RS> And with the latest ruling by the High Court on the implied right to free
RS> speech in the constitution, even fido would want to watch out if they tried
RS> to traduce someones right to free speech on political issues like that.

PE> Is this "latest ruling" the one that was done 5 years ago?

I'm hopeless at trying to guess just how far back in the past
these sorts of things are, often get a surprise when I check
the time out carefully. It does sound too long back tho.

PE> If there is a "new latest ruling", does that mean that Lolita
PE> on the PC overrides the Qld computer game law, which someone
PE> was convicted of, despite not having any computer games?

Nope, the argument is essentially that the constitution implys that
real free speech is guaranteed on political issues because of the rather
explicit statements about democracy etc. Basically they claim you cant
have real democracy without real free speech on political issues.

That means that you'd have buckleys attempting to traduce someones
free speech on say the dole diary. You cant really claim that say
fictional porn storys have anything to do with elections etc.
@EOT:

---