>>>>>>>> A TELSTRA worker, sacked for taking part in a sex romp at a
>>>>>>>> Sydney hotel after a work Christmas party, has lost the right
>>>>>>>> to receive compensation and get her job back.
>>>>>>> Telstra's actions in this case were reprehensible.
>>>>>> Why? Surely a company is allowed to set standards as to the moral
>>>>>> character of its employees?
>>>>> They probably are allowed, but as far as I am aware no such
>>>>> standards have been set or published. What is the employees moral
>>>>> standard to be measured against?
>>>> The Basic Principles of Telstra's Code of Conduct are ....
>>>> Ensure our personal business, financial and other outside
>>>> interests do not conflict with our duty to Telstra.
>>>> [snip]
>>>> Dealing with the 'grey' issues
>>>> If you are confronted with a situation or are considering
>>>> behaviour and are still unsure of its appropriateness ask
>>>> yourself these questions :
>>>> Would this look OK on the evening news or on the front page of a
>>>> newspaper?
>>>> Am I wrong in assuming that, if you end-up in the news not looking
>>>> your best, you're contravening the Code of Conduct?
>>> Yes, you are wrong.
>> That's up to Telstra.
> Nope. Its up to the law.
There's a Code of Conduct law?
>> Surely YOU think the entire Code of Conduct (or at least the
>> bit about "outside interests") is unenforceable, don't you?
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:13:34 +1100, Rod Speed wrote:
> Horry <horacewachope@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:23:11 +1100, Rod Speed wrote:
>>
>>> Magilla <magilla@DELETETHISstupidmonkey.org> wrote:
>>>> "Kwyjibo" <kwyjibo@ozdebate.remove.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:13pig2qo2ins96a@corp.supernews.com...
>>>>> "Horry" wrote ...
>>>>>> Craig Welch wrote:
>>>>>>> "Alan Parkington" said:
>>>>
>>>>>>>> From
>>>>>>>> http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegrap...007132,00.html
>>>>
>>>>>>>> A TELSTRA worker, sacked for taking part in a sex romp at a
>>>>>>>> Sydney hotel after a work Christmas party, has lost the right
>>>>>>>> to receive compensation and get her job back.
>>>>
>>>>>>> Telstra's actions in this case were reprehensible.
>>>>
>>>>>> Why? Surely a company is allowed to set standards as to the moral
>>>>>> character of its employees?
>>>>
>>>>> They probably are allowed, but as far as I am aware no such
>>>>> standards have been set or published. What is the employees moral
>>>>> standard to be measured against?
>>>>
>>>> http://telstra.com.au/abouttelstra/i...onsibility.pdf
>>>>
>>>> Part A: General Code of Conduct principles
>>>>
>>>> The Basic Principles of Telstra's Code of Conduct are ....
>>>> Ensure our personal business, financial and other outside
>>>> interests do not conflict with our duty to Telstra.
>>>>
>>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>> Dealing with the 'grey' issues
>>>> If you are confronted with a situation or are considering
>>>> behaviour and are still unsure of its appropriateness ask
>>>> yourself these questions :
>>>>
>>>> Would this look OK on the evening news or on the front page of a
>>>> newspaper?
>>>
>>>> Am I wrong in assuming that, if you end-up in the news not looking
>>>> your best, you're contravening the Code of Conduct?
>>>
>>> Yes, you are wrong.
>
>> That's up to Telstra.
>
> Nope. Its up to the law.
WTF? You're not making sense.
First you argued that an employer has no legal right to regulate the
after-hours behaviour of an employee by means of a code of conduct.
Now you seem to be saying that if an employer decides to go ahead anyway
and draw up an after-hours Code of Conduct (which, according to your first
argument, would be unforceable and worthless) the law would govern its
interpretation?
>> Surely YOU think the entire Code of Conduct (or at least the
>> bit about "outside interests") is unenforceable, don't you?
>
> Irrelevant to his question.
