Monthly Archives: October 2012

[REPORT] Digital Freedoms in International Law
Date Created: October 29, 2012  Date Modified: October 29, 2012

Released Monday from Global Network Initiative, is the following report Digital Freedoms in International Law, which addresses many of the issues relating to protecting human rights on-line. It looks into state driven censorship in oppressive regimes such as Saudi Arabia and it also highlights the lack of accountability corporations have in the digital eco-system when it comes to human rights violations:

…there are special problems in applying law generally, and human rights law in particular, to the new global, digital environment. Laws are still mainly drawn up for an environment with clearly defined territorial jurisdictions. And much of the control over the Internet rests in the hands of private companies, whereas traditional human rights law almost entirely focused on states. This raises problems of both “prescriptive” and “enforcement” jurisdiction, and of “privatised” (or semi-­-privatised) law enforcement, without adequate remedies.
Page 14

Also mentioned is the corporate sectors willingness to comply with take down requests, and that they have a moral obligation not to facilitate such:

companies should think in advance of possible risks arising from undue state demands made upon them, and they should take measures – including technical measures – to try and make it possible for them to deny or at least minimise their cooperation. They must afterwards help the victims of their enforced cooperation with such allegedly undue and illegal state actions, to alleviate the harm done as much as possible.
Page 23

I would however suggest that it is the corporate interests manipulating the states; tho this might be me speaking from a political, rather than a legal perspective.

These are a couple of in progress pics of my two-tone attempt. Im not going to explain the whats and whys of this, just that I currently dont have the time or money to do a bare-meatal respray. I aim to do that in July…

Still need a second coat

Passanger side still masked

I will leave the 380 badge off once its all finished–their glued btw, only the tri-star has pins

Rollin in a… Bath-tub?
Date Created: October 16, 2012  Date Modified: October 16, 2012

The owner of this vehicle lives in the next street, so I see this quite often–The motorized bathtub!. The first time I saw it he ran a stop sign and nearly hit me, I posted about this to FB but I knew the pics or didn’t happen was to follow, so now every time I see this transport I always photo it.

Noticing from the wheels and red spray job–hes put some work into it over time–or is this another motorized bathtub all together? in Freo it wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest.
This rant was posted in Art, Cars, Phone Pix, Photography, Tech on by .

[MAP] ABC Local
Date Created: October 14, 2012  Date Modified: October 14, 2012

Just a quick KML mashup for easy reference when away from home…

View ABC Local Stations in a larger map

This rant was posted in KML, Maps, Web on by .

I’ll wait for it to come out on eBook in the past
Date Created: October 7, 2012  Date Modified: October 7, 2012

The Idiot BoxSome folk are still end-users of the 20thC technology known as television, I dont hold too much animosity to those users as we cant always be connected to an IP. Anyway, those folk may have seen a program Underground on one of the networks last night, about a young software developer and activist known as Julian Assange.

Not being one to make use of the broadcast protocol, I will wait for the story to come out on eBook in the past.

From the Forward (Pastward?)

By releasing this book for free on the Net, I’m hoping more people
will not only enjoy the story of how the international computer
underground rose to power, but also make the journey into the minds
of hackers involved. When I first began sketching out the book’s
structure, I decided to go with depth. I wanted the reader to
think, ’NOW I understand, because I too was there.’ I hope those
words will enter your thoughts as you read this electronic book.

http://suelette.home.xs4all.nl/underground/Underground.pdf
Copyright © 1997, 2001 Suelette Dreyfus & Julian Assange

I’m intending to spend a good deal of the day researching Australian Defamation laws involving politicians… because I dont have enough experience in that already.

[REORT] Delivered Into Enemy Hands US-Led Abuse and Rendition of Opponents to Gaddafi’s Libya
Date Created: October 7, 2012  Date Modified: October 7, 2012

Human Rights Watch, an international human rights watch-dog released a report this month on the United States involvement in the torture of Libyan nationals, while in US custody. The report exposes some of the inaccuracies reported in the mainstream media by examining evidence of the Tripoli Documents and testimony from individuals released from Libyan prisons after Qaddafi’s overthrow.

