i especially love how all these places with euphemistic names are problematically restrictive and absusive of their powers.
while NZ's Cheif Censor's Office is all nice and layed back and spends most of their time Actually tracking down people making and distributing child porn and bringing them to justice, and the rest of their time assigning ratings to tv programs, movies and video games. (this is NOT a voluntary rating system, mind you, but the most restrictive, R ratings, are only limited to not providing the product in question to people under the listed age, and you're looking at basically child porn or some sort of weird realistic torture based game or something before it gets outright banned. I'm not entirely sure where cartoons of a similar nature fall.)
to be fair, large parts of the western world have adopted this.
heck, large parts of the western world have always Had this... they just used to be a lot better about not Using it on things and people that the public cared about.
NZ has a Chief Censor.
he has an office with a fair number of staff.
best part is, things banned by the Chief Censor's office outside of wartime, to the best of my knowledge: one HIGHLY offensive T-shirt (generally offensive, not religions or ideology based or anything like that.), one apparently extremely offensive book that, among other things, denied the holocaust took place, said book's author (not a citizen, not allowed in the country, and from memory that wasn't just because of the book)... and a bunch of porn to extreme even for the R18 lable here.
other than that they just assign ratings to movies and games (of which only R13, R16 and R18 have Any actual restrictions, and that is only that they may not be provided to individuals under those ages. the R13 is also basically obsolete as it has almost 100% overlap with the current top end non-restricted ratings), and review books (or anything else of similar nature) that they get actual legitimate complaints about. (generally speaking things only get banned if their production is causing actual harm (such as child porn), or if they are so morally reprehensible by current standards that failure to do so is likely to cause major public outcry... which is rare.)
that's legitimate censorship by a dedicated government body for that purpose. it's widely known about, generally accepted, non-partisan (except for the fact that it's about the only job where a question of someone's morality is a valid reason to reject their appointment reguardless of whether they have ever actually been caught doing anything wrong or the like and sometimes people find certain appointments suspect as it's Definitely a job in the 'if you want it you're unsuited for it' catagory and they find the individual's morality questionable and/or not to line up with their own. and even then it's not exactly Partisan, so much as it tends to shift voters around a bit.) and you'd basically have to buy out the entire government in order to bribe the guy to do something contrary to what he's meant to without it being found out in fairly short order and the guy being fired, his decision reversed, and i think the penalties for such things are probably pretty harsh.
then there's all the Other censorship that comes from powerful people abusing the law, the courts, and other government bodies. though there's a lot less of that than in the USA, it's still an issue. That's the one that's an actual problem.
Actual Censorship of political opinion and the like is caused by the latter. (save the rare occasion when said political opinion is both known to be false and likely to cause riots and the like.)
Re: Re: If they want more freedom, let them enjoy more laws.
not only that, but in the era in question 'cake' was not a delicious desert type thingy. it was the left over crud in the bottom of an oven at the end of the day from anything that dripped/overflowed/whatever. so that's not being clueless and out of touch. just evil.
also, most of these things are written in legalise. that can obfusicate ANYTHING in a perfectly precise and totally accurate manner.
(technically bills up for vote here in NZ are available to the public, at least usually. problem is every two or three sentences there's five paragraphs of this, that, or the other party or politician forcing through changes to the effect of adding or removing full stops, swapping 'a' for 'the' and vice versa, and other equally pathetic things that would not MATTER if the bloody thing were written in proper english in the first place. (the courts have to make rulings on exactly what is meant all the time Anyway, and while it might give people a little more leigimate wiggle room on the less important stuff, the More important stuff would be a heck of a lot clearer. there'd be less loopholes and what loopholes there were, Anyone could see and thus compensate for, and it'd be a lot harder to HIDE any unintended (or intended) consiquences that were contrary to the public good.)
fireworks on the 5th of november might be an interesting idea if protests are still needed then.
wouldn't really be noticed in the commonwealth, i suppose, but elsewhere the sudden migration of such an event might be noticeable.
