Diary of our stinking Govt.

[boris1gary]

As it's more than 100 days now, it has been suggested that a new thread was needed.  The current govt has been breaking promises and telling lies at a rate so fast it's hard to keep up.

This below is worrying, "independent" pffft, as if your own doctor is somehow what? biased, it's ridiculous. So far there is talk of only including people under a certain age 30-35, for now. Remember that if your injured in a car, injured at work or get ill, you too might need to go on the DSP. They have done a similar think in the UK with devastating consequences.

and this is the 2nd time recently where the Govt has referred to work as welfare???? So when you go to work tomorrow (or tuesday), just remember that's welfare.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-20/disability-pensioners-may-be-reassessed-kevin-andrews/5400598

Independent doctors could be called in to reassess disability pensioners, Federal Government says

The Federal Government is considering using independent doctors to examine disability pensioners and assess whether they should continue to receive payments.

Currently family doctors provide reports supporting claims for the Disability Support Pension (DSP).

But Social Services Minister Kevin Andrews is considering a measure that would see independent doctors reassess eligibility.

"We are concerned that where people can work, the best form of welfare is work," Mr Andrews said at a press conference.

[cherry*135]

Subect - Business logo's

May I direct you to:

http://www.ipaustralia.gov.au/understanding-intellectual-property/ip-for-business/design-a-logo-and-brand/

How do I protect myself?

You might pay someone to design a company logo and unless specified, the IP will belong to the designer as they have created an original work that will be protected by copyright. Payment does not necessarily give rise to ownership rights.

The best way to secure ownership would be by ensuring you have a contract with the designer that clearly addresses ownership.

Organisations should also ensure that the contract with marketing companies and designers that help you with the creation of your brand includes a clause that requires them to prove that the design work will not conflict with IP, in any medium, owned by another company.

Once your brand has been created, and before you apply it to your goods and services, make sure you formally register your trade mark. There's no point spending time and money using it in the marketplace only to find it doesn't meet the requirements of the registration process. Without trade mark registration you're leaving your brand vulnerable to copycats and you might unknowingly infringing on the IP rights of others.

[vicr3000]

Mon

Avatars are normally spot on, looks like an Old, dead, dry and lifeless tree to me !

[cherry*135]

---

@monman12 wrote:

May I direct you to

" In Australia, the Copyright Act provides "fair dealing" exceptions for the limited purpose of research or study, criticism or review, parody or satire.

---

Link as to the source of that statement required, otherwise it could have come from The Daily Telegraph for all we know.

[cherry*135]

---

@vicr3000 wrote:

Mon

Some make up rules as they go !

---

Including the Govt Intellectual Property rights website, IP Australia?   Oh, you are funny.

[cherry*135]

---

@vicr3000 wrote:

Mon

Avatars are normally spot on, looks like an Old, dead, dry and lifeless tree to me ! Your avatar is showing blank to me. Hmmmmmm

---

A lot of  trees loose there leaves in the winter, then new ones appear in spring. I thought you would know that basic information.

That tree is not old, dead, dry or lifeless. It is young, full of life, full of green leaves and frangipani flowers.

[debra9275]

You have criticised others in the past for using images in their posts/avatars they didn't create or altering images available on the net

yes, well that's true. it's a bit hyopcritical really or is it a case of do as I say not what I do

[debra9275]

---

@am*3 wrote:

---

@monman12 wrote:

May I direct you to

" In Australia, the Copyright Act provides "fair dealing" exceptions for the limited purpose of research or study, criticism or review, parody or satire.

---

Link as to the source of that statement required, otherwise it could have come from The Daily Telegraph for all we know.

---

I can't find any reference to those exceptions at all in the link AM and would also like to see where that comes from

[monman12]

A3: "Chuckle, and your use of the logo A3  also constitutes what" Sorry, I thought it would be obvious for a reasonable person test"   Try this:  Chuckle, and your use of the same logo A3 also constitutes what".

"Your post doesn't address the issue of why you have lifted a bakery business in The Philippines logo and used it in your post."

Again the "reasonable person test" fails. I wrote:

" I do though understand the need for tasty grist, regardless of authenticity or source when it is of a particular political flavour."

Rather obtuse perhaps?

"tasty grist of a particular political flavour." would produce pink flour, which would then be used for pink MYOP consumption

I am pleased though at your displayed interest in copyright tort law,  but in addition to what I have already indicated, you might (?) also  be pleased to note that:

"  Displaying images on Facebook/Twitter ,  although you still “own” the photograph, you grant the social media sites a license to use your photograph anyway they see fit for free AND you grant them the right to let others use you picture as well!

Oh gosh!

[debra9275]

so where is that information about the copyright exceptions please? I've checked wiki too

( full link thanks)

[debra9275]

Displaying images on Facebook/Twitter ,  although you still “own” the photograph, you grant the social media sites a license to use your photograph anyway they see fit for free AND you grant them the right to let others use you picture as well!

that is somewhat different to a companies business logo though