Posts in "Rants"
For those of you not watching the grand final (or at least having it on in the background while they surf the net), here's a very timely parody ad that was aired by GetUp! in this prime timeslot: https://www.getup.org.au/campaign/ClimateCleverer
Perhaps I can finally stop screaming "there's no such thing!!" at the TV every time the government's stupid "clean coal" ad comes on.
Passing along an update from Electronic Frontiers Australia about the latest "OMG terrorists!!!" legislation working its way through the Senate: EFA Slams Police Censorship Bill. Some choice quotes below:
"The Communications Legislation Amendment (Crime or Terrorism Related Internet Content) Bill 2007 would, if enacted, give senior members of the Australian Federal Police powers to ban access to Internet content"
"There are no provisions in the Bill for an appeal or review of a decision by the police to ban access to material. The operations of police agencies which affect the rights of individuals should always be subject to judicial oversight. The mistakes made by the Federal Police during the Haneef debacle demonstrate that the police are not infallible and that the courts play a vital role in protecting the rights of individuals."
"This legislation has nothing to do with terrorism. Its powers apply to all offences under a law of the Commonwealth - even copyright infringement. The reference to 'terrorism related Internet content' is a transparent attempt to deter criticism of the substance of the Bill."
Dont cite Encyclopedias
I think people have generally cottoned on that it's a bad idea to cite Wikipedia when trying to establish something as fact. But let this gem from Britannica Online serve as a reminder that the problem goes well beyond the fact-police's favourite whipping boy:
From the definition of "tautology": Thus, "All men are rational" is held to assert with regard to anything whatsoever that either it is a man or it is not rational.
This is, of course, completely wrong. The second statement is the converse of the first. Let me make two quick points in Wikipedia's favour:
- If this was on Wikipedia, I could simply have fixed it instead of writing about it.
- The Wikipedia article on Logical Converse has a nice long explanation of why this is an error.
Lozz and I were channel-flipping last night in an attempt to avoid (a) watching Medium, and (b) doing anything constructive. We arrived on channel Seven in the middle of an ad touting a groundbreaking expose on "why Australians dont trust the Media". How interesting, I thought - for once some challenging and intelligent programming.
Then we reached the end of the ad: "Coming up, on Today Tonight!".
God, oh God, I hope the irony is not lost on them...
There's a great little article in Friday's "The Age" about the the need for decent fair-use clauses in Australian copyright law. It couldnt get much simpler - under current law, it is illegal to tape a show off the TV to watch it later. Given that pretty much everyone does this, it's a good indication that things need to change.
The article was written by the Secretary of Electronic Frontiers Australia, an organisation I like to promote at every opportunity - including this one ;-)
Some people have pointed out that there is a clause in the Copyright Act (1968) granting limited copying rights to television and other broadcasts, but it's not enough to make it actually legal. And it doesnt cover emerging devices such as personal MP3 players where you're violating copyright by ripping your CDs to MP3 for playback. It's well and truly time for some basic, sensible, non-special-case fair use rights for the Australian public.
What do we do about it? Maybe you missed the link I gave you above :-). Joining the EFA or at least checking out their website would be a good place to start.