If National wins ...

[Bjauck]

... I know of two cases where that was just the case and in both, the "offender" was imprisoned. In those two cases, the "offender" was nowhere near the scene and eventually managed to be released. Can you prove that you were at home on your own on a date a month or two ago?...

The issue of consent would only be relevant where the prosecution had already established other facts including that the defendant had been present at the scene of the crime. I do not think anyone is suggesting reform of the burden of proof required for the prosecution to establish the physical facts/ actus reus of the case.

[fungus pudding]

More from the court case: the hearing continues today. After the first two weeks of airing the ad, the important two weeks, when it was played on air 180 times, the Nats pulled the ad and released it again with a track that was original, for that they paid two composers $18,000.

They paid a licence fee to an Australian outfit to use the Cohen track, but unfortunately the fee doesn't cover the risk for being sued by any other party who feels their copyright has been infringed. The Nats can afford a decent penalty being awarded, so they are in court. It seems that other outfits have used the Cohen copy track, probably not so publicly, and they've gotten away with it.

So in a bid to gain instant recognition of their TV advert, the Nats have made a classic mistake and taken a couple of shortcuts they are known for. Paying a very small amount for a close copy of the track, and going ahead because they didn't want to pay for a lawyer either.

It's just like a lot of their policies, which have an impression of being made up on the fly.

You must be the only National supporter losing sleep over this.
Don't worry too much eZ. You'll be relieved to know they'll survive regardless of the outcome and be able to continue the battle against the evil Labour party.

[craic]

Not so. The classic case is of the high school girl who arrived home in a dishevelled and, when questioned, claimed she had been raped on the way home by a weird character who travelled on her bus from school and followed her and dragged her into the woods. The unfortunate "weirdo" of limited intelligence was found, convicted and imprisoned. After some time, her boyfriend, confessed that they had consentual sex in the woods and the convicted one never even got off the bus. There have been other cases that I remember from my time in the system and there are more variations on the theme than any man dreams of. Since my time - and I retired fifteen years ago - I keep a daily diary.

The issue of consent would only be relevant where the prosecution had already established other facts including that the defendant had been present at the scene of the crime. I do not think anyone is suggesting reform of the burden of proof required for the prosecution to establish the physical facts/ actus reus of the case.

[craic]

Fundus Pudding, you must know that "battling against the evil Labour Party" is a very unfair contest - that's what they do better than anyone outside the party.

[elZorro]

You must be the only National supporter losing sleep over this.
Don't worry too much eZ. You'll be relieved to know they'll survive regardless of the outcome and be able to continue the battle against the evil Labour party.

I don't think you're looking into the full ramifications of this case, FP. I don't think the National Party are necessarily evil, more like a bunch of bumbling fools with an ill-thought-out neoliberal agenda. So the party that has political power at the moment, the election campaign now headed by Steven Joyce, will have to convince wealthy donors that none of the new money they'll be looking for, will be spent paying fines for copyright infringements in 2014. On top of this is the fact that last time Bill English was the party leader, they had record low election fundraising, that in turn led to a 25% party vote for National. This case is at a watershed moment in the campaign, just when everyone is gearing up to seek funding.

If I was a wealthy previous donor for National, and I'm not, I would take a dim view of the party's actions in trying to bypass copyright law, trying to put together a flash TV ad using minimum funds.

Also, what's the message here, the rest of us have to pay our taxes when due, and obey the laws set by govt, but it's OK for the National Party to keep themselves in power by running ads like this, that shortchanged the original artists?

[fungus pudding]

I don't think you're looking into the full ramifications of this case, FP. I don't think the National Party are necessarily evil, more like a bunch of bumbling fools with an ill-thought-out neoliberal agenda. So the party that has political power at the moment, the election campaign now headed by Steven Joyce, will have to convince wealthy donors that none of the new money they'll be looking for, will be spent paying fines for copyright infringements in 2014. On top of this is the fact that last time Bill English was the party leader, they had record low election fundraising, that in turn led to a 25% party vote for National. This case is at a watershed moment in the campaign, just when everyone is gearing up to seek funding.

If I was a wealthy previous donor for National, and I'm not,

I understand that eZ. Most National supporters are not wealthy.

[GTM 3442]

Out of idle curiosity, what are going to be the three "big issues" this election?

[blackcap]

Out of idle curiosity, what are going to be the three "big issues" this election?

As a guess I would hazard, immigration, housing and any one of taxation, clean water, health system.

[elZorro]

As a guess I would hazard, immigration, housing and any one of taxation, clean water, health system.

And how has National done on those fronts over the last few years? Upped immigration to historical highs to put undue pressure on (particularly Auckland) house prices, loaded up roads and other infrastructure, they've generally looked after people at the top with upper tier tax rate decreases and more GST levies for the rest of us. Increased dairy cow numbers by 20% with irrigation subsidies helping, also interfering with ECANZ, which has impacted on waterways. There is widespread concern about the mental health system, and even the refurbished, rebuilt Waikato Hospital emergency department has massive delays for other patients not immediately at risk.

[blackcap]

And how has National done on those fronts over the last few years? Upped immigration to historical highs to put undue pressure on (particularly Auckland) house prices, loaded up roads and other infrastructure, they've generally looked after people at the top with upper tier tax rate decreases and more GST levies for the rest of us. Increased dairy cow numbers by 20% with irrigation subsidies helping, also interfering with ECANZ, which has impacted on waterways. There is widespread concern about the mental health system, and even the refurbished, rebuilt Waikato Hospital emergency department has massive delays for other patients not immediately at risk.

You say a whole lot of things but then why is National the hot favourite to win the election?

Here is the thing ElZorro. I think its those things that the opposition are going to make the election about. But what the opposition do not realise is that quite a few National supporters are unperturbed by what you have listed there. (execpt maybe delays at emergency departments, but if you have not experienced it yourself you would not really know there are delays? are there?) So what you lefties think are all bad things, maybe a National supporter thinks are great things and you guys wonder why you keep losing. (ie I am quite happy about dairy cow numbers being up 20%, good for the economy etc)