678:
657:
688:
790:
589:
975:
954:
568:
1479:
would necessarily mean, in this particular case, that the images would now be public domain if they were incorporated as a reference. There are too many uncertainties here to read it as a public domain image, especially given that we also know that the judge placed conditions on the use of the image, and that a website which published those images was reported to the NZ police and internal affairs by the
Children's Commissioner.
878:
860:
21:
985:
888:
349:
324:
780:
762:
413:
395:
262:
56:
1450:, and it's safe to say that nobody went to jail as a result of the formal hearing that this "third-party" held over the matter. The Chairperson of this "third-party" is required by law to be a barrister or solicitor – indeed, Chairperson Morris signed her name to the ruling. I have every bit of faith that they know how to read a judge's decision, and how to accurately report on it.
293:
504:
483:
1302:, "Edicts of government, such as judicial opinions, administrative rulings, legislative enactments, public ordinances, and similar official legal documents are not copyrightable for reasons of public policy. This applies to such works whether they are Federal, State, or local as well as to those of foreign governments."
423:
1658:
public standards. All the
Broadcasting Standards Authority ruling tells us in relation to copyright is that the images were used with the judge's permission, who made the unusual decision to allow the photographs to be publicly viewed. That's not enough to assume that the images are no longer protected by copyright. -
1357:
Therefore the question is whether or not the judge removed that copyright. I'm not comfortable with your argument - you, as far as I am aware, are not a NZ copyright lawyer, so relying on your interpretation of the law, as it applies to a legal ruling which you have not seen, based on your reading of
1657:
The core problem is that the
Broadcasting Tribunal's ruling had nothing to do with copyright - it had to do with whether or not TVNZ had permission to screen the photos (they did), whether or not TVNZ provided sufficient warnings (mostly, yes), and issues related to the interests of the child and
1478:
Do you have access to the judges ruling to show that it was incorporated as a reference? What we know is that the judge allowed the images to be broadcast by the media. We don't know that he released them into the public domain, or incorporated them into his ruling as a reference, or that the law
1510:
that someone in New
Zealand is paying attention to this discussion who would be more than happy to produce it, if it will prove me wrong. In fact, I would love it if someone were to acquire it and post a photo of it to Wikimedia Commons. Even if it proves me wrong, it would certainly add to the
1614:
claim to copyright, the Crown would have had those images taken down, right?" I've got to say that I've never heard of legal action to enforce Crown copyright in New
Zealand (informal action I've seen). It seems unlike that the crown would launch action is this case due to the difficulty of
1635:
Further to this, searching the legal database I have access to, I'm failing to find a single case report that discusses "crown copyright", suggesting that there have no been any significant cases dealing with it in New
Zealand in the last two decades (before that fewer cases are digital).
1541:
Thanks also for mentioning
Commissioner Wills, I forgot about him. Given the media hype over the websites' use of the images, and in light of the fiasco that was his predecessor's predecessor, Commissioner Wills had no choice but to refer the matter to the police. What is
1838:
The only reference we have the discusses the BSA ruling in detail doesn't mention copyright at all, but mentions "judge’s stipulations" around the "child’s genitals and face not be shown" to "to preserve the child’s dignity" (i.e. not obviously copyright-related
1231:
Now, in order for Judge Lang to have released the photos into "the public realm", or "public domain", or "OK for TV broadcast", or whatever you want to call it, he would have had to have incorporated it by reference into his ruling –
208:
1518:
in this case? Since when has a judge's ruling been required to settle a dispute in
Knowledge? What's wrong with overwhelming evidence and logic? Why would you have accepted a newspaper report of that judge's decision, but you
1438:. This "third party" has powers resembling those of a court of law or judge, and is empowered to issue legally-binding orders so as to remedy situations, and is authorized to impose legal penalties (fines) of up to $ 100,000 (
1849:
allows for applications to the High Court to make them accessible and further allows for the ruling judge mek them public "subject to conditions the Judge thinks fit". To these seem to be the stipulations mentioned in the
355:
329:
1719:
TVNZ and Kiro - One News - Autopsy photos of child - Good taste and decency, privacy, fairness, programme classification, children's interests, and violence - Not upheld. - 2007-111 2008 NZBSA 25 (26 March 2008)
1537:
C'mon, that's like
President Clinton saying, "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is." If you can parse wikitext markup – and I know that you can – then you can properly parse the meaning of Section
1153:
doesn't exist in NZ copyright law, so the judge could not have been putting the images in the copyright public domain, he could have been moving them from the confidential domain to the public one, however."
1898:
legal advice on what the implications of the judges release of the image is to the copyright we have to assume it to still be copyrighted. We always take the side of caution when it comes to copyright.
