The police department that investigates 'bad cops' would not want those 'bad cops' to see that they were being investigated / followed (and / or the number plates of the cars belonging to the investigators).
I have done some work on ALPR systems for law enforcement outside of the US (as I also designed some AEI and digital image processing systems).
Even the police here had concerns about privacy.
An issue that delayed the implementation was that the ALPR system would also record covert police vehicles, which the covert police departments did not like anyone having access to.
No problem, supply a list and those plates will be excluded from capture.
But that would require the covert police department to publish a current list of all its plate numbers, which it also did not want to do...
[Note: This system was not publicly accessible, nor even accessible by your 'average policeman'. Access is very strictly controlled and monitored. Even the developers did not have access to the 'real' data.]
Read the first report, this is a tabbacco company suing the local distributor of their product for putting legally required stickers on packs (imported into Australia).
Why don't they just reprint the pack so the logo is not covered? (they have had 5 years to do so)
Is putting a label with the percentage of each ingredients and RDI on the pack also trademark infringement?
What about labels for localised promotional competitions?
How about warnings that the product may contain nuts, dairy or other ingredients you may be allergic too?
What about a pharmacy/doctor that puts stickers (with dose, patient etc) over the brand on medicine bottles?
Tabacco is a restricted product in Australia (selling tabacco to a under 18's is a very large fine) and can not even be diplayed in shops. So only after purchase will the logo be seen.
For decades there has been no tabacco advertising allowed on TV.
For 5 years the 100% of the back panel and 25% of the front of all tabacco products has been a graphic warning.
For the last year tabacco products can not be displayed in shops (hidden inside cabinets).
Recently cigarettes had to meet fire hazard standards (must self extinguish).
Soon all the packs will have to be blank, except for the warning.
Clearly the tabacco industry knows this will harm their business and are fighting back (by trying to set an obtuse legal precident).
BTW a pack of 25 costs US$15 - US$20 in Australia, due to massive taxes.
Because Australia has full public health care, paid for by the Australian tax-payers (and 1/4 of all Australian tabacco users need expensive health care at some point).
"Furthermore, as someone born to Indian parents, I also fear for this new rule because of the recent spate of violence against people of Indian descent in Australia that has often been willfully ignored by the officials; as a lot of Indian people probably look like "terrorists", this sort of harassment (often violent) will now effectively be officially condoned. Truly sickening."
Much of this is an Indian media beat up (similar to the Australian media beat up of the Commonwealth Games).
Did the Indian media mention these murders of Indian nationals?
Did the Indian media report that all were later found to be committed by Indians nationals?
Jyoti Mehta and Ujalla Dinesh murdered 5 March 2008 by Indian national.
Ranjodh Singh murdered December 29 2009 by another 2 Indian nationals.
Navdeep and Kawaldeep Singh murdered February 11 2010 by another Indian national.
Gurshan Singh Channa murdered 3rd March 2010 by Indian national.
I can not work in the rail industry for another 12 months, an industry in which I have a decade of experience with the specialised systems, locations and equipment (trackside and rollingstock).
I know that the 2 year NC agreement would not stand up in court.
BUT the companies in the local rail sphere all know each other and are not willing to risk annoying my previous boss (in case he then refuses to do all those 'extra' little customer service tasks for free).
Most annoying is that I did most of those 'extras'....
I develop bespoke asset protection and safety systems for mining operations.
No one sues if something goes wrong because the companies know these new systems save them money in the long run, even if the system makes the odd error.
Companies that produce buggy systems quickly disappear as word travels very quickily.
Any company knows if it sues one supplier (for bugs in one of these new systems) it will no longer be able to buy from any supplier or will pay much more for these systems (as the suppliers will factor in the cost of possible litigation with that company).