pwc

It is an interesting question. According to AVHerald the tail number for this plane is N772UA:

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n772ua

... so it looks like it’s been flying at least for the last week.

To be eligible for the scheme, the proposed bill requires annual revenues of at least[0] $150,000 (amongst other things), so I imagine it would exclude most independent-journalist-running-a-blog situations

[0] see section 52G of the draft bill - https://www.accc.gov.au/focus-areas/digital-platforms/news-m...

> At least according to FOI laws I'm vaguely familiar with (in Australia), an FOI request can only be made for an item of information that is known to exist. People can't go on "fishing expeditions" for, say, all communications between nominated people over a nominated period of time.

Interestingly I don't think this is 100% true - under (for example) the federal FOI Act I think a request framed as asking for "email sent on government systems between Alice and Bob in the last six months" would be facially valid, if Alice and Bob were civil servants (although of course exemptions may apply to individual emails).

Here's an (Australian) FOI request that is similar in spirit to your example:

https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/philip_gaetjens_the_l...

which asks for "any emails contained in all of Philip Gaetjens’ outlook items (including deleted items) that contain any of the following terms (in the body of an email and/or in the addressee fields of an email): “liberal.org.au” or “ipa.org.au”", and the department deemed that a valid request. (Philip Gaetjens is a senior civil servant, the Liberals are a political party and the IPA is a right-leaning think tank; it's reasonable to infer that the fishing here is for evidence of a link between the civil service and a particular side of politics.)

It looks like, in England and Wales at least, there are a few sections that are yet to be repealed:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/Edw1cc1929/25/9

Sections I, IX, XXIX as well as some front- and end-matter seem to remain in force.

Of course while the Magna Carta is most famously associated with England, it forms part of the law of many former colonies, for example here:

http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/vic/conso...

shows section XXIX remains law in Victoria, Australia - I imagine the case is similar in various other places.

Sounds like the book might have been Inside the Soviet Army:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inside_the_Soviet_Army

http://militera.lib.ru/research/suvorov12/index.html

You can download the 2013 Senate below-the-line preferences from here:

http://results.aec.gov.au/17496/Website/SenateDownloadsMenu-...

(Down the bottom, under “State Below the Line Preferences”)

I think those files, plus the above-the-line preferences should be enough to re-do the AEC's calculation... I would be interested to know if anyone had ever tried that.