1854:
Note that in New
Zealand inquests are open by default (those ruled suicides can't be reported on though), but autopsies are not. My understanding is that this is similar to the British system. The
550:
2094:
99:
202:
515:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
516:
1558:
claim to copyright, the Crown would have had those images taken down, right? Or maybe at least asserted their "copyright" and removed from Google's search results? That's
1442:
the costs of the prevailing party's legal expenses) against a person or organization who is in violation. Also, anyone who provides false testimony to this "third-party" is
2114:
744:
734:
511:
488:
253:
249:
245:
1955:
1423:– No, actually, the question is whether the judge incorporated the photos by reference into his ruling, and how he could have released the photos into the public realm
1535:"We don't know ... that the law would necessarily mean, in this particular case, that the images would now be public domain if they were incorporated as a reference."
2124:
836:
2089:
2007:
2003:
1989:
1654:
You keep returning to the Broadcasting Standards Authority ruling, as if the authority found that the images were public domain. The authority did not state this.
540:
1739:
A similar ruling on suppression of autopsy information, which also touches on photographs (indeed the only other ruling I can find that mentions autopsy images).
1143:
To date, there has been one argument against declaring the photos to be in the public domain, and that is because Crown Copyright exists and persists indelibly.
1802:
Hope I'm not sticking my nose where it's not wanted -I was asked to contribute to the RFC -but I note a similar discussion about morgue images has been held at
2154:
1045:
1035:
710:
2109:
1702:
I would encourage everyone involved in the discussions around this page to spend a non-trivial proportion of time on the article looking for more sources.
842:
134:
2159:
1386:
The only "evidence" which you had cited previously as to the "dubious" nature of "my readings" was that you couldn't find explicit confirmation by a
2139:
2129:
2069:
930:
2084:
2079:
1834:, search for references to 'judge') was concerned with the copyright on the autopsy images. I do not believe this to be the case. My reasons are:
701:
662:
441:
223:
2104:
1011:
639:
629:
190:
1574:
The sites in question are both based in the United States, not on some pirate ship in the middle of the ocean... yet Google continues to list
2149:
1383:. Nor am I asking you to believe "my reading" of anything. I have provided links for everything – and encourage you to read it for yourself.
812:
140:
2119:
936:
445:
2074:
1842:
It is common practise in New Zealand for coroners to suppress all details of autopsies as a matter of course, but the Section 75 of the
677:
656:
1583:
Please, point out the failure in my logic, and I will come around and acquiesce – I know you don't believe that, but really, I will.
1929:
449:
79:
1956:
https://web.archive.org/web/20120225155059/http://www.biggie.co.nz:80/discussion/the_real_face_of_child_abuse_in_nz_size9warning_tear
2144:
998:
959:
184:
440:, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Knowledge's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
1111:
803:
767:
605:
37:
to some readers, to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter. For more information, please refer to
2099:
436:
400:
180:
154:
85:
27:
1830:
Some of the comments above appear to suggest that the commenter believes that the High Court judge's ruling (discussed in the
1506:
Someone in New Zealand would have a better chance of getting a hold of the judge's ruling, which is public information, and I
1945:
1177:
1162:
159:
75:
2134:
1959:
230:
129:
62:
42:
2050:
1243:– nor would it make sense for him to have done so in this case. Thus, subsection 27(1A)(a) of the Act is satisfied, and
304:
38:
34:
596:
573:
120:
1447:
1069:
The issue of "Fair Use" keeps getting brought up on this page, and was even cited as the reason to close the RfC:
261:
240:
1846:
901:
865:
2006:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
1398:
272:
196:
1354:. So based on that alone, the assumption is that the image is non-free, and will remain so for quite some time.
1320:
1170:
1169:
After reviewing that law, I disagreed, and tagged the license on the file's description page in the Commons as
693:
1480:
1380:
2041:
1937:
1435:
1431:
905:, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the
164:
1299:
20:
1885:
1876:
is likely to be similar to the ruling that we can't find; again, copyright is not mentioned; a non-issue.
1863:
1748:
1677:
1641:
1624:
2025:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
2013:
1803:
1725:
1391:
1352:
1209:
310:
1936:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
1806:. That image tells me nothing as I already know the guy was shot. This photo shows sustained beating.
1980:
1873:
1736:
1712:
1706:
1358:
a third party's statement, is insufficient for me to accept that crown copyright has been removed. -
1351:
The image was protected by crown copyright presumably as a work made by a person engaged by the crown
1007:
360:
334:
1894:
I doubt a judge has the ability to remove the copyright on an image, and we're not lawyers, without
1718:
292:
1769:
1594:
1578:
sites in their search results – proving that the Commissioner's police referral was groundless P.R.