It's centrally important. Unless you're suggesting that the law governs
the interpretation of "Codes of Conduct" even when they have no legal
effect. (Which is what you seem to be doing.)
Magilla <magilla@DELETETHISstupidmonkey.org> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> Horry wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Magilla wrote
>>>>> Kwyjibo wrote
>>>>>> Horry wrote
>>>>>>> Craig Welch wrote
>>>>>>>> Alan Parkington wrote
>>>>>>>>> A TELSTRA worker, sacked for taking part in a sex romp at a
>>>>>>>>> Sydney hotel after a work Christmas party, has lost the right
>>>>>>>>> to receive compensation and get her job back.
>>>>>>>> Telstra's actions in this case were reprehensible.
>>>>>>> Why? Surely a company is allowed to set standards as to the moral character of its employees?
>>>>>> They probably are allowed, but as far as I am aware no such
>>>>>> standards have been set or published. What is the employees moral
>>>>>> standard to be measured against?
>>>>> The Basic Principles of Telstra's Code of Conduct are ....
>>>>> Ensure our personal business, financial and other outside
>>>>> interests do not conflict with our duty to Telstra.
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>> Dealing with the 'grey' issues
>>>>> If you are confronted with a situation or are considering
>>>>> behaviour and are still unsure of its appropriateness ask
>>>>> yourself these questions :
>>>>> Would this look OK on the evening news or on the front page of a newspaper?
>>>>> Am I wrong in assuming that, if you end-up in the news not looking
>>>>> your best, you're contravening the Code of Conduct?
>>>> Yes, you are wrong.
>>> That's up to Telstra.
>> Nope. Its up to the law.
> There's a Code of Conduct law?
There is plenty of law that applys to employment, stupid.
>>> Surely YOU think the entire Code of Conduct (or at least the
>>> bit about "outside interests") is unenforceable, don't you?
Horry <horacewachope@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:13:34 +1100, Rod Speed wrote:
>
>> Horry <horacewachope@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:23:11 +1100, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>
>>>> Magilla <magilla@DELETETHISstupidmonkey.org> wrote:
>>>>> "Kwyjibo" <kwyjibo@ozdebate.remove.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:13pig2qo2ins96a@corp.supernews.com...
>>>>>> "Horry" wrote ...
>>>>>>> Craig Welch wrote:
>>>>>>>> "Alan Parkington" said:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> From
>>>>>>>>> http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegrap...007132,00.html
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A TELSTRA worker, sacked for taking part in a sex romp at a
>>>>>>>>> Sydney hotel after a work Christmas party, has lost the right
>>>>>>>>> to receive compensation and get her job back.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Telstra's actions in this case were reprehensible.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why? Surely a company is allowed to set standards as to the
>>>>>>> moral character of its employees?
>>>>>
>>>>>> They probably are allowed, but as far as I am aware no such
>>>>>> standards have been set or published. What is the employees moral
>>>>>> standard to be measured against?
>>>>>
>>>>> http://telstra.com.au/abouttelstra/i...onsibility.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>> Part A: General Code of Conduct principles
>>>>>
>>>>> The Basic Principles of Telstra's Code of Conduct are ....
>>>>> Ensure our personal business, financial and other outside
>>>>> interests do not conflict with our duty to Telstra.
>>>>>
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>
>>>>> Dealing with the 'grey' issues
>>>>> If you are confronted with a situation or are considering
>>>>> behaviour and are still unsure of its appropriateness ask
>>>>> yourself these questions :
>>>>>
>>>>> Would this look OK on the evening news or on the front page of a
>>>>> newspaper?
>>>>
>>>>> Am I wrong in assuming that, if you end-up in the news not looking
>>>>> your best, you're contravening the Code of Conduct?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, you are wrong.
>>
>>> That's up to Telstra.
>> Nope. Its up to the law.
> WTF? You're not making sense.
Easy to claim. Hell of a lot harder to actually substantiate that claim.
> First you argued that an employer has no legal right to regulate the
> after-hours behaviour of an employee by means of a code of conduct.
