Was anyone else disturbed by the emphasis the Herald gave to the shooter being a recent immigrant? Seriously, how the heck is that relevant to the tragedy?
Just a Heads-up: it's entirely possible this has been mentioned before, but the submissions deadline for the copyright bill has been extended to the 9th of March. The parliamentry website still gives two dates, but I gave them a call and they confirmed the 9th is the correct one.
Okay, so while I'm good and angry who's the best MP(s) to start lobbying about this DCMA-wannabe? Or is it too late?
Even if it is a telecom minion rather than at the instigation of the leviathan itself, they still should be hit with the full force of the law. Section 112 of the Telecommunications Act 2001 sounds on the money:
(2)Every person commits an offence who—
(a)uses, or causes or permits to be used, any telephone device for the purpose of disturbing, annoying, or irritating any person, whether by calling up without speech or by wantonly or maliciously transmitting communications or sounds, with the intention of offending the recipient; or
(b)in using a telecommunications device, knowingly gives any fictitious order, instruction, or message.
(3)Every person who commits an offence against subsection (1) or subsection (2) is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 months or a fine not exceeding $2,000.
You are supposed to call 0800 809 806 to get Telecom to look into it, but I reckon a call to the plod is also in order.