| Inside Scoop | Breaking News | Video | Blog Index | Humor | ||
| Politics | Economics | New Media | Travel and Lifestyle | Technology | Education | Green Living |
The ShadowLands
Yellowtail wines is an Australian export phenomenon which, in a short period of time, has become the most popular brand imported into the United States. It now accounts for more than 15 per cent of Australia’s multi-billion dollar export wine industry. It seems there has been nothing but good news for Yellowtail – up until now that is.
Something about the court case where Men at Work were found to have ripped off a children’s song for their worldwide hit Down Under just isn’t right. It’s obvious, yes, that Men at Work borrowed the tune, Kookaburra for parts of the song. The give-away is at the 52 second mark of the above video, where…well, have a look and you’ll get it. Unlike other artists, Men at Work never ripped off a tune and pretended to call it their own, they incorporated a kids’ tune and added it to the fabric of their work. It’s clear that there was no masterplan by Men at Work to steal a tune and make a killing from it - Down Under was originally released as a B-side on their first single when they were still a struggling band from Melbourne. The Australian children’s song suited Down Under’s theme of a nation’s innocence and optimism, and their innocence and optimism no doubt led them to believe Kookaburra was part of the public domain. The composer of Kookaburra, Melbourne music teacher, Marion Sinclair never sought royalties from Men at Work during her lifetime, possibly because she was an Australian who didn’t believe the world owed her a living, and possibly because – it is said – her song borrowed elements from an old Welsh folk tune. Instead, the music publishers stepped into the fray after she died. One of the themes of Down Under was that Australia was a refuge from the rest of the world (“You’d better run, you’d better take cover.”) Ironically, it turns out the thing to run from was copyright laws. As suggested in a comment over here, it is believed copyright laws that worked in the music publisher's favour in this case came to Australia as part of the wheelings and dealings for a US-Australia free trade deal. The thing that doesn’t sit quite right is that Men at Work, in good faith, were creative and ultimately gave something to Australia and the public at large. They got lucky and made money out of it – so good for them. The people suing them, on the other hand, appear to be opportunists who have not created anything. Judgment for damages has not yet been made, but I humbly submit that the legal profession might yet salvage some honour if the music publishers are awarded costs, a can of Fosters (if anyone can find one) and a vegemite sandwich.
Despite the fact that the PM, Kevin Rudd has previously professed to believe in a big Australia, his Government is now clamping down on migration. (Incidentally, his predecessor, John Howard faced howls of protest for much, much less.) Suddenly it will be more difficult for the enterprising hairdressers and cooks who are working their way in Australia to make their homes here. But there is still a way that you can migrate to Australia just by following a few simple steps. a) Are you Chinese? Start up a blog where you publish defamatory statements about Hu Jintao – heck, why not photoshop some racy images? If you’re Indian, maybe you could do a similar job on that tool who threatened violence against Australian cricketers. In fact, this would get you some major sympathy from a great many Australians. Go to a public library and send death threats to publish on your website. b) Using the money you might otherwise have spent on your education, get yourself on a cruise to Christmas Island. The cost of one of these trips would be about the same (maybe less) than the cost of a fare on the floating death-traps the Tamils are taking, but you should find the cruise directors will not try to blow up your ship, and there will be many more Mai Tais on offer. Take lots - I mean lots - of books. c) When you arrive, get yourself up to the Christmas Island Detention Centre and phone one of those sucky refugee advocates. It won't be hard, they publish their mobile numbers on the internet. Remember, these idiots will believe absolutely anything you tell them, so gain their sympathy with some kind of sob story (don't forget disparaging comments about John Howard), and they will tell you how to work the system. d) Make things easier for the officials to get you a security clearance – bring all your documentation, referees, and the address of your clearly identifiable website (www.hudoesitwithdonkeys.com or whatever it is.) e) It will be crowded, but thanks to the Howard Government, conditions are said to be not too bad. Behave yourself, and within three months (probably less, as they run quickly out of room) you’ll be flown to Melbourne. f) On arrival at Melbourne airport, catch the next available plane to Sydney. Open a restaurant near me. g) Welcome to Australia, cobber! Seriously, Rudd's immigration system is so stupid, I think this might actually work. I'm not joking. If enough migrants decided to take this route, the government might eventually change their profoundly stupid policies. This approach might bring a merciful end to Kevin's Drowning Generation, and create a whole bunch of great new websites along the way.