1466:
1338:
1117:
216:
110:
2055:
1912:
1889:
1867:
1815:
1797:
1776:
1752:
1681:
1667:
1645:
1628:
1601:
1491:
1473:
1367:
1345:
1010:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
811:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
709:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
604:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1498:
990:
277:
125:
2010:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
1130:"The Authority also observes that TVNZ adhered to the stipulations made by the High Court judge"
2026:
1180:, Section 27(1)(g) and Section 27(1A), this image is ineligible for Crown Copyright protection.
1881:
1859:
1855:
1843:
1744:
1673:
1637:
1620:
1144:
795:
706:
276:
106:
1616:
428:
274:
2033:
1946:
https://web.archive.org/web/20121013190540/http://safe-nz.org.nz/Data/faasisilateusila.htm
1906:
1793:
1663:
1515:
1487:
1363:
1280:. The US Copyright Office has interpreted this as applying to all "edicts of government"
1158:
1136:
reviewed the text of the Judge's decision. Nevertheless, they recite the above assertions
1274:
1253:, please note that the English Knowledge operates under U.S. jurisdiction. According to
1877:
1992:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
1960:
http://www.biggie.co.nz/discussion/the_real_face_of_child_abuse_in_nz_size9warning_tear
1811:
1760:
1585:
1522:
1457:
1430:
The "third-party" to which we refer is an "independent Crown Entity" as defined by the
1329:
1218:(1) No copyright exists in any of the following works, whenever those works were made:
2032:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
1949:
588:
567:
2063:
1205:
I therefore reproduce the relevant portions of that law here for further discussion:
1188:
reverted the licence, flagged the justification as "Dubious", and later removed it,
1619:. Certainly lack of legal court action can't be taken to imply lack of copyright.
1254:
974:
953:
1411:
excludes from Crown Copyright certain works, even if the Queen herself created it?
877:
859:
1999:
1003:
887:
1758:
Excellent work, I will do that now. Even if it proves me wrong, I thank you.
1226:(b) that is incorporated by reference in a work referred to in subsection (1).
412:
394:
348:
323:
1998:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
1901:
1788:
1659:
1483:
1359:
1224:(a) in which the Crown copyright has not been assigned to another person; and
1185:
980:
893:
883:
808:
785:
779:
761:
683:
418:
1531:
believe everything you read in the paper, or only when it fits your position?
1376:
I have changed my bullets to numbers above (and below) by request... Bilby,
1107:
1807:
1298:
The Compendium of Copyright Office Practices (Compendium II) section 206.01
1278:
in states and municipalities that ordinarily claim copyright over their work
1092:
of High Court Judge Lang's ruling (I'd love to get a hold of it), but there
1880:
from the High Court on autopsy information, again no mention of copyright.
1155:
Sounds a bit self-contradictory, but nevertheless, he continued by saying,
1737:
R v Te Hiko HC Rotorua CRI 2006 077 921 2007 NZHC 1663 (23 February 2007)
1722:
Broadcasting Standards Authority ruling, duplicate source to their website
1831:
1379:
You're right – no, I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, nor did I
1222:(1A) No Crown copyright exists in any work, whenever that work was made,—
1726:
Fa'asisila v Minister of Immigration 2011 NZIPT 500158 (9 December 2011)
1713:
R v Ngati HC Auckland CRI-2006-092-001919 2007 NZHC 1850 (15 June 2007)
1672:
The judge didn't give copyright permission, he gave privacy permission.
1157:"as copyrightable material produced by crown agents, the images remain
370:
Knowledge:WikiProject Adoption, fostering, orphan care and displacement
1566:
have successfully done that with about 15 minutes of effort. But no,
373:
Template:WikiProject Adoption, fostering, orphan care and displacement
1707:
R v Ngati HC Auckland CRI-2006-092-01919 2007 NZHC 1727 (8 May 2007)
1550:
has happened in the last year of their "monitoring the situation".
1272:, and the court opinions of any court case are in the public domain.
1098:
evidence to indicate that under that judge's order, the photos were
448:. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
601:
503:
482:
1421:"the question is whether or not the judge removed that copyright"
1173:. I also added the following justification to the description:
1071:"the most pertinent is that the image does not satisfy WP:NFCC."
1615:
enforcement, muddied jurisdictional waters and the power of the
1266:. All current or formerly binding laws, codes, and regulations
906:
286:
278:
70:
50:
15:
1511:
encyclopedic value of this article, and I would welcome that.