Didnt do anything like that.
> Now you seem to be saying that if an employer decides to go ahead
> anyway and draw up an after-hours Code of Conduct (which, according
> to your first argument, would be unforceable and worthless) the law
> would govern its interpretation?
Nope, not saying anything like that.
>>> Surely YOU think the entire Code of Conduct (or at least the
>>> bit about "outside interests") is unenforceable, don't you?
>> Irrelevant to his question.
> It's centrally important.
Wrong, as always.
> Unless you're suggesting that the law governs the interpretation
> of "Codes of Conduct" even when they have no legal effect.
Nope.
> (Which is what you seem to be doing.)
Guess who need to get its seems machinery seen to ?
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message news:605jo0F1027e5U1@mid.individual.net...
> Magilla wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>>> Horry wrote
>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>> Magilla wrote
>>>>>> Kwyjibo wrote
>>>>>>> Horry wrote
>>>>>>>> Craig Welch wrote
>>>>>>>>> Alan Parkington wrote
>>>>>>>>>> A TELSTRA worker, sacked for taking part in a sex romp at a
>>>>>>>>>> Sydney hotel after a work Christmas party, has lost the right
>>>>>>>>>> to receive compensation and get her job back.
>>>>>>>>> Telstra's actions in this case were reprehensible.
>>>>>>>> Why? Surely a company is allowed to set standards as to the
>>>>>>>> moral character of its employees?
>>>>>>> They probably are allowed, but as far as I am aware no such
>>>>>>> standards have been set or published. What is the employees
>>>>>>> moral standard to be measured against?
>>>>>> The Basic Principles of Telstra's Code of Conduct are ....
>>>>>> Ensure our personal business, financial and other outside
>>>>>> interests do not conflict with our duty to Telstra.
>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>> Dealing with the 'grey' issues
>>>>>> If you are confronted with a situation or are considering
>>>>>> behaviour and are still unsure of its appropriateness ask
>>>>>> yourself these questions :
>>>>>> Would this look OK on the evening news or on the front page
>>>>>> of a newspaper?
>>>>>> Am I wrong in assuming that, if you end-up in the news not
>>>>>> looking your best, you're contravening the Code of Conduct?
>>>>> Yes, you are wrong.
>>>> That's up to Telstra.
>>> Nope. Its up to the law.
>> There's a Code of Conduct law?
> There is plenty of law that applys to employment, stupid.
But nothing *specifically* about Codes of Conduct and the
contents thereof?
>>>> Surely YOU think the entire Code of Conduct (or at least the
>>>> bit about "outside interests") is unenforceable, don't you?
Magilla <magilla@DELETETHISstupidmonkey.org> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> Magilla wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Horry wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>> Magilla wrote
>>>>>>> Kwyjibo wrote
>>>>>>>> Horry wrote
>>>>>>>>> Craig Welch wrote
>>>>>>>>>> Alan Parkington wrote
>>>>>>>>>>> A TELSTRA worker, sacked for taking part in a sex romp at a
>>>>>>>>>>> Sydney hotel after a work Christmas party, has lost the
>>>>>>>>>>> right to receive compensation and get her job back.
>>>>>>>>>> Telstra's actions in this case were reprehensible.
>>>>>>>>> Why? Surely a company is allowed to set standards as to the
>>>>>>>>> moral character of its employees?
>>>>>>>> They probably are allowed, but as far as I am aware no such
>>>>>>>> standards have been set or published. What is the employees
>>>>>>>> moral standard to be measured against?
>>>>>>> Part A: General Code of Conduct principles
>>>>>>> The Basic Principles of Telstra's Code of Conduct are ....
>>>>>>> Ensure our personal business, financial and other outside
>>>>>>> interests do not conflict with our duty to Telstra.
>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>> Dealing with the 'grey' issues
>>>>>>> If you are confronted with a situation or are considering
>>>>>>> behaviour and are still unsure of its appropriateness ask
>>>>>>> yourself these questions :
>>>>>>> Would this look OK on the evening news or on the front page of a newspaper?