As every boy scout knows, there are three things that you need if you want to get fire. One is oxygen – and we are unlikely to be able to prevent the availability of this anytime soon. Number two is ignition. Try as we might to prevent them, there will always be firebugs, electrical faults, people flicking cigarettes out of car windows, and there will always be lightning. The third thing you need for fire is fuel - the one thing that we can control. The organisation most responsible for managing the fuel that killed 173 people in Victoria this time last year was, unsurprisingly, the Victorian Government. Under the umbrella of the Victorian Government lay bureaucracies and local governments and a fuel-creating culture that also played a significant part. However, a year on, very few questions seem to have been asked of the Victorian Government. In fact, Premier John Brumby seems to have been portrayed in some quarters as a kind of heroic Rudy Giuliani-type figure, rather than the man who headed an entity that ignored the advice of experts, and the stark warnings of local people to allow a mountain of fuel to pile up around the eventual victims. To fully understand the culpability of the Victorian Government consider this: Following huge bushfires in 2003, the Australian Federal Parliament held an inquiry into public land management in relation to bushfires. The states of Victoria, NSW and the Australian Capital Territory refused to take part for political reasons. Victoria finally agreed to hold its own inquiry into these aspects in 2008, with its findings coming down in November - too late for any recommendations to be implemented for the disastrous 2009 fire season. At the Victorian bushfire inquiry the Federal Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestries wrote, as politely as possible: “DAFF would also like to draw the attention of the Inquiry to the outcomes of the national inquiries held after the 2003 fires in to fire management...There is concern that some of the recommendations from the national inquiries have not been implemented by land management agencies.” Warning enough? How about this from a landholder, by the name of Mr Gentle: "You are restricted with the size of the fire (for backburning) you can light; you are restricted on the days that you can light. All these things restrict you to the best time you can burn off on your property but because the local government regulations say you cannot do it on that day you lose that window of opportunity.
And was there any complacency? Look at this, once again from Victoria’s 2008 bushfire inquiry:
“Mr Packham: When the Western Australians were burning 20-25 per cent of their prime forest areas...they were fireproof. They had no fires at all...we are thoroughly of the conclusion that it is the best practice in the world...
Mr Walsh: David, I found your comments about Western Australia interesting. When we sought a travel budget...to look at other jurisdictions of fire control, we were told that we were the best in the world by the presiding officers, and there was no need for us to go outside this state.” So why is it that Victoria failed to take part in the Federal 2003 bushfire inquiry or fully comply with its recommendations? It’s a question for which the families of 173 people deserve an answer.
As newswires everywhere light up with the latest so-called ramming of a Sea Shepherd vessel by the Nisshin Maru, you can already see the above video of the event on youtube – and no doubt we will see it ad nauseum on the news in coming days. This reminds us: why are there still no photos or videos available of Sea Shepherd’s attempt to salvage the Ady Gil, the last boat they claimed had been rammed by the Japanese?
As JF Beck pointed out here earlier, the Japanese claimed that Sea Shepherd had abandoned the boat, and video of the drifting, diesel-spewing vessel is available on youtube.
Also, in a NZ news story, you will find this interesting sentence:
Don Bethune, of Hamilton, father of Ady Gil skipper Pete Bethune, said today the trimaran was made of lightweight materials, including carbon fibre, and as a result the hull would probably not sink.
The Sea Shepherd crew who, it seems, film everything, could help scuttle this speculation with a single photograph or video showing that they tried to salvage the vessel - but it appears there simply isn’t one.
The only evidence we have that Sea Shepherd ever attempted to salvage the Ady Gil is their word for it, and as we have already discovered, their word is pretty much completely worthless.
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||