thomas and might as well take that stance since you have no corporation to answer to.
What kind of tools will be in place to protect children from viewing adult content Zooomr. Thats my concern.
I think that this will be an interesting policy to uphold. I completely agree with you on it and I hope that it will stick in the months (years) to come.
Way to go, guys.
Boiler, I think we can protect kids by applying a click through screen warning of offensive material and also the ability to make a choice on their end to exclude these photos from browsing. I don’t see these tools as censorship. As long as it’s an optional choice and not the only choice.
We are still building these tools of course though and will look to the community for guidance in how best to implement them.
Dawn, it will be interesting. I’m sure we will be challenged in the months ahead. But it feels like the right thing to do and I think when it’s in writing it has more force than when it is not.
Thomas & Kristopher,
I applaud your stance on censorship. I wish more companies would take a stand.
-Jeff
http://blog.zemote.com
yee haw. I’m 99.9% w/ you, TH. but really, you can’t simultaneously throw around the term “censhorship” while overstating the subtle differences b/w Flickr and Zooomr photo filtering.
you’re on the right side TH, better to highlight the big differences than overstate the little ones. I applaud your level-headed post here that focuses on what Zooomr is being right instead of what Flickr may be doing wrong.
Zooomr, can you also clearly define your position on the source code copyright?
Do you have any ETA to remove code and text fragments you’ve stolen from Flickr out of your code base?
How about fixing at least the many security issues since MIII?
Private photos are showing on my profile, for example.
Your statement, “We think you deserve not to be censored, but we also believe that [sic] world with less censorship is a better one than a world with more,” makes absolutely no sense to me. We don’t deserve censorship. But you’re going to give us a little, just not a lot? So.. how is a little censorship not censorship? Because it’s just two guys in a high-rise, and not a major corporation doing it? And just how much is enough? And who’s to say?
I call double-standards on this issue.
Your plan sounds similar to Flickr’s initial plans for governing the images that appear on their systems, with the static-like image placed over inappropriate stuff. Given all the hoopla you’ve helped create around that, I would have thought you’d be going at it differently yourselves.
I’m all for open communication.
I’m all for content control. I don’t want to see filth.
My problem is with how the business aspect of Zooomr is handled, when you attempt to blur the lines between censorship and common decency, and then rant against a certain other company’s attempt at balancing the two, only to put in place something similar they’re trying to achieve yourself…
I know nothing I say will change your position, and someone [you or the fanboys] will have their say about what I’ve said.
I don’t appreciate double-standards, and your practice of them mars my respect for your efforts.
Congrats and thanks for the stand. It would encourage more and more photographers.
BTW, if you haven’t noticed, link to the Learn More page in the footer page at Zooomr is broken down.
This makes no mention of deliberately illegal photos, despite the nation of origin. Given that you operate in America, there is one (or maybe two) thing(s) that you absolutely cannot allow on your site.
Now, legal photos that people whine gripe and complain about because they’re intolerant (i.e. christians and porn) I have no problem with, but as much as I encourage freedoms, there are still the few things (KP ESPECIALLY) that you cannot provide an outlet for.
To “I am” two comments above. They *HAVE* to practice some censorship. The government/individual firms will send DMCA and other legally bound requests, and Zooomr will take them down or GO OUT OF BUSINESS.
You cannot abolish censorship, I think KT/TH and plenty of other people know this.
But when it starts to come about, they will do everything they can to avoid taking it down, if there is truly no legal precedent for doing so.
This is the right stand to make. Censorship is not a friend of humanity, at some point it becomes oppression.
And decency is not the same thing as censorship. Removing child porn is not only dictated by law, it is dictated by decency. Child porn is a form of abuse - there is no discussion on that. Removing those images and reporting the person who posted them to authorities is not the same as, or even close to, censorship. I think we all agree on that point.
TH and KT must follow the law. End of discussion. At this point the law is not censoring anyone on Zooomr (at least to my knowledge). We have protections in this country that KT and TH are just reaffirming.
Regarding adult content - That is the job of parents, not the government, corporations, or two guys doing great things for the photography community. I am a parent and it is my job to make sure my kids understand safe Internet use, and to monitor their activity if necessary. No one can build any filter that I will agree with all the time. I need to teach my kids to develop their own filters.
KT and TH are taking a stand for something, and should be congratulated for that if nothing else.
Thank you.
“1) Data that can identify individual users should not be hosted in Internet restricting countries, where political speech can be treated as a crime by the legal system.”
How are you going to deal with people tagging photos? What if I tag a shot in a way that identifies an individual user?
Hey Gymnopedie, Elinesca
What we mean by that is that we won’t host actual Zooomr data on servers in countries where political speech can be treated as a crime.