356:
WikiProject Adoption, fostering, orphan care and displacement
1965:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the
1728:
Appeal of Fa'asisila against being deported. (appeal failed)
1940:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
376:
Adoption, fostering, orphan care and displacement articles
1239:
No evidence has been presented to suggest that the judge
1176:"... As a result of that judge's order, and pursuant to
1933:
215:
1236:. Thus, subsection 27(1A)(b) of the Act is satisfied.
1002:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
807:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
705:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
600:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
2002:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
1950:
http://www.safe-nz.org.nz/Data/faasisilateusila.htm
1743:Still no luck with the order releasing the images.
1455:They're certainly more reliable than a newspaper.
1311:I'm not sure how many more reasons we need, but I
1193:so much as a passing mention of the referenced law
1110:from Dr. Kiro's complaint against TVNZ before the
935:This article has not yet received a rating on the
841:This article has not yet received a rating on the
525:Knowledge:WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography
2095:WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography articles
1079:Fair Use is not relevant, because the photos are
528:Template:WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography
367:Adoption, fostering, orphan care and displacement
330:Adoption, fostering, orphan care and displacement
358:, a project which is currently considered to be
88:for general discussion of the article's subject.
41:regarding potentially objectionable content and
33:Images or details contained within this article
1988:This message was posted before February 2018.
1804:Talk:Benito_Mussolini#Photo_of_body_in_morgue
1785:I'll try to have a further look too. Thanks.
1402:
1392:link to Section 26 of the Crown Copyright Act
1260:
1241:assigned the Crown Copyright to a third party
1174:
229:
8:
1715:High Court Appeal over sentencing (updated).
1397:Since you referenced it, I hope you noticed
63:configure your browser to not display images
1317:the image is ineligible for Crown Copyright
948:
854:
756:
651:
562:
477:
389:
318:
2115:Mid-importance Freedom of speech articles
1928:I have just modified 2 external links on
1327:discussion of the above on its merits.
1138:without challenging or contradicting them
1065:Fair Use? Crown Copyright? Public Domain?
35:may be graphic or otherwise objectionable
1404:"This section is subject to section 27."
1381:stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night
512:WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography
1291:
1264:legal rulings also form a special class
1220:(g) judgments of any court or tribunal
950:
856:
758:
719:Knowledge:WikiProject Freedom of speech
653:
564:
479:
391:
320:
290:
2125:Unknown-importance Journalism articles
1610:, if the Crown was in possession of a
1554:, if the Crown was in possession of a
1534:
1420:
1276:This applies even to the laws enacted
1270:including other countries’ governments
1156:
1148:
1129:
1103:
1099:
1070:
722:Template:WikiProject Freedom of speech
2090:Mid-importance Crime-related articles
1977:to let others know (documentation at
1268:produced by government at any level,
1106:. These statements are found in the
7:
1262:Under U.S. law, laws themselves and
1255:Knowledge's Public Domain guidelines
996:This article is within the scope of
899:This article is within the scope of
801:This article is within the scope of
699:This article is within the scope of
594:This article is within the scope of
509:This article is within the scope of
434:This article is within the scope of
354:This article is within the scope of
2155:Low-importance New Zealand articles
1858:does not mention copyright at all.
1234:else the ruling wouldn't be binding
909:and the subjects encompassed by it.
309:It is of interest to the following
78:for discussing improvements to the
2110:C-Class Freedom of speech articles
1930:Autopsy images of Ngatikaura Ngati
1709:High Court Appeal over sentencing.
1525:Crown Entity's report of the same?
1216:27. No copyright in certain works.
1208:New Zealand's Copyright Act 1994 (
80:Autopsy images of Ngatikaura Ngati
14:
1932:. Please take a moment to review
1514:But exactly what is the required
1390:, so I thank you for including a
1200:any evidence to counter the claim
1020:Knowledge:WikiProject New Zealand
2160:WikiProject New Zealand articles
1434:, and was established under the
1409:Do you disagree that Section 27
1112:Broadcasting Standards Authority
1023:Template:WikiProject New Zealand
983:
973:
952:
886:
876:
858:
821:Knowledge:WikiProject Journalism
788:
778:
760:
686:
676:
655:
587:
566:
502:
481:
421:
411:
393:
347:
322:
291:
260:
100:Click here to start a new topic.