>>>>>>> Am I wrong in assuming that, if you end-up in the news not
>>>>>>> looking your best, you're contravening the Code of Conduct?
>>>>>> Yes, you are wrong.
>>>>> That's up to Telstra.
>>>> Nope. Its up to the law.
>>> There's a Code of Conduct law?
>> There is plenty of law that applys to employment, stupid.
> But nothing *specifically* about Codes of Conduct and the contents thereof?
Wrong, as always.
And it aint just black letter law that matters anyway.
>>>>> Surely YOU think the entire Code of Conduct (or at least the
>>>>> bit about "outside interests") is unenforceable, don't you?
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 06:14:06 +1100, Rod Speed wrote:
> Magilla <magilla@DELETETHISstupidmonkey.org> wrote
>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>> Magilla wrote
>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>> Horry wrote
>>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>> Magilla wrote
>>>>>>>> Kwyjibo wrote
>>>>>>>>> Horry wrote
>>>>>>>>>> Craig Welch wrote
>>>>>>>>>>> Alan Parkington wrote
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> From
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegrap...007132,00.html
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> A TELSTRA worker, sacked for taking part in a sex romp at a
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sydney hotel after a work Christmas party, has lost the
>>>>>>>>>>>> right to receive compensation and get her job back.
>
>>>>>>>>>>> Telstra's actions in this case were reprehensible.
>
>>>>>>>>>> Why? Surely a company is allowed to set standards as to the
>>>>>>>>>> moral character of its employees?
>
>>>>>>>>> They probably are allowed, but as far as I am aware no such
>>>>>>>>> standards have been set or published. What is the employees
>>>>>>>>> moral standard to be measured against?
>
>>>>>>>> http://telstra.com.au/abouttelstra/i...onsibility.pdf
>
>>>>>>>> Part A: General Code of Conduct principles
>
>>>>>>>> The Basic Principles of Telstra's Code of Conduct are ....
>>>>>>>> Ensure our personal business, financial and other outside
>>>>>>>> interests do not conflict with our duty to Telstra.
>
>>>>>>>> [snip]
>
>>>>>>>> Dealing with the 'grey' issues
>>>>>>>> If you are confronted with a situation or are considering
>>>>>>>> behaviour and are still unsure of its appropriateness ask
>>>>>>>> yourself these questions :
>
>>>>>>>> Would this look OK on the evening news or on the front page of a newspaper?
>
>>>>>>>> Am I wrong in assuming that, if you end-up in the news not
>>>>>>>> looking your best, you're contravening the Code of Conduct?
>
>>>>>>> Yes, you are wrong.
>
>>>>>> That's up to Telstra.
>
>>>>> Nope. Its up to the law.
>
>>>> There's a Code of Conduct law?
>
>>> There is plenty of law that applys to employment, stupid.
>
>> But nothing *specifically* about Codes of Conduct and the contents thereof?
>
> Wrong, as always.
What law specifically deals with Codes of Conduct?
> And it aint just black letter law that matters anyway.
How would an Code of Conduct, for argument's sake unenforceable, come
before a court and be interpreted by the court? In that case the court
would completely ignore the Code of Conduct and apply and interpret the
law.
You can't rationally argue that a Code of Conduct is both a legal
irrelevancy AND subject judicial interpretation.
If I drew up a "Rod Speed Usenet Code of Conduct" and then, alleging a
breach of the Code, took possession of your car as disciplinary action, the
court would interpret and apply NSW law -- I'd be punished and you'd get
your car back.
The court wouldn't interpret the "Rod Speed Usenet Code of Conduct".