The issue here most likely relates to Yahoo’s widely criticized decision to turn over private emails to the Chinese government that resulted in a journalist being jailed there for 10 years.
By not hosting our servers and data in countries where free speech can be crime we prevent this sort of thing from happening.
Tagging on a photograph would not be the same thing and would be fine and allowed under this policy. As a user you can tag your photos whatever you want. We won’t censor that.
Hi Thomas,
What about photo cencorship?
What will Zooomr do if someone upload child porn stuff ? In case you have to censor that completely different issue than freedom of speech indeed.
thomas and kris, what a brave thing to do, I’m 100% behind it. It won’t be easy true, but it’s worth the try.
Gary, what a lovely exposition of an argument.
contragulations zooomr!
Totally agree with you guys. One more reason to use Zooomr. You are supporting freedom.
Thanks.
hey! I can´t sing up, why? I want to be part of this comunity…
@amd64
Have you seen zooomr’s source code? Have you seen flickr’s source code? Are there really legitimate concerns?
If so, there’s a better way to rectify the problem than to troll around the zooomr blog.
My stance is not against censorship. My stance is also against extreme censorship. My stance is against the tactics used in the past months with the CEO of Zooomr.
Flickr has had problems with their content control. Flickr is trying to work out the kinks and establish a content control system that is fair to the artists while controlling content for the general public.
I disagree with how Thomas Hawk handles this kind of situation over and over again. He can call himself ‘unbiased’ over it, but he’s not. He’s got partial control of a competitor to Flickr, that being Zooomr. He takes a stance against Flickr’s *censorship* and then sees to put a similar system on Zooomr, to control content, from what I’ve read the post and above comments.
I call that a double-standard. To say bad things about someone and then go do something similar. It’s hypocritical.
Don’t get me wrong. I love what Zooomr is doing, I love what Flickr is doing, and I’ll continue to use both services, content-controlled or not. I’ll love it when Flickr’s API is open to Zooomr so I can port all of my images, because I don’t have time to upload 6-8 images at a time to catch up to my 1,000+ on Flickr.
I wish “TH” (as everyone seems to call him, hoping for a hint at familiarity) would reconsider his stance on how he operates as CEO. What I see is dirty interaction with the community abroad, mainly within Flickr and spreading sensational arguments against the company.
I’ve chatted with Thomas in the Zooomr uStream, I watch his blog, I’ve even given him pointers with his new Mac. (That’s my hope for a hint at familiarity.) He’s commendable on many things, but I think he’s crossed the line on this whole censorship thing.
And that’s all I have to say about that.
im actually trying to join zooomer right now and am not getting an ‘enter’ when i fill out all info, just a ‘please fill out infor above’ ?
Hey you all, This discussion needs to happen. I am on both sides of it. I am a musician and a school teacher. On the one hand, I hate sensorship. On the other hand, I can not log into my zooomr account at work because the banner of random peoples photos (a great idea I think) not only can not be shut off, but more times than not displays not only nude photos, but photos I would typically consider porn (images that have the intent of arousment over artistic integrity). While that is not my call to make. I just had to sign up to Flickr because if I log in to zooomr at work, I WILL LOOSE MY CAREER. I know you all have bugs to work out, but I love this site and wish I could be a part of the revolution.
Peace,
Jacob
‘I am’ said: “…I think he’s crossed the line on this whole censorship thing”.
Just because people at flickr and also flickr staff have that position does not make censorship right. There is a difference between
a) to ban a single photo because it is inappropriate by whatever means as long as the rules are clear beforehand and
b) to block users from an entire country for certain content regardless of whether or not that content really is objectible and whether or not single persons from that county may be free to see respective content.
flickr clearly does censor photos. And flickr does block entire countries from certain content unbiased. This is wrong. Period.
And as you folks at flickr do not accept that I have deleted my account. Simple: I do not agree, I go elsewhere.
There is no ’sensational argument’ I know of. Why is something deviating from a certain opinion a ’sensational argument’? Why is not only another opinion? Are not free to have different opinons?
flickr does massive censorship. Fact.
“im actually trying to join zooomer right now and am not getting an ‘enter’ when i fill out all info, just a ‘please fill out infor above’ ? ”
And me…can someone help?
In regard to sign-up for accounts on Zooomr, do not use Internet Explorer. If on Windows, use Firefox and the sign-up process will go more smoothly. For, whatever reason, IE does not work well with Zooomr.
Suggestion: this information, about IE and sign-up, should be shared on the sign up page itself.
