Posts by ScottY
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Raymond, Germany apologised to Poland in 1994
-
It is worth noting that the Germans still have not apologised for what they did, 'cause it wasn't them it was the nazis etc
The Germans have been apologising for the last 60 years. Maybe you weren't listening.
-
Germans on the other hand, the more we mock their so called Nazi superman culture the better
I don't know too many Germans who have a Nazi superman culture. You're talking about something that died in 1945 in the rubble of Berlin.
The most grossly offensive part of the Lincoln party was not the Nazi uniforms. It was the people who dressed up as concentration camp inmates. I can forgive the brainless antics of the Lincoln students involved, because they were probably too stupid to know that what they were doing was offensive. But we shouldn't pretend it was just harmless entertainment.
-
I think Tim prety much hits the nail on the head with his first point. I lived in the UK for almost three years, and I saw it for myself: nobody does war nostalgia like the Brits. It is as if WWII was the high point in British history. That may be because WWII was the last time Britain got to seriously flex its muscles on the international stage.
The other possible reason is that the British people did not suffer the same horrors as the rest of Europe. The UK was not invaded, and although the bombing raids in 1940 killed thousands, the whole nation was not left a pile of ruins (unlike Germany and Poland).
There is also a great deal of romanticism about the efforts of "our boys" in Crete, North Africa and Italy. And NZ has not been touched by war since the "land wars" of the 1860s. We just don't understand the horrors of war.
-
I only just watched the Letterman segment with John Key in it.
My God it just wasn't funny. And with Key grinning like a buffoon it was embarrassing and painful.
And could someone please stuff a microphone down the throat of that annoying twat Shaffer.
-
Great post, Hadyn.
-
It's the kind of thing that'd be settled long before it made it before a judge.
Most likely.Only a tiny percentage of disputes ever go to trial.
-
Who was Justice Minister for the previous nine years of government? Wasn't the Parole Act 2002 passed by him? Some fellow or other, I can never remember who.
That's a fair call, and both major parties have pandered to the "law and order" mob.
But the current admin has put its foot on the gas.
-
I suspect you'd be wrong (depending on what you mean by archival work, of course). When you copy a heritage image (or document) you have to take it out of secure storage and handle it and expose it to light and other hazards. You don't want to do this often as you risk damaging it. So you make sure you do a high quality copy so that if someone wants another copy later you don't have to handle the original again.
Noted (and sorry if I offended any archival-type-persons out there). But it still comes down to whether the person doing the reproduction is exercising sufficient skill and labour. Unless the reproduction is in some way different to the original it is arguable that no new copyright work arises in the reproduction.
It might be arguable that new copyright arises if the scanning process involves some judgement about things like lighting, contrast etc, even if the scanned image appears identical to the image on the original document/photo. But ultimately though it's for a court to decide. I'm not aware of any NZ case law on the issue.
-
We should send the bill to Garth McVicar. If he wants to lock more people up he can damn well pay for it.