Notice that the wording on http://www.abc.net.au/reception/news/changes_sa...
has changed to 'comply with court suppression orders' (with a s).It seems to me it sounds permanent and that gives me the right pip!.Once again step by step,inch by inch the police
state marches forward.

This suppression order, that seemingly protects the identity and rights of the plaintiff organisation in favour of suppressing the rights of thousands of ordinary Australians is unconstitutional and an absolute disgrace.

So if it IS still available somewhere else, what's the point of a court suppression order?

Does all this really mean that the evidence before this court might not support the prosecution's case "beyond a shadow of doubt" but they still want a guilty verdict? If so, are they trying to distort the principle of presumption of innocence by doing another Ned Kelly style trial in Victoria? Which case is it anyway, and why does the rest of the country have to put up with this type of gagging to support a doubtful prosecution?

It's time someone with some clout asked the hard questions. We ordinary citizens will just get ignored as usual.

Whilst the services on Optus C1 have been restricted, it is still possible to view the ABC and SBS interchange services on Optus D1 this also includes ABC 2 !!! Hope this is of some assistance!

That is outrageous, and since it inpinges upon my persons viewing of public broadcasting of information OTHER THAN anything about this court case, it is an infringement of my rights as a law-abiding private citizen. Where is the lawyer to push my case (and that of thousands of other citizens) and have this ridiculous, antiquated, colonial-style suppression order lifted and NEVER repeated?
(Whatever happened to Magna Carta?)

Absolutely correct, we arrive indoors on our Station in Western NSW to access the delayed feeds and the box is denied to decode the ones we rely on, especially during daylight saving.