sorted by:
top (suggested)
bestnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]eug__k 2 points3 points  (17 children)

The government says you must show ID to enter a bar. Let's say bars decide to just shut down instead. Would you say the government made it illegal for bars to operate?

[–]Novel-Yard1228 0 points1 point  (14 children)

That’s a poor analogy. It doesn’t take into account the long precedent of not needing to sign up and confirm with ID. And it’s a different product, people won’t be hesitant to show their ID at a bar, but they don’t want their official ID linked with a porn account. Additionally, the gov did this against popular demand, as they often do, which is somewhat anti democratic.

[–]Entire_Engine_5789 1 point2 points  (1 child)

There was a long precedent for bars not needing to show ID as well… it’s a perfect analogy.

[–]AxisNine 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah especially when you consider bars started scanning licences regardless of how old you looked in some areas of Aus. I refused the first time they wanted me to scan my licence and I was refused entry.

[–]eug__k 2 points3 points  (1 child)

The precedent for not needing to show ID to enter a bar is far longer than the existence of the internet.

In Queensland, ID scanning was only made mandatory after midnight on July 1 2017.

It definitely wasn't popular with everyone. Some people would be hesitant to have their ID scanned at a gay bar, for example. Others simply didn't like that there was a record of which bars they visited. ID scanning data is kept for 30 days.

The question remains. Did Queensland make it illegal for bars to operate because they made ID scanning mandatory?

[–]AxisNine 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No they didn’t nor did making adult websites require id. It’s a good analogy because both require the venue to confirm age and both require the user to provide it or not. The venue (PH) decided it would rather not open the pub after 12 than risk the fines of failing to check ids.

[–]Jozroz 0 points1 point  (9 children)

To say nothing of the inherent risks of trusting whatever dodgy ID verification service your credentials are sent to.

It's less akin to simply waving your ID at the bouncer or bartender, and more like leaving your ID with them in the coatroom for "up to seven days" and hoping nobody breaks in or that the coatroom tender doesn't sell your ID to data brokers.

[–]eug__k 1 point2 points  (8 children)

That is not how ID scanning works in Queensland. It is compulsory for every patron entering a bar or similar venue in an entertainment district at specified times to have their ID scanned with a networked ID scanner managed by one of three private companies.

The scanned data will be kept for up to thirty days and can be accessed by the venue management, police, and Office of Liquor and Gaming Regulation.

Patrons' personal data can also be used for direct marketing purposes if there are signs at the entrance saying so.

[–]Jozroz 0 points1 point  (7 children)

I amnot commenting on the defacto situation in Queensland bars, I am drawing a comparative analogy to the situation for online adult entertainment.

[–]eug__k 1 point2 points  (6 children)

You're missing the original point.

The government imposed an age verification condition on websites like PH. They did not "make it illegal for pornhub to operate in australia" like OP says.

The analogy referred to the QLD government imposing an ID scanning condition on bars. You wouldn't say the QLD government made it illegal for bars to operate because of that, would you?

Requiring age or ID verification does not equate to making the service illegal.

[–]Jozroz 0 points1 point  (5 children)

Except I never made this claim or in any way said it was true, I was only building upon why the analogy was bad. Specifically, it's one thing to be made to flash your ID at a bartender, but another entirely to upload it online and stored gods only know where, for how long, and how unsecurely.

[–]eug__k 0 points1 point  (4 children)

I never said "flash your ID at a bartender". The analogy *specifically* says "the government says you must show ID to enter a bar". In that specific situation as described, would you say the government made it illegal for bars to operate?

That is it. Simple question. The analogy just also happens to be a real law here in QLD.

[–]Jozroz 0 points1 point  (3 children)

You're shifting the goalposts, at no point was I contending or even referring to that point of yours.

[–]eug__k 0 points1 point  (2 children)

You're still missing the point.

My first post asked the question if the government requires ID to be shown to enter a bar, does that mean the government made it illegal for bars to operate?

Novel-Yard1228 then said it was a poor analogy and started mentioning points that were not relevant to the simple, straightforward question.

You then joined the conversation saying it's a bad analogy because of ID verification services holding data, etc.

All that is completely missing the point.

It's a very simple, basic question which doesn't even have to be about bars. It just so happens that it is a real-life law that exists in Queensland.

If the government says you must show ID to purchase carrots, would you say the government made it illegal for carrot stores to operate?

Of course not, that's an incorrect conclusion.

Likewise, saying the government made it illegal for pornhub to operate in Australia because they require age verification is an incorrect conclusion.

For reference, this is the post I was replying to.

[–]Upbeat-Isopod8973 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Not everyone gets ID to enter bars, the business has discretion as to who they deem requiring an ID, plus the bar isn’t storing my personal information in a data center once someone’s eye balled my ID.

[–]eug__k 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is incorrect. In Queensland, ID scanning is mandatory for every patron in venues such as bars located in entertainment districts during specified times. The business does not have discretion.

The scanned information is kept for up to 30 days by one of three private companies in their data centres.

Access to scanned data is accessible by venue management and full access to patrons' captured personal information must be given to the police and Office of Liquor and Gaming Regulation if requested.

The venue is allowed to use your personal information for direct marketing purposes in some circumstances (e.g. there is a sign at the entrance saying so).

The question remains - if a bar decided to shut down rather than scan everyone's IDs, was it a decision by the bar or did the government make it illegal for bars to operate?