(now, Guy Fawks day is actually a celebration of the fact that he Failed to destroy parliament... but more importantly, failed to kill the Monarch, as the point in the exercise was apparently a change in king. still, whether you read it as pointing out that those sufficiently unhappy with how things are being run may well resort to explosives or as that attempts to undermine the right and proper order of government Will fail (note that right and proper in this case means actually for the good of the people, with their participation, whether a monarch is involved or not) it'd still be significant.
failing that you get the link to V for Vendetta and Annoymous, so meh *shrugs*)
a large number of those are places that no sane person would want to Be if they can avoid it... being rich mitigates or nullifies the issues in several more, i suppose.
a few of them i've never actually heard of. heh.
and a lot of them are in situations where, while there may be no extridition treaty, the USA could A) lean on the government there and have them deal with it, or B) conduct covert or military ops to deal with it themselves and have the international community not bat an eye lid (or at least be unwilling to risk getting embroiled in said war on the opposite side from the USA.)
unfortunately, the NZ telecomunications system has taps in it that allow them to monitor just that. (this was snuck through and caused some public outcry, but by the time the public heard about it it was already done and there was the classic 'oh, but we won't actually USE it' spiel combiend with 'if you're not doing anything wrong you've got nothing to hide' and such. complete bullshit and a major weakness in the system as Anyone who gets a password or two can activate and use them, but oh well.)
they cannot prove if it's him or just someone in his house using the internet, but it's a fair bet that they'll be set up in such a way that Anyone using it via the land line from that building will count.
hard to stop someone using a prepayed data plan and a smartphone, i suppose, but one would imagine all such would be confiscated at the begining and the movement restrictions (a large part of the point of the 24 hour notification would be to let them escort/monitor him) would prevent him aquireing new ones.
well, save that any of the more Obvious courses of action against NZ would have much more serious international diplomatic consequences than in those places.
people actually LIKE us :P
(basically if you list off the USA's allies that actually helped them in those cases, you can take pretty much every english speaking one as an ally who would bail on them, or possibly actively work against them, depending on the situation, if they invaded NZ. ... France, on the other hand... yeah, you know how the US has this stereotype of france always surrendering or whatever? well, the NZ image of France, if they care at all, is based on their spies infiltrating the country, conducting acts of sabotage and, at least, manslaughter as a result, being caught by Common Citizens while the country was NOT in any way geared up mentally, organizationally, or in any other way, for war, being tried and convicted, being handed over to the french government to serve the rest of their sentences after not very long at all, and not long after being Let Go by that french government... so no one would be surprised if they helped the USA with such a move. and the few who would be surprised by the USA Doing it would be surprised only if they hadn't been involved in helping have it done.)
i mean, maybe if he were facing execution he might flee and take his family with him or something, but that's not the case here.
(well, not legally or legitimately at least. who knows what'll happen if the court finds no grounds to extradite him or otherwise cripple his business further.)
even Australia isn't as close as it looks, the Tasman Sea is very dangerous. strong winds, unhelpful currents, and a tendency towards the formation of tornadoes (waterspouts) which occasionally make landfall in the North Island.
you need a big, and incredibly freaking obvious, ship to make That trip safely... and even then most wouldn't.
which, if it were grounds for Anything, would be grounds for depriving him of his drivers liscence and whatever fines/jail time was appropriate for any resulting damage. which is a compleatly different issue.
it's a fair bet that the NZ system is a lot closer to the Canadian system than the US system... the US system is designed to manage a continental empire, after all. (and is all kinds of weird and twisted as a result)
NZ is much smaller and it's systems often reflect that.
the use of tribunals as step one for a large number of non-criminal legal issues which leads to many of them being resolved before they even Get to court is a big one. (basically, in most of these cases, the tribunal is enforced arbitration, with a ruling only if the parties prove incapable of reaching an agreement and a court case only if one party or the other fails to follow through on their side of the agreement/ruling, or sometimes if it is a big enough issue to be appealed.)
our court system has a number of Layers, but the only difference between one district court and another is it's location. all the rulings hold across the whole system (unless it is appealed, of course, in which case the result of That is what holds.)
such is my understanding, anyway. much easier to keep track of what's going on.
i've never heard of the prosecution having much, if any, input into the conditions of bail beyond a bit of effort to prove that it shouldn't be granted at all.
i mean, i'm not a lawyer, but the news reports seem to indicate that granting bail or not, and it's conditions is entirely the decision of the judge.
(the prosecution may Ask for certain conditions, i suppose, but whether they 'accept' them or not would seem to be irrelivant.)
perhaps a New Zealand based lawyer could actually comment on this... if any read techdirt...
On the post: Techdirt Deemed Harmful To Minors In Germany
Re: A German by any other name is still a…
while NZ's Cheif Censor's Office is all nice and layed back and spends most of their time Actually tracking down people making and distributing child porn and bringing them to justice, and the rest of their time assigning ratings to tv programs, movies and video games. (this is NOT a voluntary rating system, mind you, but the most restrictive, R ratings, are only limited to not providing the product in question to people under the listed age, and you're looking at basically child porn or some sort of weird realistic torture based game or something before it gets outright banned. I'm not entirely sure where cartoons of a similar nature fall.)
this contrast amuses me.