Colin,
I am sorry if people thought I was from Flickr, I am not. I am also quite against censorship “even in m own classroom.” However, it is unfair to us as users and to Zooomr (who looses clients like myself who desperately want to join the revolution) because of lewd and disturbing images that are forced upon us (if we want to join the community). YOu mention an age restricted area, but the three pictures that are shown in the bottom right are at times both lewd and disturbing. So, my freedom of choice takes me elsewhere. This is unfortunate because I wish I could lay my loyalties here.
Jacob,
Have you considered that instead of a service, or others, censoring or - perhaps another “c” word may be better, curbing what you see/shows up on your computer screen … why not make use of user-installed filters that you could set up to block out certain elements? I know there are programs like net nanny that have been out for years now … so wouldn’t seem unlikely there are other options available that may suit your needs that may, for example, allow you to filter out certain usernames or tags/keywords.
I am not a prude but, like you, there are some things that are not going to inspire or tempt me to see the larger image or follow the link. I pretty much so can deal with just skipping over those, or for the most part, ignore them.
Yes, it would be easier if someone else would curb what showed up … but sometimes the other person gets over-zealous or may restrict what I feel is ok or am comfortable with reading/viewing with their opinion outweighing mine and others.
For example, what you consider to be an arousement*-inducing photo or porn - I may not feel the same way. But this thought, of curbing or filtering content, is not solely about nudity or porn images/content - although that may be the first thought that comes to some folk’s minds on what may be a (likely) candidate for filtering or censoring.
One thing I like about Zooomr is that I can opt to see certain images or ignore them on my own accord. I like that ability more so than dealing with service-provided filters that rarely let you have elbow room on their settings or what criteria they use on determining what is filtered from your view. However, that is my opinion.
Carol
* I think I made up a new word?
Carol,
Arousement may be a word already, but if it is not, I like it. Perhaps you should contact the folks at Oxford :).
I understand what you are saying about using the filters, but I should not have to. I despise the idea in of filters in general, and have lived my life thus far without the need. Therefore, why would I install one just to use this site? Further more, I have a lot of students who are into art, and I think this would be a potentially great place for them to spend some time. But I will not even mention it to them while this issue is a possibility.
How would you feel if your twelve- year- old child came home touting the gospel of Zooomr because he or she heard about it from a teacher, and you signed up because the visit and discovery looked neat, but when you logged in for the first time with your child sitting next to you, you saw sexually explicit images? My guess is, it would be an awkward situation at best, and warrant a phone call to the teacher who recommended the site at least.
I understand too, that this is a slippery slope, there are many images I can think if that would be quite offensive to someone, that would not be filtered out. For instance a picture of violence, or for some people a picture of a certain flag, or the burning of a certain flag.
However, if you feel there is content that should require age restricted access, you should not in my mind advertise that content in thumbnails on everyone’s user page as they log in.
If you were to impose a filter that would just filter the “everyone’s photos” section of the user page, I would be happy. In addition, if you did not want to use a filter, and had it turned off by default, and had an age verified link warning people about the potential content (though it cuts out in my mind a great service) that would be great. But, you have to admit, if you are going to have an age restricted area, and then give users that content without any warning at random in a way they can neither control, nor prepare for, that either something is not right, or you are saying that you do not want families, children, or adults who are offended by such images to be members of your site. Which would cut out most of the world in my mind. As I said before, it is unfortunate because other than this issue, this site rocks.
Peace,
Jacob
P.S. Colin, I apologize, I meant to address Photomotion above. I had a similar setback, but was so excited to join the revolution, that I just used a different email address, and it worked that time.
Und es hat Zoomr gemacht!
Der US-Fotodienst Zoomr erkennt die Anti-Zensurerklärung ausdrücklich, die Yahoo!s Aktionäre abgelehnt hatten, und und integriert sie ab sofort in seine Firmengrundsätze:
Therefore, be it resolved, that Zooomr today adopts the following policies to…
I’m actually interested in how this “non-censorship” issue will apply to the internationalization effort. It seems to be very US-centric when it comes to definition of appropriate and inappropriate content and how the laws of other countries apply when it comes to age verification for adult content.
It might also be worthwhile to note that the Yahoo decision, while disappointing, wasn’t made at the executive level, but rather, by stockholder vote. Only 4% of Yahoo stockholders voted in favor of a human rights committee, which would have applied to the “censorship” issues as well as blocked sites in search results in countries like China.
It’s all well and good to applaud a Utopian ideal when it’s a two-man operation making the rules, but answering to investors or stockholders isn’t a comparable situation. And if Zooomr wants (and needs) investors, the “we’ll let you post anything not illegal” may not fly for long.
Cyndy Aleo-Carreira said ‘the “we’ll let you post anything not illegal” may not fly for long.’