54:
19:
2140:Unknown-importance law articles
2130:WikiProject Journalism articles
2070:Knowledge objectionable content
1319:, and must therefore be tagged
1214:Sections 26-28: Crown Copyright
1104:"allowed into the public realm"
1073:After further research, I will
1040:This article has been rated as
824:Template:WikiProject Journalism
739:This article has been rated as
634:This article has been rated as
545:This article has been rated as
458:Knowledge:WikiProject Biography
43:options for not seeing an image
2085:C-Class Crime-related articles
2080:WikiProject Biography articles
1178:New Zealand Copyright Act 1994
1128:In order for the BSA to rule,
1081:ineligible for Crown Copyright
461:Template:WikiProject Biography
39:Knowledge's content disclaimer
1:
2105:Mid-importance Death articles
1014:and see a list of open tasks.
815:and see a list of open tasks.
713:and see a list of open tasks.
702:WikiProject Freedom of speech
608:and see a list of open tasks.
519:and see a list of open tasks.
97:Put new text under old text.
2150:C-Class New Zealand articles
2056:07:54, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
1913:00:46, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
1890:01:41, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
1868:05:00, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
1816:20:11, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
1798:06:50, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
1777:06:31, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
1753:05:16, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
1682:08:49, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
1668:07:01, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
1646:08:54, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
1629:06:41, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
1602:06:31, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
1492:03:56, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
1474:03:38, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
1368:22:46, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
1346:21:33, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
1100:"released by the High Court"
522:Crime and Criminal Biography
489:Crime and Criminal Biography
446:contribute to the discussion
2120:C-Class Journalism articles
1826:What did the judge rule on?
1503:Responding to your points:
1417:would interpret Section 27?
614:Knowledge:WikiProject Death
105:New to Knowledge? Welcome!
2176:
2075:C-Class biography articles
2019:(last update: 5 June 2024)
1925:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
1046:project's importance scale
1008:New Zealand-related topics
937:project's importance scale
843:project's importance scale
745:project's importance scale
725:Freedom of speech articles
640:project's importance scale
617:Template:WikiProject Death
551:project's importance scale
1282:both domestic and foreign
1245:no Crown copyright exists
1123:reliable secondary source
1088:Nobody has uncovered the
1039:
968:
934:
915:Knowledge:WikiProject Law
871:
840:
773:
738:
671:
633:
582:
544:
497:
406:
342:
317:
135:Be welcoming to newcomers
28:Knowledge is not censored
2145:WikiProject Law articles
1399:Section 26 paragraph (7)
918:Template:WikiProject Law
694:Freedom of speech portal
1921:External links modified
1732:Less directly related:
1432:Crown Entities Act 2004
1210:Public Act: 1994 No 143
999:WikiProject New Zealand
2100:C-Class Death articles
1406:
1309:
1182:
1084:. I'll state my case:
804:WikiProject Journalism
531:Crime-related articles
299:This article is rated
130:avoid personal attacks
1568:nothing has been done
1436:Broadcasting Act 1989
437:WikiProject Biography
254:Auto-archiving period
155:Neutral point of view
2135:C-Class law articles
2000:regular verification
1572:That speaks volumes.
1026:New Zealand articles
160:No original research
1990:After February 2018
1969:parameter below to
1118:quasi-judicial body
827:Journalism articles
2044:InternetArchiveBot
1995:InternetArchiveBot
1548:absolutely nothing
1388:newspaper reporter
1284:. (emphasis added)
1163:Copyright Act 1994
1108:text of the ruling
991:New Zealand portal
464:biography articles
305:content assessment
141:dispute resolution
102:
2020:
1856:Coroners Act 2006
1844:Coroners Act 2006
1562:easy to do, even
1502:
1444:guilty of perjury
1323:. I welcome any
1315:to maintain that
1308:
1286:
1060:
1059:
1056:
1055:
1052:
1051:
947:
946:
943:
942:
853:
852:
849:
848:
796:Journalism portal
755:
754:
751:
750:
716:Freedom of speech
707:Freedom of speech
663:Freedom of speech
650:
649:
646:
645:
597:WikiProject Death
561:
560:
557:
556:
476:
475:
472:
471:
388:
387:
384:
383:
285:
284:
121:Assume good faith
98:
69:
68:
49:
48:
2167:
2054:
2045:
2018:
2017:
1996:
1984:
1911:
1909:
1904:
1791:
1775:
1772:
1766:
1763:
1617:Streisand effect
1606:In response to "
1600:
1597:
1591:
1588:
1496:
1472:
1469:
1463:
1460:
1425:without doing so
1401:, which states,
1344:
1341:
1335:
1332:
1303:
1296:
1288:
1285:
1028:
1027:
1024:
1021:
1018:
993:
988:
987:
986:
977:
970:
969:
964:
956:
949:
923:
922:
919:
916:
913:
896:
891:
890:
880:
873:
872:
862:
855:
829:
828:
825:
822:
819:
798:
793:
792:
791:
782:
775:
774:
764:
757:
727:
726:
723:
720:
717:
696:
691:
690:
689:
680:
673:
672:
667:
659:
652:
622:
621:
618:
615:
612:
591:
584:
583:
578:
570:
563:
533:
532:
529:
526:
523:
506:
499:
498:
493:
485:
478:
466:
465:
462:
459:
456:
442:join the project
431:
429:Biography portal
426:
425:
424:
415:
408:
407:
397:
390:
378:
377:
374:
371:
368:
351:
344:
343:
338:
326:
319:
302:
296:
295:
287:
279:
265:
264:
255:
234:
233:
219:
150:Article policies
71:
58:
57:
51:
23:
16:
2175:
2174:
2170:
2169:
2168:
2166:
2165:
2164:
2060:
2059:
2048:
2043:
2011:
2004:have permission
1994:
1978:
1938:this simple FaQ
1923:
1907:
1902:
1900:
1828:
1786:
1770:
1764:
1761:
1759:
1700:
1595:
1589:
1586:
1584:
1521:won't accept a
1516:burden of proof
1467:
1461:
1458:
1456:
1448:Crimes Act 1961
1339:
1333:
1330:
1328:
1307:
1306:
1297:
1293:
1228:
1159:Crown copyright
1067:
1025:
1022:
1019:
1016:
1015:
989:
984:
982:
962:
920:
917:
914:
911:
910:
902:WikiProject Law
892:
885:
826:
823:
820:
817:
816:
794:
789:
787:
724:
721:
718:
715:
714:
692:
687:
685:
665:
619:
616:
613:
610:
609:
576:
530:
527:
524:
521:
520:
491:
463:
460:
457:
454:
453:
427:
422:
420:
375:
372:
369:
366:
365:
332:
303:on Knowledge's
300:
281:
280:
275:
252:
176:
171:
170:
169:
146:
116:
55:
12:
11:
5:
2173:
2171:
2163:
2162:
2157:
2152:
2147:
2142:
2137:
2132:
2127:
2122:
2117:
2112:
2107:
2102:
2097:
2092:
2087:
2082:
2077:
2072:
2062:
2061:
2038:
2037:
2030:
1963:
1962:
1954:Added archive
1952:
1944:Added archive
1922:
1919:
1918:
1917:
1916:
1915:
1878:Another ruling
1852:
1851:
1840:
1827:
1824:
1823:
1822:
1821:
1820:
1819:
1818:
1780:
1779:
1741:
1740:
1730:
1729:
1723:
1716:
1710:
1699:
1696:
1695:
1694:
1693:
1692:
1691:
1690:
1689:
1688:
1687:
1686:
1685:
1684:
1655:
1652:
1651:
1650:
1649:
1648:
1581:
1580:
1579:
1539:
1532:
1523:quasi-judicial
1512:
1453:
1452:
1451:
1428:
1418:
1413:Can I ask how
1407:
1395:
1384:
1371:
1370:
1355:
1305:
1304:
1290:
1289:
1259:
1258:
1248:
1237:
1229:
1227:
1225:
1223:
1221:
1219:
1217:
1215:
1213:
1206:
1203:
1183:
1167:
1141:
1126:
1066:
1063:
1058:
1057:
1054:
1053:
1050:
1049:
1042:Low-importance
1038:
1032:
1031:
1029:
1012:the discussion
995:
994:
978:
966:
965:
963:Low‑importance
957:
945:
944:
941:
940:
933:
927:
926:
924:
898:
897:
881:
869:
868:
863:
851:
850:
847:
846:
839:
833:
832:
830:
813:the discussion
800:
799:
783:
771:
770:
765:
753:
752:
749:
748:
741:Mid-importance
737:
731:
730:
728:
711:the discussion
698:
697:
681:
669:
668:
666:Mid‑importance
660:
648:
647:
644:
643:
636:Mid-importance
632:
626:
625:
623:
620:Death articles
606:the discussion
592:
580:
579:
577:Mid‑importance
571:
559:
558:
555:
554:
547:Mid-importance
543:
537:
536:
534:
517:the discussion
507:
495:
494:
492:Mid‑importance
486:
474:
473:
470:
469:
467:
433:
432:
416:
404:
403:
398:
386:
385:
382:
381:
379:
352:
340:
339:
327:
315:
314:
308:
297:
283:
282:
273:
271:
270:
267:
266:
236:
235:
173:
172:
168:
167:
162:
157:
148:
147:
145:
144:
137:
132:
123:
117:
115:
114:
103:
94:
93:
90:
89:
83:
67:
66:
59:
47:
46:
32:
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2172:
2161:
2158:
2156:
2153:
2151:
2148:
2146:
2143:
2141:
2138:
2136:
2133:
2131:
2128:
2126:
2123:
2121:
2118:
2116:
2113:
2111:
2108:
2106:
2103:
2101:
2098:
2096:
2093:
2091:
2088:
2086:
2083:
2081:
2078:
2076:
2073:
2071:
2068:
2067:
2065:
2058:
2057:
2052:
2047:
2046:
2035:
2031:
2028:
2024:
2023:
2022:
2015:
2009:
2005:
2001:
1997:
1991:
1986:
1982:
1976:
1972:
1968:
1961:
1957:
1953:
1951:
1947:
1943:
1942:
1941:
1939:
1935:
1931:
1926:
1920:
1914:
1910:
1905:
1897:
1893:
1892:
1891:
1887:
1883:
1879:
1875:
1872:
1871:
1870:
1869:
1865:
1861:
1857:
1848:
1845:
1841:
1839:terminology).