Horry <horacewachope@gmail.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Magilla <magilla@DELETETHISstupidmonkey.org> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> Magilla wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>> Horry wrote
>>>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>>> Magilla wrote
>>>>>>>>> Kwyjibo wrote
>>>>>>>>>> Horry wrote
>>>>>>>>>>> Craig Welch wrote
>>>>>>>>>>>> Alan Parkington wrote
>>>>>>>>>>>>> A TELSTRA worker, sacked for taking part in a sex romp
>>>>>>>>>>>>> at a Sydney hotel after a work Christmas party, has lost
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the right to receive compensation and get her job back.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Telstra's actions in this case were reprehensible.
>>>>>>>>>>> Why? Surely a company is allowed to set standards
>>>>>>>>>>> as to the moral character of its employees?
>>>>>>>>>> They probably are allowed, but as far as I am aware no
>>>>>>>>>> such standards have been set or published. What is the
>>>>>>>>>> employees moral standard to be measured against?
>>>>>>>>> Part A: General Code of Conduct principles
>>>>>>>>> The Basic Principles of Telstra's Code of Conduct are ....
>>>>>>>>> Ensure our personal business, financial and other outside
>>>>>>>>> interests do not conflict with our duty to Telstra.
>>>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>>>> Dealing with the 'grey' issues
>>>>>>>>> If you are confronted with a situation or are considering
>>>>>>>>> behaviour and are still unsure of its appropriateness ask
>>>>>>>>> yourself these questions :
>>>>>>>>> Would this look OK on the evening news or on the front page of a newspaper?
>>>>>>>>> Am I wrong in assuming that, if you end-up in the news not
>>>>>>>>> looking your best, you're contravening the Code of Conduct?
>>>>>>>> Yes, you are wrong.
>>>>>>> That's up to Telstra.
>>>>>> Nope. Its up to the law.
>>>>> There's a Code of Conduct law?
>>>> There is plenty of law that applys to employment, stupid.
>>> But nothing *specifically* about Codes of Conduct and the contents thereof?
>> Wrong, as always.
> What law specifically deals with Codes of Conduct?
Like I said, there is more than just black letter law involved.
>> And it aint just black letter law that matters anyway.
> How would an Code of Conduct, for argument's sake unenforceable,
> come before a court and be interpreted by the court?
Try that question again in english next time.
> In that case the court would completely ignore the
> Code of Conduct and apply and interpret the law.
But if someone was sacked because of an alleged breach of a
purported code of conduct, that isnt necessarily what would happen.
> You can't rationally argue that a Code of Conduct is both
> a legal irrelevancy AND subject judicial interpretation.
Having fun thrashing that straw man ?
> If I drew up a "Rod Speed Usenet Code of Conduct" and then,
> alleging a breach of the Code, took possession of your car as
> disciplinary action, the court would interpret and apply NSW
> law -- I'd be punished and you'd get your car back.
Irrelevant to what can happen in other circumstances.
> The court wouldn't interpret the "Rod Speed Usenet Code of Conduct".
Irrelevant to what can happen in other circumstances.
And I didnt say anything about any court interpreting any code of conduct anyway.
On Jan 25, 8:56*am, Craig Welch <cr...@pacific.net.sg> wrote:
> "Alan Parkington" <alan.parking...@team.telstra.com> said:
>
> >From
> >http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegrap...105142-5007132,...
>
> >A TELSTRA worker, sacked for taking part in a sex romp at a Sydney hotel
> >after a work Christmas party, has lost the right to receive compensation and
> >get her job back.
>
> Telstra's actions in this case were reprehensible.
>
> --
> Craig * * * * * * * * * * * * *http://www.wazu.jp/
> 1,239 Unicode fonts for 82 written language groups:
> Price your own web plan:http://www.wazu.jp/hosting/
I work for a large company.
We are reminded that during after hours company events, including
friday night drinks at the local pub and the like, we are expected to
behave towards fellow employees in accordance to the company code of
conduct, and also not bring the company into disrepute during such
occaisions.
The Telstra employees involved must have crossed the line and paid the
penalty.
"Craig Welch" <craig@pacific.net.sg> wrote in message
news:jd2ip3l3471cbnn3fq2tt5goog5en3brdg@4ax.com...