From the page #6:

Al-Libi’s case is significant, among other reasons, because the United States relied on statements obtained through his interrogation while in CIA custody to justify the 2003 invasion of Iraq: Al-Libi died in a Libyan prison in 2009—a suicide, according to Libyan authorities at the time—so it is difficult to obtain information about him today. But by talking to family members and others detained with him in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Libya, Human Rights Watch has pieced together some new details about al-Libi’s time in CIA custody and circumstances
surrounding his death. Human Rights Watch also observed photos of al-Libi that Libyan prison officials appear to have taken on the morning of his death which allegedly depict him in the manner he was found in his cell. The photos show bruising on parts of his body.

Im lost for comment, thats why this has been sitting in the drafts for so long. I decided to publish after checking WT…

An AGLC3 Plugin
Date Created: October 6, 2012  Date Modified: October 8, 2012

I decided after posting my first LAW150 assignment I realised that lawyers dont really hate HTML, its just too much effort to manually code tags or worse still paste MS Word generated HTML into most web text areas.

A simple solution would be to hack the CSS and add things like Act classes, but that would be out of the scope for some legal bloggers who have to dedicate more time to legal research than learning how to CSS.

It was pointed out early on that one could use the “i” button, well that puts text in <em> tags, which for Accessibility, is not appropriate.

A BETTER solution would be to create a simple WordPress plugin that adds the functionality without having to manually edit any CSS files.

To use this with the shortcode, simply place the square brackets around the [ Act ] Name of the Act [ /Act ] 2001. Im currently working on shortcodes for Australian jurisdictions to make it even easier for those “dumb lawyers” 🙂

This is still in BETA, as I just started this on a rainy Sunday morning; I aim to create a short code for this to simplify it even more, but for now its in a testing stage.

UPDATE: Now prints 12pt Times, but I dont use printers so I cant test it (too many years not printing things @DEC)

LAW150 – Assignment – Byron Levene – 30188908
Date Created: October 4, 2012  Date Modified: November 4, 2012

Notes from author: This assignment can be downloaded from Scribd with its original formatting. This assignment has not been marked at this point.

I’m using my LegalCSS plugin shortcodes for the Names of Acts.

It is the purpose of this essay to outline advice to the plaintiff, Ace Hi Fi, on potential action against AZ Hi Fi, and the third parties of Planes R Us, and Adventure Air, who were under contract by AZ Hi Fi to provide aerial advertising services, in respect to a special events order obtained by Ace Hi Fi under Part 2 of the Major Events (Aerial Advertising) Act 2009 (WA) (‘MEAA’). Three individual events must be examined here. The action of Planes R Us, under contract by AZ Hi Fi, to fly aircraft displaying advertising material as defined in MEAA section 3, near the venue on the first day of the event; The knowledge of potential actions of Planes R Us to fly aircraft dropping flyers, under contract by AZ Hi Fi, over the venue on the last day of the event; And the actions of Air Adventures, under contract by AZ Hi Fi, to fly jetpacks displaying advertising material over the venue on the last day of the event.

Planes R Us Fly near venue of first day of event.

The action of Planes R Us, under contract by AZ Hi Fi to fly a banner advertising AZ Hi Fi on the first day of the event, does meet the requirements of aerial advertising as defined under the MEAA . However, in order to satisfy a breach under section 11 of the MEAA, the aircraft must be “within sight of a specified venue…”, as we have no definition of “within sight” in MEAA, we will to refer to its ordinary meaning in an dictionary . The Macquarie Dictionary defines within as:
“in the compass or limits of; not beyond: within view, to live within ones income.”
And sight:
“range of vision: in sight of land.”
It being the case that the aircraft displaying the aerial advertising in question could only be seen with the use of binoculars, therefore outside the unassisted visible range from the venue, and not meet the meaning ordinary meaning of “within sight”.

