RE: UK to leave EU
June 27, 2016 at 1:45 am
(This post was last modified: June 27, 2016 at 1:46 am by Redbeard The Pink.)
(June 26, 2016 at 7:57 am)madog Wrote: The example I chose to make a point on was about a much bigger issue, which was ridiculed prior to any evidence being considered .... so no I won't further discuss the issue and certainly not with those who have showed they have formed their opinions and don't give a shit for evidence if it challenges their beliefs, other than to point out what should have been obvious to any one with any understanding of law ....
Law isn't just how you interpret the articles, but how the important terms are defined ....
There is no independently legal definition for "Commercial Communication" or "Information Society services" except for some specific legislation for example a European Directive 2000/31/EC .... But an important note the acts/dirctives define those terms and in particular only for the purposes of those acts or Directives where they have been used.
Commercial Communication is a broad term when undefined, discussing any product in a any medium when it was Commercially available is "Commercial Communication" when taken to its broadest interpretation ... because of this these and other similar broad terms are defined so the Courts are limited to the intentions of the Act or Directive....
Note The European Commission failed to define "Commercial Communication" or "Information Society services" this issue is presently before the European Parliament ...
Kind of a lot of text out of somebody who doesn't want to talk about it any more.
If your issue is that the EU doesn't really have to follow its own laws (or the EC-whatever), that I can understand. If the EU is writing laws that destroy free speech, that's definitely a problem. What I see happening here, on the other hand, is that they're trying to limit the promotion of a nicotine delivery product. That is a pretty normal thing for modern countries to do, and I'm not aware of any examples where such laws lead directly to further free speech limitations.
You also mentioned that the issue of wording is before parliament, which tells me that concerned parties are in the process of deciding how to rectify that situation.
Verbatim from the mouth of Jesus (retranslated from a retranslation of a copy of a copy):
"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you too will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. How can you see your brother's head up his ass when your own vision is darkened by your head being even further up your ass? How can you say to your brother, 'Get your head out of your ass,' when all the time your head is up your own ass? You hypocrite! First take your head out of your own ass, and then you will see clearly who has his head up his ass and who doesn't." Matthew 7:1-5 (also Luke 6: 41-42)
Also, I has a website: www.RedbeardThePink.com
"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you too will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. How can you see your brother's head up his ass when your own vision is darkened by your head being even further up your ass? How can you say to your brother, 'Get your head out of your ass,' when all the time your head is up your own ass? You hypocrite! First take your head out of your own ass, and then you will see clearly who has his head up his ass and who doesn't." Matthew 7:1-5 (also Luke 6: 41-42)
Also, I has a website: www.RedbeardThePink.com