1837:
1836:
1835:
1833:
1825:
1817:
1813:
1809:
1805:
1801:
1800:
1799:
1795:
1790:
1784:
1783:
1782:
1781:
1778:
1773:
1767:
1757:
1756:
1755:
1754:
1750:
1746:
1738:
1735:
1734:
1733:
1727:
1724:
1721:
1717:
1714:
1711:
1708:
1705:
1704:
1703:
1697:
1683:
1679:
1675:
1671:
1670:
1669:
1665:
1661:
1656:
1653:
1647:
1643:
1639:
1634:
1633:
1632:
1631:
1630:
1626:
1622:
1618:
1613:
1609:
1605:
1604:
1603:
1598:
1592:
1582:
1577:
1573:
1569:
1565:
1561:
1557:
1553:
1549:
1545:
1540:
1536:
1533:
1530:
1526:
1524:
1517:
1513:
1509:
1505:
1504:
1500:
1499:edit conflict
1495:
1494:
1493:
1489:
1485:
1481:
1477:
1476:
1475:
1470:
1464:
1454:
1449:
1445:
1441:
1437:
1433:
1429:
1426:
1422:
1419:
1416:
1412:
1408:
1405:
1400:
1396:
1393:
1389:
1385:
1382:
1378:
1377:
1375:
1374:
1373:
1372:
1369:
1365:
1361:
1356:
1353:
1350:
1349:
1348:
1347:
1342:
1336:
1326:
1322:
1321:PD-ineligible
1318:
1314:
1301:
1295:
1292:
1287:
1283:
1279:
1275:
1273:
1271:
1265:
1256:
1252:
1249:
1246:
1242:
1238:
1235:
1230:
1211:
1207:
1204:
1201:
1199:
1194:
1192:
1187:
1184:
1181:
1179:
1172:
1171:PD-ineligible
1168:
1166:
1164:
1161:, as per the
1160:
1154:
1152:
1151:Public domain
1146:
1142:
1139:
1135:
1131:
1127:
1124:
1120:
1119:
1113:
1109:
1105:
1101:
1097:
1096:
1091:
1087:
1086:
1085:
1083:
1082:
1076:
1072:
1064:
1062:
1047:
1043:
1037:
1034:
1033:
1030:
1013:
1009:
1005:
1001:
1000:
992:
981:
979:
976:
972:
971:
967:
961:
958:
955:
951:
938:
932:
929:
928:
925:
908:
904:
903:
895:
889:
884:
882:
879:
875:
874:
870:
867:
864:
861:
857:
844:
838:
835:
834:
831:
814:
810:
806:
805:
797:
786:
784:
781:
777:
776:
772:
769:
766:
763:
759:
746:
742:
736:
733:
732:
729:
712:
708:
704:
703:
695:
684:
682:
679:
675:
674:
670:
664:
661:
658:
654:
641:
637:
631:
628:
627:
624:
607:
603:
599:
598:
593:
590:
586:
585:
581:
575:
572:
569:
565:
552:
548:
542:
539:
538:
535:
518:
514:
513:
508:
505:
501:
500:
496:
490:
487:
484:
480:
468:
451:
450:documentation
447:
443:
439:
438:
430:
419:
417:
414:
410:
409:
405:
402:
399:
396:
392:
380:
363:
362:
357:
353:
350:
346:
345:
341:
336:
331:
328:
325:
321:
316:
312:
306:
298:
294:
289:
288:
269:
268:
263:
259:
251:
247:
244:
242:
238:
237:
232:
228:
225:
222:
218:
214:
210:
207:
204:
201:
198:
195:
192:
189:
186:
182:
179:
178:Find sources:
175:
174:
166:
165:Verifiability
163:
161:
158:
156:
153:
152:
151:
142:
138:
136:
133:
131:
127:
124:
122:
119:
118:
112:
108:
107:Learn to edit
104:
101:
96:
95:
92:
91:
87:
81:
77:
73:
72:
64:
60:
53:
52:
44:
40:
36:
30:
29:
25:
22:
18:
17:
2042:
2039:
2014:source check
1993:
1987:
1974:
1970:
1966:
1964:
1927:
1924:
1895:
1882:Stuartyeates
1860:Stuartyeates
1853:
1829:
1745:Stuartyeates
1742:
1731:
1701:
1674:Stuartyeates
1638:Stuartyeates
1621:Stuartyeates
