The difference is that at least donations are (supposed to be?) listed and tracable, and can be scrutinized if necessary.
Compare it with the sort of corruptino you find in countries like india, and china, where you _have_ to give money to the official to get your paper signed to do somethign that ordinarily you should'nt have to (e.g., may be you'd like to open a car import/export business. you'd be paying quite a few visites to gov't officials with expensive gifts or unmarked bills).
Takes a little bit of epistemology to make sure that what you think you perceive is in fact what is really going on (how do I know what I know?). Corruption may be going on all around people, but they see it as "business as usual" or it's built into the "lawful" system, so isn't perceived as corrupt (though it is visible).
Some people expect a certain amount of "low-level" (harmless?) corruption, so reserve their identification of corruption to particular visible or impactful events.
It's yet to be seen what his involvement is, but his whole involvement in this case has reeked of ass-covering and distancing. It'll be interesting to see the outcome of this inquiry.
The copyright lobby and elements of the USG were able to apply to pressure to a few individuals, but after the back helicopters that sense of outrage and strong internal systems are kicking in hard.
NZ should never have gone along with it - just trying to please the US.
So, there is some hope!
The fact that New Zealand is looking into this is proof that democracy is working there.
Or is this supposed to be some kind of hip/ironic comment suggesting... what, that the US is going to invade NZ?
This is an example of why political articles foster commentary that is... less than stellar.
Copyright stuff is small potatoes compared to the US Navy.
And yet... they didn't get invaded, did they?
Hand waving makes for poor, ill-informed debate.