Further information would be required to confirm if this act by the Planes R Us aircraft was in fact exempt, in that it may be the case an event order was taken out by AZ Hi Fi, in another location adjacent to the venue at the same time .

Due to the Planes R Us aircraft being out of visible range, and the possibility of another event order covering this flight, no action for this incident can be taken under the authority of MEAA 2009, with the information provided.

Planes R Us Dropping Flyers Over the Venue on the Last Day of Event.

The planned action of Planes R Us, under contract by AZ Hi Fi to fly over the venue on the last day of the event and drop 100,000 flyers, satisfies the definition of aerial advertising in MEAA, and no information has been provided that permission has been given by the event organiser for this action . It also can not meet an exemption for ‘…another specified event at another specified venue.’ , as this action is to take place at the specified venue required of the original event order taken out by Ace Hi Fi. Regarding the exemption allowed for “…an emergency; […] or in, provision of emergency services.” There is no indication this is applies from the information supplied.

It is important to differentiate between the actions of Planes R Us, and those of AZ Hi Fi in relation to this event. In relation to the Planes R Us, under contract by AZ Hi Fi to fly the planes over the venue on the last day of the event, this would meet the criteria of “…within sight of a specified venue during the specified time…” , and therefore meet criteria for an injunction.

It should also be noted that AZ Hi Fi, having fore knowledge of the event order in place and choosing to ignore the restrictions by procuring the services of Planes R Us to make this fly-over. Being that the flight was not conducted by AZ Hi Fi directly, this would constitute “attempting or conspiring to contravene section 11”.

As this action satisfies a breach of the event order, the event organizer does have the option to apply to the Supreme Court to seek an injunction restraining both AZ Hi Fi and Planes R Us from engaging in this activity.

Jetpacks flying over stage on last day of event.

The potential of Air Adventures, under contract by AZ Hi Fi to fly Jetpacks over the stage on the last day of the event satisfies “within sight of a specified venue during the specified time in relation to a specified event conducted at the venue…” being that this would occur over the stage while the event is at its climax.

The shirts worn by the Air Adventures staff would display the name of AZ Hi Fi, which falls into the definition of advertising as defined in the act, and that the shirts are not the normal branding of Adventure Air, this would also satisfy the definition of aerial advertising as defined in MEAA.

Being that this action on behalf of AZ Hi Fi, by Adventure Air meets the criteria for an offence under MEAA, the event organizer has the option to seek an injunction to restrain both AZ Hi Fi and Adventure Air from engaging in this activity.

Remedies

As outlined above the criteria has been met to apply to the courts for an injunction to restrain AZ Hi Fi and Planes R Us form flying over the venue on the last day of the event and dropping flyers advertising AZ Hi Fi. Another order could be sort to restrain AZ Hi Fi and Adventure Air from flying jetpacks over the stage on the last day of the event.

Section 14 (1) of MEAA allows action for damages under a breach of section 11, however these are limited to any “…loss, injury or damage, or damages in respect of loss, injury or damage. As no loss has occurred, due to the breeches of section 11 being future acts, no damages could be sort under this section.

Section 14 (2) allows “…recovery of future losses as a result of the potential loss of sponsorship of an event.” As there has been no indication that the plaintiff, Ace Hi Fi has lost sponsorship of the event, no action can be made for future losses under this section.

Giving consideration to the above, Ace Hi Fi would likely be granted the injunctions to restrain: 1) AZ Hi Fi and Planes R Us from dropping flyers over the event on the last day, and 2) AZ Hi Fi and Adventure Air from flying over the stage on the last day of the event.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Cook Catriona Robin Creyke Robert Geddes and David Hamer, Laying Down the Law (LexisNexis Butterworths, 8th ed, 2012).
Butt Peter and David Hamer (eds), LexisNexis Concise Australian Legal Dictionary (LexisNexis Butterworths, 4th ed, 2011).
The Macquarie Dictionary (3rd ed, 2001 at 27 September 2012).
Interpretation Act 1984 (WA).
Major Events (Areal Advertising) Act 2009 (WA).