1611:
1607:
1575:
1571:
1567:
1563:
1559:
1555:
1551:
1547:
1544:more telling
1543:
1528:
1520:
1507:
1443:
1439:
1424:
1414:
1410:
1403:
1387:
1324:
1316:
1312:
1310:
1294:
1281:
1277:
1269:
1267:
1263:
1261:
1250:
1244:
1240:
1233:
1197:
1196:
1190:
1189:
1175:
1150:
1145:Stuartyeates
1137:
1133:
1132:, they have
1122:
1115:
1094:
1093:
1089:
1080:
1078:
1074:
1068:
1061:
1041:
997:
921:law articles
900:
802:
740:
700:
635:
595:
546:
510:
435:
359:
311:WikiProjects
257:
239:
226:
220:
212:
205:
199:
193:
187:
177:
149:
74:This is the
26:
1981:Sourcecheck
1874:This ruling
1698:New sources
1325:substantive
1251:Furthermore
1090:actual text
1077:state that
1017:New Zealand
1004:New Zealand
960:New Zealand
907:legal field
203:free images
86:not a forum
2064:Categories
2051:Report bug
1832:BSA ruling
1612:legitimate
1556:legitimate
1446:under the
894:Law portal
818:Journalism
809:journalism
768:Journalism
2034:this tool
2027:this tool
455:Biography
401:Biography
143:if needed
126:Be polite
76:talk page
2040:Cheers.—
1847:see here
1546:is that
1313:continue
1147:argued:
361:inactive
335:inactive
241:Archives
111:get help
84:This is
82:article.
61:You can
1967:checked
1934:my edit
1850:source.
1538:27(1A).
1527:Do you
1198:without
1191:without
1044:on the
743:on the
638:on the
549:on the
301:C-class
258:31Â days
209:WPÂ refs
197:scholar
1975:failed
1896:expert
1608:Surely
1552:Surely
1529:really
1300:states
1195:, and
1134:surely
307:scale.
181:Google
1903:raeky
1789:Trevj
1762:Groll
1660:Bilby
1587:Groll
1484:Bilby
1459:Groll
1360:Bilby
1331:Groll
1186:Bilby
1075:again
611:Death
602:Death
574:Death
224:JSTOR
185:books
139:Seek
1971:true
1886:talk
1864:talk
1812:talk
1808:JRPG
1794:talk
1771:talk
1765:Ď„ech
1749:talk
1678:talk
1664:talk
1642:talk
1625:talk
1596:talk
1590:Ď„ech
1576:both
1560:real
1508:know
1488:talk
1468:talk
1462:Ď„ech
1440:plus
1364:talk
1340:talk
1334:Ď„ech
1121:and
1102:and
1006:and
444:and
217:FENS
191:news
128:and
2008:RfC
1985:).
1973:or
1958:to
1948:to
1787:--
1415:you
1036:Low
931:???
912:Law
866:Law
837:???
735:Mid
630:Mid
541:Mid
231:TWL
2066::
2021:.
2016:}}
2012:{{
1983:}}
1979:{{
1899:—
1888:)
1866:)
1814:)
1796:)
1751:)
1680:)
1666:)
1644:)
1627:)
1570:.
1490:)
1482:-
1366:)
1212:):
1165:."
1116:a
1114:,
1095:is
256::
248:,
211:)
109:;
2053:)
2049:(
2036:.
2029:.
1908:t
1884:(
1862:(
1810:(
1792:(
1774:)
1768:(
1747:(
1676:(
1662:(
1640:(
1623:(
1599:)
1593:(
1564:I
1501:)
1497:(
1486:(
1471:)
1465:(
1427:.
1394:.
1362:(
1343:)
1337:(
1257::
1247:.
1202:.
1149:"
1140:.
1125:.
1048:.
939:.
845:.
747:.
642:.
553:.
452:.
364:.
337:)
333:(
313::
250:2
246:1
243::
227:·
221:·
213:·
206:·
200:·
194:·
188:·
183:(
113:.
65:.
45:.
31:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
