[LINK] Crimenet Site
Mon, 05 Jun 2000 15:34:52 +1000
At 11:24 5/06/00 +1000, Rick Welykochy wrote:
>Presume that the Victorian Court finds Crimenet (or its owner)
>in contempt, and the owner moves the site offshore.
>Would any legal beagles like to comment on the effectivesnes of
>such a ploy? Surely the contempt still exists in the eyes of the court,
Maybe not quite as far as that in it's entirety and I'm not a legal beagle,
The AJTODD Kidnapping site was under similar concern by the Department of
Community Services. They were concerned that the Accuracy of the content
of Scanned documents and their signatures might not be entirely correct.
They sort advice from the Crown Solicitors office, whom upon an
investigation found that it would not be economical to try and issue
injunctions as the site was mirrored in over 90 countries. That the content
would exist on the Internet no matter what happened locally. To seek
injunctions in other countries was complex and even more costly especially
as some countries have extensive freedom of speech rights.
That was all there was to it.
So, in short, if Crimenet went offshore, mirrored itself in a few
countries, there is NOTHING that can be done, at least not with ease.
>since the owner stills resides and conducts his business in
>Australia. The physical location of the server would seem to
>be of little consequence when the larger issue of ownership
>of the publication and intention of the owner are concerned.
Who says he might be an owner? He might sell it off!
>Or will it take yet another precedent-setting case to establish
Yep, no doubt. Oh and before we run around screaming examples of UK law
and Dragonnet or whatever it was. I wish to advise that there is a current
and affective piece of Legislation that nullified any UK based precedents
after some date - I forget which exactly, but lets say most of us on this
list won't be concerned as any use would predate our births!