On the post: Techdirt Deemed Harmful To Minors In Germany
Re: Re: IM PROUD OF GERManY
heck, large parts of the western world have always Had this... they just used to be a lot better about not Using it on things and people that the public cared about.
On the post: Techdirt Deemed Harmful To Minors In Germany
Re:
NZ has a Chief Censor.
he has an office with a fair number of staff.
best part is, things banned by the Chief Censor's office outside of wartime, to the best of my knowledge: one HIGHLY offensive T-shirt (generally offensive, not religions or ideology based or anything like that.), one apparently extremely offensive book that, among other things, denied the holocaust took place, said book's author (not a citizen, not allowed in the country, and from memory that wasn't just because of the book)... and a bunch of porn to extreme even for the R18 lable here.
other than that they just assign ratings to movies and games (of which only R13, R16 and R18 have Any actual restrictions, and that is only that they may not be provided to individuals under those ages. the R13 is also basically obsolete as it has almost 100% overlap with the current top end non-restricted ratings), and review books (or anything else of similar nature) that they get actual legitimate complaints about. (generally speaking things only get banned if their production is causing actual harm (such as child porn), or if they are so morally reprehensible by current standards that failure to do so is likely to cause major public outcry... which is rare.)
that's legitimate censorship by a dedicated government body for that purpose. it's widely known about, generally accepted, non-partisan (except for the fact that it's about the only job where a question of someone's morality is a valid reason to reject their appointment reguardless of whether they have ever actually been caught doing anything wrong or the like and sometimes people find certain appointments suspect as it's Definitely a job in the 'if you want it you're unsuited for it' catagory and they find the individual's morality questionable and/or not to line up with their own. and even then it's not exactly Partisan, so much as it tends to shift voters around a bit.) and you'd basically have to buy out the entire government in order to bribe the guy to do something contrary to what he's meant to without it being found out in fairly short order and the guy being fired, his decision reversed, and i think the penalties for such things are probably pretty harsh.
then there's all the Other censorship that comes from powerful people abusing the law, the courts, and other government bodies. though there's a lot less of that than in the USA, it's still an issue. That's the one that's an actual problem.
Actual Censorship of political opinion and the like is caused by the latter. (save the rare occasion when said political opinion is both known to be false and likely to cause riots and the like.)
On the post: Techdirt Deemed Harmful To Minors In Germany
Re: Re: Re: Re:
also 'looks at links'?
they could bring down ANYTHING with comments etc enabled with that simply by having people PUT those links there.
On the post: European Commission Suggests ACTA's Opponents Don't Have 'Democratic Intentions'
Re:
the results will be bias to the point of uselessness for anything other than propaganda.
On the post: European Commission Suggests ACTA's Opponents Don't Have 'Democratic Intentions'
Re: Re: If they want more freedom, let them enjoy more laws.
On the post: European Commission Suggests ACTA's Opponents Don't Have 'Democratic Intentions'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: European Commission Suggests ACTA's Opponents Don't Have 'Democratic Intentions'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: European Commission Suggests ACTA's Opponents Don't Have 'Democratic Intentions'
Re:
it's like a less well organized bureaucratic dictatorship, with an outer coating similar in nature to the cover of the Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy.
On the post: European Commission Suggests ACTA's Opponents Don't Have 'Democratic Intentions'
Re: Re:
also, most of these things are written in legalise. that can obfusicate ANYTHING in a perfectly precise and totally accurate manner.
(technically bills up for vote here in NZ are available to the public, at least usually. problem is every two or three sentences there's five paragraphs of this, that, or the other party or politician forcing through changes to the effect of adding or removing full stops, swapping 'a' for 'the' and vice versa, and other equally pathetic things that would not MATTER if the bloody thing were written in proper english in the first place. (the courts have to make rulings on exactly what is meant all the time Anyway, and while it might give people a little more leigimate wiggle room on the less important stuff, the More important stuff would be a heck of a lot clearer. there'd be less loopholes and what loopholes there were, Anyone could see and thus compensate for, and it'd be a lot harder to HIDE any unintended (or intended) consiquences that were contrary to the public good.)
On the post: European Commission Suggests ACTA's Opponents Don't Have 'Democratic Intentions'
Re: Re:
wouldn't really be noticed in the commonwealth, i suppose, but elsewhere the sudden migration of such an event might be noticeable.
