| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 117326 | 2011-04-13 05:42:00 | Govt rushing through internet piracy bill | Barnabas (4562) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1193992 | 2011-04-13 12:56:00 | It's no different to an infringement notice issued by the Police is it? Usually if you do not pay a speeding fine you are charged with not paying the fine. If you can prove you were not the driver as in you were elsewhere at the time then you have a defence. Also right under what you bolded is the rights owner must satisfy the Tribunal .......... etc. So that means the rights owner needs to proove it. Please try to comprehend. There is usually evidence. This is more akin to police issuing you a ticket for hearing a skid and saying it was you without evidence. |
Cato (6936) | ||
| 1193993 | 2011-04-13 13:00:00 | Please try to comprehend. Snorkeler trying to explain the law - who would ever have thought. :clap |
Twelvevolts (5457) | ||
| 1193994 | 2011-04-13 13:00:00 | I like Cato's analogy but to expand it a little, its like getting a instant ticket because someone decided to *555 you regardless of anything you did or didn't do. | DeSade (984) | ||
| 1193995 | 2011-04-13 13:03:00 | There is usually evidence. This is more akin to police issuing you a ticket for hearing a skid and saying it was you without evidence. Yes but Snorkie wouldn't mind as long as they kept an open mind and consulted your horoscope before they charged you. |
Twelvevolts (5457) | ||
| 1193996 | 2011-04-13 13:05:00 | Snorkeler trying to explain the law - who would ever have thought. :clap Well would you like to try and prosecute an infringement notice then? And what's with this snorkeler? I have never been snorkelling in my life. |
Snorkbox (15764) | ||
| 1193997 | 2011-04-13 13:05:00 | I like Cato's analogy but to expand it a little, its like getting a instant ticket because someone decided to *555 you regardless of anything you did or didn't do. Yep that's pretty much it, you only really have to be accused to be considered guilty. You then have to demonstrate you aren't guilty rather than the accuser proving you are. |
Twelvevolts (5457) | ||
| 1193998 | 2011-04-13 13:06:00 | I have never been snorkelling in my life. Prove it. |
Twelvevolts (5457) | ||
| 1193999 | 2011-04-13 13:10:00 | I like Cato's analogy but to expand it a little, its like getting a instant ticket because someone decided to *555 you regardless of anything you did or didn't do. Sigh. The offence has to be proven does it not? It's why I think the law is crap as it's probably not enforceable. |
Snorkbox (15764) | ||
| 1194000 | 2011-04-13 13:14:00 | Prove it. Sigh. Are you now charging me with having at one time in my life been snorkelling? If so then issue an infringement notice giving place, date and time. When you have done that I would suspect I could prove I was elsewhere. |
Snorkbox (15764) | ||
| 1194001 | 2011-04-13 13:14:00 | The bill assumes the infringement notice is correct, and the accused is guilty by default. :pf1mobmini: |
CYaBro (73) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 | |||||