3 ms·

Can you share more details? Source? This kind of wording is alone unconstitutional in many countries.

RL_Quine 6y ago
Australia doesn't meaningfully have a constitution, it's just a declaration of powers of the various governments. https://australianpolitics.com/constitution/text https://australianpolitics.com/constitution/text Before you downvote, take a read yourself. This isn't sarcasm.
- RL_Quine 6y ago
  I'll concede that people are mentioned in it, my original comment wasn't completely correct. "In reckoning the numbers of the people of the Commonwealth, or of a State or other part of the Commonwealth, aboriginal natives shall not be counted." Not really a statement of rights so much as a statement that the native people of Australia are not people.
  - chrismorgan 6y ago
    For completeness it must be noted that that was repealed by referendum in 1967: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_127_of_the_Constitution_of_Australia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_127_of_the_Constitutio.... (The related Section 25 remains, however.)
shakna 6y ago
> This kind of wording is alone unconstitutional in many countries. Australia's legal system is Common Law, inherited from Britain. You won't find any kind of enshrinement of rights in our constitution. It doesn't work that way. > Can you share more details? Source? You can find the proposed bill here [0]. It doesn't name Facebook and Google specifically, but says that is up to the Minister to designate "digital platform services" that it applies to. Part of which is: > In making the determination, the Minister must consider whether there is a significant bargaining power imbalance between Australian news businesses and the group comprised of the corporation and all of its related bodies corporate. Which just so happens to be one of the key findings of a report in 2018 [1] by the ACCC, which may have kicked off Parliament's slow gravitation towards this terrible idea of a law: > The ACCC is further considering a recommendation for a specific code of practice for digital platforms’ data collection to better inform consumers and improve their bargaining power. In that report, only Facebook and Google are named, and in the presentation of this law as a good thing, ministers have only named Facebook and Google. [0] https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;page=0;query=BillId:r6652%20Recstruct:billhome https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.... [1] https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/accc-releases-preliminary-report-into-google-facebook-and-australian-news-and-advertising https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/accc-releases-prelimin...
- graeme 6y ago
  According to this the Australian High Court bills of attainder are unconstitutional. Meaning not within the powers granted to the federal government, as those are judicial powers instead. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_attainder https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_attainder (Note that I’m not saying this proposed law is unconstitutional or a bill of attainder. Haven’t examined it.)
  - gamblor956 6y ago
    I don't know why you keep bringing up this "bill of attainder" nonsense. A bill of attainder is "a legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial." Legislation that singles out an individual or group for other purposes is not a bill of attainder. This bill singles out Facebook and Google, but it does not subject them to criminal punishment. It is therefore, by definition under common law tradition (and also under U.S. law), not a bill of attainder.
  - morei 6y ago
    The code is not a bill of attainder. Note that there are existing codes for other industries that operate along the same lines as the proposed code . e.g. The Telecom Industry Ombudsman operates via a code. The (non-government!) TIO has the government granted right to impose costs onto those companies that are deemed 'telecoms operators'.
- v7p1Qbt1im 6y ago
  Honestly it probably just boils down to: Rupert Murdoch hates Google and Facebook.
  - shard972 6y ago
    Untrue, rupert hates microsoft and currently uses gsuite extensivly for newscorp

Australia doesn't meaningfully have a constitution, it's just a declaration of powers of the various governments. https://australianpolitics.com/constitution/text https://australianpolitics.com/constitution/text Before you downvote, take a read yourself. This isn't sarcasm.

RL_Quine 6y ago
I'll concede that people are mentioned in it, my original comment wasn't completely correct. "In reckoning the numbers of the people of the Commonwealth, or of a State or other part of the Commonwealth, aboriginal natives shall not be counted." Not really a statement of rights so much as a statement that the native people of Australia are not people.
- chrismorgan 6y ago
  For completeness it must be noted that that was repealed by referendum in 1967: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_127_of_the_Constitution_of_Australia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_127_of_the_Constitutio.... (The related Section 25 remains, however.)

shakna 6y ago

> This kind of wording is alone unconstitutional in many countries. Australia's legal system is Common Law, inherited from Britain. You won't find any kind of enshrinement of rights in our constitution. It doesn't work that way. > Can you share more details? Source? You can find the proposed bill here [0]. It doesn't name Facebook and Google specifically, but says that is up to the Minister to designate "digital platform services" that it applies to. Part of which is: > In making the determination, the Minister must consider whether there is a significant bargaining power imbalance between Australian news businesses and the group comprised of the corporation and all of its related bodies corporate. Which just so happens to be one of the key findings of a report in 2018 [1] by the ACCC, which may have kicked off Parliament's slow gravitation towards this terrible idea of a law: > The ACCC is further considering a recommendation for a specific code of practice for digital platforms’ data collection to better inform consumers and improve their bargaining power. In that report, only Facebook and Google are named, and in the presentation of this law as a good thing, ministers have only named Facebook and Google. [0] https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;page=0;query=BillId:r6652%20Recstruct:billhome https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.... [1] https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/accc-releases-preliminary-report-into-google-facebook-and-australian-news-and-advertising https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/accc-releases-prelimin...

graeme 6y ago
According to this the Australian High Court bills of attainder are unconstitutional. Meaning not within the powers granted to the federal government, as those are judicial powers instead. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_attainder https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_attainder (Note that I’m not saying this proposed law is unconstitutional or a bill of attainder. Haven’t examined it.)
- gamblor956 6y ago
  I don't know why you keep bringing up this "bill of attainder" nonsense. A bill of attainder is "a legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial." Legislation that singles out an individual or group for other purposes is not a bill of attainder. This bill singles out Facebook and Google, but it does not subject them to criminal punishment. It is therefore, by definition under common law tradition (and also under U.S. law), not a bill of attainder.
- morei 6y ago
  The code is not a bill of attainder. Note that there are existing codes for other industries that operate along the same lines as the proposed code . e.g. The Telecom Industry Ombudsman operates via a code. The (non-government!) TIO has the government granted right to impose costs onto those companies that are deemed 'telecoms operators'.
v7p1Qbt1im 6y ago
Honestly it probably just boils down to: Rupert Murdoch hates Google and Facebook.
- shard972 6y ago
  Untrue, rupert hates microsoft and currently uses gsuite extensivly for newscorp