Perhaps I missed an important part of this video but I was waiting for something on what kind of legal protection exists already for sacred sites and then for a description and/or for an example of how, more exactly, such existing legal protection does not take into consideration any live community using the site in the present day. I was waiting for this because a lack of reference to these communities when considering laws of protection for these sites seemed to be the target point of the whole time of this video.
Perhaps the video we see here is merely an extract from a much longer video which goes on to give a much fuller explanation of this point? I'm afraid the given links sent me on a circular tour when I tried to find this out. Maybe we are meant to log on to OpenLearn to investigate further but perhaps if a more explanatory part of the video was posted here on the Law Postgraduate Home page it would give quicker access to the missing points and might therefore be of more use to students who are short of time to spend on investigating interests not immediately and obviously relevant to their course.
As it is, this video left me feeling let down that I'd watched an evidently learned professor talk for five minutes (the bar above the heading says 10 minutes, so perhaps there is indeed more than we are shown here) while hinting at something of concern to him and which might have made a point to me about something I'd not considered, but that that point had only been shown as being hinted at when there was presumably so much more in his head than he was being shown as saying!
Nikki Jones, in her comment of 24 March, below, does seem to get the point, or certainly does appear to get a point which makes the video relevant for her. So, something is going on here, it seems. It's just that I'd quite like to know what it is, more exactly please! Thanks.
Rate and Review
Rate this video
Review this video
Log into OpenLearn to leave reviews and join in the conversation.
Video reviews
Perhaps the video we see here is merely an extract from a much longer video which goes on to give a much fuller explanation of this point? I'm afraid the given links sent me on a circular tour when I tried to find this out. Maybe we are meant to log on to OpenLearn to investigate further but perhaps if a more explanatory part of the video was posted here on the Law Postgraduate Home page it would give quicker access to the missing points and might therefore be of more use to students who are short of time to spend on investigating interests not immediately and obviously relevant to their course.
As it is, this video left me feeling let down that I'd watched an evidently learned professor talk for five minutes (the bar above the heading says 10 minutes, so perhaps there is indeed more than we are shown here) while hinting at something of concern to him and which might have made a point to me about something I'd not considered, but that that point had only been shown as being hinted at when there was presumably so much more in his head than he was being shown as saying!
Nikki Jones, in her comment of 24 March, below, does seem to get the point, or certainly does appear to get a point which makes the video relevant for her. So, something is going on here, it seems. It's just that I'd quite like to know what it is, more exactly please! Thanks.