The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) has released its response to Senate questions it took on notice regarding current operation procedures it uses to act upon when it comes to handling reported prohibited online content.

Yesterday afternoon the ACMA submitted to Parliament its answers to Senate questions regarding numerous practices it undertakes to ensure prohibited content online is dealt with appropriately.

The questions, put to the ACMA by various Senators on February 23rd of this year, were put on notice for the ACMA to come back at a later date to answer.

One of the questions, asked by Greens Party member Senator Ludlam, was whether the ACMA had been referred to any content that was found to be that of “RC – Child – depiction”, and if so, whether it had been reported to the Australian Federal Police or State or Territory police forces.

The ACMA responded by stating that where possible it notified the Country of where the content was hosted.

“In the financial year 1 July 2007 to 30 June 2008, ACMA took action on 410 items of prohibited content and potential prohibited content which were hosted outside Australia and which were considered likely to be classified RC in accordance with item 1(b) of the Films Table of the National Classification Code.”

“Of the 410 URLs, 344 URLs were referred to a hotline which is a member of the International Association of Internet Hotlines (INHOPE), for assessment under applicable legislation in the country concerned, and referral to the relevant law enforcement agency in that country, if appropriate.”

“Sixty-six items of content were referred directly to the Australian Federal Police, due to the lack of an INHOPE member hotline in the country in which the content was hosted.”

The ACMA also added that an additional 11 items of prohibited content were hosted in Australia during that period.

“In the same period, a further 11 items of prohibited content which were hosted in Australia, and which the Classification Board classified RC in  accordance with item 1(b) of the Films Table of the National Classification Code, were referred to Commonwealth, and State or Territory law enforcement agencies.”

When quizzed by Ludlam about the time frame that ACMA operates by when dealing with prohibited material, the ACMA responded by stating that it acted on material as soon as possible.

“In the case of other Australian hosted content likely to be classified RC, ACMA generally issues an interim take-down notice and asks the Classification Board to classify the content within 2 to 5 working days of receipt of the complaint.”

“As the process for content hosted outside Australia does not require initial consultation with a law enforcement agency or mandate classification of the content by the Classification Board, ACMA is also able to make a decision about and take action on such material within two to five working days in most cases.”

“ACMA must ask the Classification Board to classify all potential prohibited content that is hosted in or provided from Australia.”

“This process generally takes 5 to 10 business days from the date of the request.  Complaints about other content hosted outside Australia are generally able to be resolved within five business days.”

The ACMA also responded to claims from Ludlam that suggested from a study that authorities act 150 times faster on bank phishing websites than they do on child sexual abuse websites.

The ACMA saw no relevance in the study as it was conducted overseas.

“ACMA understands that the July 2008 study examined processes undertaken outside Australia.”

“As ACMA is not aware of comparable studies of reporting and take-down processes undertaken outside Australia it is not in a position to advise on such a comparison.”

“ACMA can however provide information on the general timeframes which apply to its processes for dealing with complaints about suspected online depictions on child sexual abuse.”

“Under clause 47 of Schedule 7 to the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 (BSA) (and prior to 20 January 2008, clause 30 of Schedule 5 to the BSA), if in the course of an investigation ACMA locates online content that is prohibited content (as defined by clause 20 of Schedule 7 to the BSA) or potential prohibited content (as defined by clause 21 of Schedule 7 to the BSA) hosted in Australia, it must direct the host to take-down the content or otherwise take action to ensure that it is not prohibited content.”

“A person who is given such a notice by ACMA must comply with the notice as soon as practicable, and in any event by 6.00 pm on the next business day, after the notice was given to the provider.”

“Since 1 January 2000, ACMA has directed the take-down of 372 items of prohibited content hosted in Australia.”

“In all cases the content host, hosting service provider or links service provider has complied with the notice within the required timeframe.”

Many other questions were asked and are available for download online,

Some quick interesting facts:

• The ACMA revealed that it currently staffs close to 600 people on an ongoing basis and hires 26 temporary staff.
• According to the ACMA 1122 complaints about online content were received during the period 1 July 2007 to 30 June 2008.
• Forty-six of those complaints were anonymous and did not contain contact details.
• Complaints containing contact details in the form of a contact email address came from 740 unique email addresses.