Advertisements
BREAKING: Craig Thomson Guilty Of Fraud Charges
5 Comments
Welcome to the Sandpit
I love a good argument so please leave a comment
Please support the Sandpit
Do you feel lucky?
Copyright
Portions of any work that are quoted are reproduced on the basis of the "fair dealing for purpose of criticism or review" section 41 of the Copyright Act 1968.
let's look at the Australian Copyright Council's fact sheet on Fair Use:
The Federal Court has stated that “criticism and review” involves making a judgment of the material concerned, or of the underlying ideas. Criticism and review may be strongly expressed, and may be expressed humorously, and need not be balanced. The defence can apply where the criticism or review takes place in a commercial context, such as in published books or newspapers or on commercial television.
However, the court emphasised that the purpose of criticism or review must be genuine. If the person has other motives – especially if these motives involve using the material to make a profit, or using a competitor’s material to
divert customers from the competitor – the fact that they have also engaged in a form of criticism or review is not
enough to prevent the use from infringing copyright
All other content on this site is copyright Iain Hall and may not be reproduced in any form with out explicit permission of the author.
Comment Copyright
Anyone who comments at the Sandpit under a pseudonym does so on the clear understanding that by doing so they are giving any and all rights and ownership of those comments to the site-owner who may reproduce them in any form or at any other site or venue entirely at his own discretion.
[…] reading on today’s verdict can be found at Iain Hall and The Red and the […]
MEANWHILE! As the failed abortions on Bolt’s blog, rant and rave about the taxpayer funded ABC, and Craig Thomson, they celebrate Rupert Mirdoch’s taxpayer funded $880 windfall, an American owned news corp——which will blow a $880m hole in the federal budget. These failed abortions on Bolt’s blog hang off Andrew, as they gorge themselves on his every word,—– like dags on a sheep’s crutch. What can I say,— fuck-em all.
Richard, That money was a taxation issue. Started with a claim in 1981 that the taxman refuted. (who were in power in 1991?) Ended in a court case on the 25th of July last year (who was in power then?). Yes, Richard, it has blown a hole in the budget, but it has had nothing to do with funding. As for your insults, nothing has really changed with you, has it?
Strange! No posts on the Murdoch tax story, on Bolt’s blog of smeer, Bolt is so far up Rupert’s arse, major surgery will be required to extract him
Richard
I do have a live besides blogging and you do realise that I hardly read Bolt at all these days don’t you?