Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Thursday May 29 2014, @06:34PM   Printer-friendly
from the critical-thinking-not-required dept.

Ever wondered what politics is really like? Wondered how politicians talk to one another in a open debate about something like a three strikes policy being introduced in a country (Australia) where it isn't in place? Here is a great example, taken right out of the Australian Senate — a back and forth between Attorney General George Brandis (thats long for big cheese) and Senator Scott Ludlam of the Australian Greens Party.

"I know industry leaders have very strong views on these things, but I'm asking you about groups like Choice or ACANN or others that might represent consumer interests or the public interest," he [Scott] said. "There is a very strong public interest in the protection of private property and that includes the protection of intellectual property." Brandis responded evasively. "So you're not going to answer the question?" Ludlam said rhetorically.

There is a lot more on this debate and it is disgraceful how clearly the AG is simply spouting what he is told to say.

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 31 2014, @04:29AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 31 2014, @04:29AM (#49442)

    "Brandis said that his team has consulted with “industry leaders†in the United Kingdom and the United States to learn from their experiences. That wasn’t the answer Ludlam was looking for.

    “I know industry leaders have very strong views on these things, but i’m asking you about groups like Choice or ACANN or others that might represent consumer interests or the public interest,†he said."

    http://torrentfreak.com/aussie-attorney-general-pr essured-on-three-strikes-secrecy-140529/ [torrentfreak.com]

    IP extremists often try to argue that IP law is for the little guy. If that's true why is it always the big guy pushing for these laws the most?