(now, Guy Fawks day is actually a celebration of the fact that he Failed to destroy parliament... but more importantly, failed to kill the Monarch, as the point in the exercise was apparently a change in king. still, whether you read it as pointing out that those sufficiently unhappy with how things are being run may well resort to explosives or as that attempts to undermine the right and proper order of government Will fail (note that right and proper in this case means actually for the good of the people, with their participation, whether a monarch is involved or not) it'd still be significant.
failing that you get the link to V for Vendetta and Annoymous, so meh *shrugs*)
On the post: Megaupload Boss Kim Dotcom Granted Bail After US Fails To Prove He's Got Cash Stashed Away To Make An Escape
Re:
a few of them i've never actually heard of. heh.
and a lot of them are in situations where, while there may be no extridition treaty, the USA could A) lean on the government there and have them deal with it, or B) conduct covert or military ops to deal with it themselves and have the international community not bat an eye lid (or at least be unwilling to risk getting embroiled in said war on the opposite side from the USA.)
On the post: Megaupload Boss Kim Dotcom Granted Bail After US Fails To Prove He's Got Cash Stashed Away To Make An Escape
Re:
they cannot prove if it's him or just someone in his house using the internet, but it's a fair bet that they'll be set up in such a way that Anyone using it via the land line from that building will count.
hard to stop someone using a prepayed data plan and a smartphone, i suppose, but one would imagine all such would be confiscated at the begining and the movement restrictions (a large part of the point of the 24 hour notification would be to let them escort/monitor him) would prevent him aquireing new ones.
On the post: Megaupload Boss Kim Dotcom Granted Bail After US Fails To Prove He's Got Cash Stashed Away To Make An Escape
Re:
people actually LIKE us :P
(basically if you list off the USA's allies that actually helped them in those cases, you can take pretty much every english speaking one as an ally who would bail on them, or possibly actively work against them, depending on the situation, if they invaded NZ. ... France, on the other hand... yeah, you know how the US has this stereotype of france always surrendering or whatever? well, the NZ image of France, if they care at all, is based on their spies infiltrating the country, conducting acts of sabotage and, at least, manslaughter as a result, being caught by Common Citizens while the country was NOT in any way geared up mentally, organizationally, or in any other way, for war, being tried and convicted, being handed over to the french government to serve the rest of their sentences after not very long at all, and not long after being Let Go by that french government... so no one would be surprised if they helped the USA with such a move. and the few who would be surprised by the USA Doing it would be surprised only if they hadn't been involved in helping have it done.)
On the post: Megaupload Boss Kim Dotcom Granted Bail After US Fails To Prove He's Got Cash Stashed Away To Make An Escape
Re: Re:
i mean, maybe if he were facing execution he might flee and take his family with him or something, but that's not the case here.
(well, not legally or legitimately at least. who knows what'll happen if the court finds no grounds to extradite him or otherwise cripple his business further.)
On the post: Megaupload Boss Kim Dotcom Granted Bail After US Fails To Prove He's Got Cash Stashed Away To Make An Escape
Re: Re: Re:
you need a big, and incredibly freaking obvious, ship to make That trip safely... and even then most wouldn't.
On the post: Megaupload Boss Kim Dotcom Granted Bail After US Fails To Prove He's Got Cash Stashed Away To Make An Escape
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Megaupload Boss Kim Dotcom Granted Bail After US Fails To Prove He's Got Cash Stashed Away To Make An Escape
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Megaupload Boss Kim Dotcom Granted Bail After US Fails To Prove He's Got Cash Stashed Away To Make An Escape
Re: Re: Re: Re:
it's a fair bet that the NZ system is a lot closer to the Canadian system than the US system... the US system is designed to manage a continental empire, after all. (and is all kinds of weird and twisted as a result)
NZ is much smaller and it's systems often reflect that.
the use of tribunals as step one for a large number of non-criminal legal issues which leads to many of them being resolved before they even Get to court is a big one. (basically, in most of these cases, the tribunal is enforced arbitration, with a ruling only if the parties prove incapable of reaching an agreement and a court case only if one party or the other fails to follow through on their side of the agreement/ruling, or sometimes if it is a big enough issue to be appealed.)
our court system has a number of Layers, but the only difference between one district court and another is it's location. all the rulings hold across the whole system (unless it is appealed, of course, in which case the result of That is what holds.)
such is my understanding, anyway. much easier to keep track of what's going on.
On the post: Megaupload Boss Kim Dotcom Granted Bail After US Fails To Prove He's Got Cash Stashed Away To Make An Escape
Re:
i mean, i'm not a lawyer, but the news reports seem to indicate that granting bail or not, and it's conditions is entirely the decision of the judge.
(the prosecution may Ask for certain conditions, i suppose, but whether they 'accept' them or not would seem to be irrelivant.)
perhaps a New Zealand based lawyer could actually comment on this... if any read techdirt...
Next >>