British Library's wi-fi service blocks Hamlet

[j.p.s]

A man using the British Library's wi-fi network was denied access to an online version of Shakespeare's Hamlet because the text contained "violent content".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23680689

I guess that they didn't want to be outdone by the various Mark Twain fusses in the US.

[Mookie]

The gulf between the technologists who create/manage the system and the mission of the library.

The Librarians who had input didn't comprehend the jargon and the technologists probably depend on a whitelist for exceptions to a brittle rule base.

Dopey.

[tubemonkey]

Digital rights activists raised concerns about the move, fearing that the lists of "banned" sites could be expanded to include pages that should be publicly available.

Prof Ross Anderson, a security expert at Cambridge University, told the BBC that internet filters were "pointless" and that it was "completely inappropriate" to have one in the British Library.

He added: "Everything that is legal should be available over the library's wi-fi network. The only things they should block are the few dozen books against which there are court judgements in the UK.

"One of the functions of deposit libraries is to keep everything, including smut."

The British Library defended its position, saying that it wanted to protect children visiting the building from content "such as pornography and gambling websites".

I totally agree with the good prof. When tax dollars are involved, libraries have no right to censor legal content for adult patrons. I have no problem with protecting children, so libraries need to find solutions that don't infringe upon the rights of adults.

[FizzyWater]

In my library system, originally computers were "open access". If there was an available computer, you could plop down in the seat and use it.

Then they changed it to requesting access using our library cards in 60 minute chunks. (It's been awhile since I was in, but I believe you could "renew" if no one was waiting for a computer when your time ran out).

I always assumed they did this because people were uploading or downloading copyrighted materials through the library system's access. But maybe it was a way to implement child-proof filters by age?

Originally Posted by FizzyWater

I always assumed they did this because people were uploading or downloading copyrighted materials through the library system's access. But maybe it was a way to implement child-proof filters by age?

They probably did it for a multitude of reasons, but I'm guessing that the biggest reasons were: people hogging the machines, restricting access to sensitive materials for children, and keeping adults out of the children's area. Copyright may have been an issue, but I'm guessing that the courts would be more liable to hold the library liable if the Internet access was restricted.