Posts by dubmugga

Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First

  • Hard News: So-called celebrity justice,

    Breaking the law is a personal choice we all have but breaking it when someone else could end up wearing the punishment is a different kettle of fish...

    ...about as lame as you be our case law guinea pig Russell and I'll stay hidden behind my oh-so-rebellious persona

    no one broke any laws dahlin' , just the house rules and the apology was accepted for it, so thanx for your belated opinion, much appreciated...

    ...fight the power:p

    Don't you just love it when A. Nonymous takes a "do what I say, don't say what I do" approach to transparency, accountability and personal responsibility?

    oooh are you THE craig ranapia, can i have your autograph ?

    why does russell not trust the kids when the teacher is out of the room ?...way to treat us like grown ups fella :)

    i suppose the big question now is, will the artist in question man up, out himself and take the hit ?

    the back of your mind • Since Nov 2006 • 257 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: So-called celebrity justice,

    A chain email flouting the name suppression of an entertainer facing sex charges may force a test case for the courts, law experts say...

    "We just named him ... Sort it out John Key, even you wanted to know. It is a basic right. A criminal should own up to the crime he is found guilty of.

    "Either he faces his fans and the general public of New Zealand, and admits what he did and takes responsibility for his actions, or we will."

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/3097505/Sex-charges-email-may-test-suppression

    hate the playa not the game ?

    the back of your mind • Since Nov 2006 • 257 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: So-called celebrity justice,

    oh please, this is hard news, not soggy news, or flaccid news, or no fire in the belly news, or touchy feely news or community taonga news...isnt it ?

    ...just trying to live up to the hype is all :p

    the back of your mind • Since Nov 2006 • 257 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: So-called celebrity justice,

    1000 dollars ??? sheeeit... they can put it on my tab and see if i can get it swapped for playing rekkids at my local kindy where i'm sometimes parent help for the day

    the thing with making this site a test case as opposed to others is. we're not special enough to qualify for media watchdog status nor able to line up the blognoscenti and assorted hacks in support or do a whiparound the water cooler and russell up a sly grand to pay the fine.

    imagine a journo revolt/strike not covering politics or whatever in support of hard news ?

    the back of your mind • Since Nov 2006 • 257 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: So-called celebrity justice,

    In some territories, yes, there are safe harbour provisions. In New Zealand, no: I'm the publisher. It does suck.

    that doesnt suck, that blows...hard!!!...so would you fancy a law change to make it otherwise ?

    sure in hindsight i broke your rules and i'm sorry bout that but did i really break the law ?

    does name supression apply to name only or does it apply to ethnicity, employment sector, hobbies, friends and does it even apply to an entertainers pseudonym which isnt their real name either ?

    the back of your mind • Since Nov 2006 • 257 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: So-called celebrity justice,

    Gen...short sighted they may be but so it seems are many of the current laws governing media responsibility and free speech cos they were drafted in a time where they couldn't possibly envision the babylon we exist in now.

    surely a disclaimer saying the views represented in the discussions do not neccessarily represent those of the owners of this site would be cover russells arse...yeah ?

    or even his counter posts to suggest he disagrees would count as evidence of his compliance with court orders ?

    the back of your mind • Since Nov 2006 • 257 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: So-called celebrity justice,

    Yup -- and some of the recommendations in it regarding enforcement on the internet are unclear to the point of being alarming. Going to ISPs and hosting companies with takedown orders isn't a good thing, because they have no interest in defending publishers.

    so when you say i clearly dont understand supression orders, it's not just me...i mean, did i really breach the supression order ?

    do you really feel the need to accept responsibility for posters opinions fearing legal action over defending a posters rights to free speech ? I know its your gaff and all so its your rules but is this not also a public place where people can say whatever and you cant be held responsible for that ?

    ...what then will it take to get a site taken to court and the laws tested ?

    the back of your mind • Since Nov 2006 • 257 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: So-called celebrity justice,

    If you could test this theory out elsewhere, that'd be great.

    dont get out much huh kyle ?

    the back of your mind • Since Nov 2006 • 257 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: So-called celebrity justice,

    enough with the troll shit and get off the dick craig, let someone else have a go eh ?

    what doesnt kill you makes you stronger. if PAS did get made a test case, i'm sure it would rise from the ashes wayyy more potent.

    hah...you do real life you and i'll do virtual me. so don't measure me by your double standards or think i'll accept responsiblity for shit i say as an anonymous online persona:)

    the back of your mind • Since Nov 2006 • 257 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: So-called celebrity justice,

    Scrutiny of internet commentary around court activity certainly seems to be at a high right now - wasn't the MoJ or someone specifically looking at Kiwiblog and Trademe for breaching standards around presumed innocence a few months back?
    And the Law Commission has just put out a paper on suppression orders in the last couple of weeks.

    old skool rules/laws governing mainstream media dont apply online in much the same way copyright laws aren't respected. Generation 2.0 really dont give a shit eh...

    it's like the man don't give a shit about carly binding referendums so why should the public give a shit about their court orders ??

    ...thats why it cracks me up why, given the proliferation of leaked music and gossip on the net/free media that this artist ever thought name supression would stick

    A top entertainer who shoved a young woman's head into his genitals in an alleyway is fighting to keep his name secret because he says publicity will destroy his career.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/3008402/Entertainer-in-court-over-alleyway-sex-act

    ...looks like the opposite might hold true

    the back of your mind • Since Nov 2006 • 257 posts Report Reply

Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 26 Older→ First