I am with it as long as it does.
Jacob,
Oxford Dictionary would love me, as I have made up some new words from time to time.
If I were a teacher, of art courses, would I recommend Zooomr for a 12 year old? I would, most probably, add Zooomr and a few other sites and give that to the parents along with a notation (verbal and written on the paper sharing the recommendations) that the sites share user-contributed contents; therefore they may 1) want to check it out without their child at their side, and 2) if liking a large percentage of the contents, but not feeling all the contents are suitable for their child, to consider if 3rd party filtering software or other alternatives to help curb what their child views/sees or not allowing their child to use the site at all.
However, given a not too long ago instance here in PA where a middle school pulled art books of artists (e.g. Renoir, Cezanne, Manet, Monet, El Grecco, et cetera), I would also have to take into consideration the school district itself, and if they have done similar in the past, as that may influence or shorten the list of what I would write as a recommendation for even the child’s parents to consider. To further cover my butt I would present the recommendation list, with the warning about contents attached, for their approval to hand out to the parents.
As detailed or complicated the above may be - it would not stop me from considering in recommending Zooomr or other sites to people if I felt the majority of the content would help, or inspire, Johnny. It would just mean I would have to consider past actions, by that school, and an additional step or two versus just saying to Johnny’s Mom “Mrs. Smith, I think Johnny would get inspiration from site XYZ” like I could, more easily, to the person sitting next to me on a city bus.
Then again, though, I am not a licensed teacher - so I may be wrong in what steps one can consider or will need to go through in sharing web site recommendations.
How would I, as a parent, feel about a teacher sending home a note recommending Zooomr? I cannot answer that hypothetically since I already allow my son, age 9, to do so along with places like DeviantArt. On Zooomr he looks up animal, food, and such images … on DeviantArt he looks up things like “fan art” of Spongebob and such.
Like you - I would prefer to not have filters but I do not always agree with a service-provided filter, and how it filters, either. Toss in global differences and aspects, plus how easily many of the “age restriction” filters can be bypassed with ease, and self-filtering (on the user’s side) versus service-provided filters may be more feasible, and better satisfying, option for people.
I guess my question is, why would a parent or whole district go to the trouble of installing an app. like net-nanny just to use one site, or in this case, community. I thin the answer most districts would go to is say, “Just use Flickr, there is no issue.” The distinction, I would like to make, and pardon me if I am repeating myself is the uncontrollable or forewarned section that advertises images that in my mind are demeaning and inappropriate for a middle school setting. I understand that the images have the right to be displayed, but if they are being put in sections where access is not restricted then this is not a safe community for children, or educators. There are many other similar communities, and I fear that is where they will move. This is unfortunate, as none of those communities are as full featured or rich despite, and not because of this issue. I guess I am having a difficult time understanding why this is an issue. The technology exists to keep the objectionable content from being advertised on the “Everyone’s Photos” link, and having it appear down there will only push more people away.
# Carol said on 15 Jun 2007 at 2:40 pm:
“In regard to sign-up for accounts on Zooomr, do not use Internet Explorer. If on Windows, use Firefox and the sign-up process will go more smoothly. For, whatever reason, IE does not work well with Zooomr.”
It’s not that IE does not work well with Zooomr, it’s that Zooomer does not work well with IE. And if this is the case, the developer should ensure that the product works on all platforms, esp the one that has at least and 87% share of the market.
Tyroga said: “It’s not that IE does not work well with Zooomr, it’s that Zooomer does not work well with IE.”
Most developers develop for Firefox first and then tweak the IE bugs later. This is because, if you design for IE (esp. with all the CSS bugs IE has) it probably won’t look right in Firefox.
If a website works with Firefox, Opera, Safari and other browsers, but doesn’t work with IE, it is a problem that needs to be worked around by the developer…eventually.
But don’t blame the developer for the crappyness of Internet Explorer. *gag* I haven’t used IE for web surfing for more than 2 years now, and I DO NOT miss it. (Disclaimer: I only use IE for design testing purposes only.)
Get a clue…Get Firefox.
Interesting how Google’s shareholders rejected a similar resolution last month. I don’t see Thomas picking on them. Of course, he’s not trying to lure visitors from Google’s photo sharing site.
Hello! Good Site! Thanks you! myifanpbcvi
[…] pesar de los dolores de cabeza de su Mark III ya ofrece en 11 idiomas alojamiento de fotos… y el post de hoy de estos dos muchachos suena […]
Is Your Computer Strong Enough For A work From Home Internet Business…
Is Your Computer Strong Enough For A work From Home Internet Business By Tom Worsley…