> "Alan Parkington" <alan.parkington@team.telstra.com> said:
>
>>From
>>http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegrap...007132,00.html
>>
>>A TELSTRA worker, sacked for taking part in a sex romp at a Sydney hotel
>>after a work Christmas party, has lost the right to receive compensation
>>and
>>get her job back.
>
> Telstra's actions in this case were reprehensible.
"Horry" <horacewachope@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1o3nff4hw9hes.lkr86ycwvhmw.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 21:56:06 GMT, Craig Welch wrote:
>
>> "Alan Parkington" <alan.parkington@team.telstra.com> said:
>>
>>>From
>>>http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegrap...007132,00.html
>>>
>>>A TELSTRA worker, sacked for taking part in a sex romp at a Sydney hotel
>>>after a work Christmas party, has lost the right to receive compensation
>>>and
>>>get her job back.
>>
>> Telstra's actions in this case were reprehensible.
>
> Why? Surely a company is allowed to set standards as to the moral
> character of its employees?
>>> AFAIK, no "Code of Conduct" mentions people having sex outside of
>>> working hours.
>
>> No "Code of Conduct" mentions naked employees smearing animals
>> turds over their body while being photographed for magazines either.
>
> And telstra gets no say what so ever on an employee of theirs doing that
> in their own time.
Apparently, from this case, they think they do get to have that right
> "Horry" <horacewachope@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1o3nff4hw9hes.lkr86ycwvhmw.dlg@40tude.net...
>> On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 21:56:06 GMT, Craig Welch wrote:
>>
>>> "Alan Parkington" <alan.parkington@team.telstra.com> said:
>>>
>>>>From
>>>>http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegrap...007132,00.html
>>>>
>>>>A TELSTRA worker, sacked for taking part in a sex romp at a Sydney hotel
>>>>after a work Christmas party, has lost the right to receive compensation
>>>>and
>>>>get her job back.
>>>
>>> Telstra's actions in this case were reprehensible.
>>
>> Why? Surely a company is allowed to set standards as to the moral
>> character of its employees?
>
> No, it isnt
>>>> AFAIK, no "Code of Conduct" mentions people having sex outside of
>>>> working hours.
>>
>>> No "Code of Conduct" mentions naked employees smearing animals
>>> turds over their body while being photographed for magazines either.
>>
>> And telstra gets no say what so ever on an employee of theirs doing that
>> in their own time.
>
> Apparently, from this case, they think they do get to have that right
> Companies regularly impose conditions on their employees' behaviour
> outside
> working hours. For example, requiring that they be contactable 24/7 and
> remain able to come in to work any time at short notice.
Thats a CONTRACTUAL obligation, not a moral obligation
> Many companies have a "no drugs" policy.
No drugs whilst you are at work, not outside of it
> Why shouldn't a company be able to do likewise respecting sexual
> behaviour?
>> Companies regularly impose conditions on their employees' behaviour
>> outside
>> working hours. For example, requiring that they be contactable 24/7 and
>> remain able to come in to work any time at short notice.
>
> Thats a CONTRACTUAL obligation, not a moral obligation
So WHAT?
>> Many companies have a "no drugs" policy.
>
> No drugs whilst you are at work, not outside of it
Incorrect.
>> Why shouldn't a company be able to do likewise respecting sexual
>> behaviour?
>
> Because its not legal
Horry <horacewachope@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Feb 2008 10:21:50 GMT, Michael wrote:
>
>>>>> AFAIK, no "Code of Conduct" mentions people having sex outside of
>>>>> working hours.
>>>
>>>> No "Code of Conduct" mentions naked employees smearing animals
>>>> turds over their body while being photographed for magazines
>>>> either.
>>>
>>> And telstra gets no say what so ever on an employee of theirs doing
>>> that in their own time.
>>
>> Apparently, from this case, they think they do get to have that right
>
> And, apparently, from this case, they do.
Re: Twist in Telstra sex romp case 
Linear Mode
