I’ve just read on Twitter that a guy I follow, Martin MacDonald, took some pictures of the wildfires in Lochalsh. (Not the ones used in this peace which came from Googling.)
He posted them on his Twitter feed and soon got this tweet from the “Scottish” Sun.
Mr MacDonald replied in the negative:
Sorry, no.
___________
No equivocation there. Just plain and simple NO. Even a moron could have understood.
So what do you think the Sun did?
Yep, you’d be right.
They deleted their original tweet asking for permission and used Mr MacDonald’s photographs anyway.
Is there anything he can do?
I’ll be honest I would absolutely refuse to allow one of these Tory rags to use any picture I had taken unless the payment was in four figures. However, I’d make an exception in the case of the immoral, disgusting Sun, Scottish or not. For them, I would require a seven-figure sum!
Why do these newspapers not have reporters any more? Why, as this fire has been raging for some time, have the “Scottish” Sun not got a reporter or photographer there in Skye taking photographs and asking locals how they are coping, talking to the Police and Medical and Fire Services?
Why do they just steal other people’s stuff?
__________________
MUNGUIN'S NEW REPUBLIC 
I’d imagine the photographs are Martin’s property, and therefore the sun has stolen them.
On the other hand could the sun argue they were already in the public domain?
Or more likely, they can afford more lawyers, and don’t care.
LikeLike
Yes, I suppose they could do that. But why then ask his permission to make money out of them?
LikeLike
This happened to my daughter a few years ago. We threatened the offender with court action for breach of copyright and they immediately stumped up without question. £400 as I remember.
LikeLike
I hope Mr. MacDonald is seeing his lawyer soon – as in tomorrow morning.
The Sun made – must have made – a calculation about the likelihood of being sued over this, and the size of any likely award against them – for breach of copyright, would it be? It would please me greatly – that is easy for me to say, of course, as it would be Mr. MacDonald who would have to suffer through the experience – if the Sun were to be legally obliged to pay him a truly punitive amount in compensation.
Our appalling meeja – both dead-tree and broadcast, really – are a plague and a scourge on us all … the only way to exert any leverage over them is through their wallets, as they have no shame or decency.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t know Mr MacDonald personally, but I would love to see him handsomely recompensed for his pictures and their theft.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Update: They have taken the pictures down.
LikeLike
But that’s what the page looked like.
LikeLike
I’m putting this up in this post because I doubt anyone will see it in the post that it concerns, which is the one about Ruth and the intimidating man who was harassing her and following her with barking dogs.
He’s demanding a retraction and an apology. He’s getting a hard time for supposedly harassing a pregnant woman and he’s not a happy man.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Having Truthie and Kezia in court over defamation of character? Where do I donate money?
LikeLiked by 4 people
Yep. It’s been suggested that if he needs funds he should set up a page.
We’ll happily contribute and give it publicity.
She is quite appalling. She doesn’t do constituencies; apparently she doesn’t reply to letters; she only does interviews with the press when she wants to and it seems that you can’t even talk to her in the street without being accused of harassing a pregnant lady.
She is, however, always available to do some mine clearance in Afghanistan (part of the day job of the leader of the opposition in Scotland, I presume) or to be on bake off programmes.
She’s ex-BBC so she gets an even easier ride from them than the average Tory.
Oh for the days of Annabel Goldie. Even if I didn’t agree with her on most things, she was a proper leader and a proper politician… and incidentally, when I spoke to her, she couldn’t have been more helpful and polite.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Conan
How many bawbees you
Got stashed you old miser
You
LikeLiked by 1 person
Not that many with six grandchildren.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Dammit. He is not just more erudite and wise, the Librarian has two more grandchildren that I!
Life is so unfair 😉
LikeLiked by 3 people
Just found out his wee dugs are called Saor and Alba. Worth another tenner.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Yep
LikeLike
Off topic , here is a link to the First Ministers interview on Politico.EU from the 28th when she turned up in Brussels without the knowledge of the Westminster cabal . Its a long interview https://www.politico.eu/article/nicola-sturgeon-uks-brexit-position-unsustainable/
LikeLiked by 3 people
Thanks Ricky. I’ll save it for tomorrow then.
LikeLike
Can’t wait !
LikeLiked by 1 person
You gonna come and watch it with me?
LikeLike
Managed to catch that interview while it was still going out, then went back and listened to it again up to the point where I came in – and then all the way through to the end again.
We are very lucky to have as FM a politician who is of such evident sincerity. No wonder the Unionists so hate, loathe and despise her.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yep, I think that’s true. She answers questions. She doesn’t bluster and she sticks to her principles.
Ruth, on the other hand, seems to have a “position of the day” on most stuff.
LikeLike
That’ll be irony 😆
LikeLike
Is that a no, then?
LikeLike
The BBC once warned me that I was using one of their copyright photographs on my website, I quickly informed them that I had taken the photo and had the EXIF information to prove it.
They came back saying Mrs. JMF (my wife) had posted it on one of their articles and in doing that transferred all permissions and copyrights to them.
I wrote back reiterating my earlier statement and in addition, if I found they had used in it the past or in the future I would be suing them. There was no reply.
Moral of the story. Be careful where you post your pictures you may giving away your rights and open yourself to have to pay a fee or be sued for displaying your own photograph.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Ujnbelievable, though true! How the heck did we get ourselves into a fix like that?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Maybe the ‘j’ was unnecessary? Oh for an edit feature around here!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Disney, mostly.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Jings… Someone needs to look into that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
We allow the meeja machine to get away with far too much – and before anyone cries “censorship!”, swimming in a sea of disinformation, advertorials, misinformation, distortion, bias, spin, lies blatant and lies covert, connived-at cover-ups and airbrushings out of history, deliberate failures to report certain types of news – that’s not freedom of speech.
So let’s sue the pants off them whenever a proper casus belli presents itself. I’m in for a crowdfunder.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Your question about the lack of any journalists raises issues too.
Media reports what is seen on social media which somehow becomes “news”, other than that “news” consists of press releases from political parties and government institutions.
Good old investigative journalism involving people getting out from behind a desk and asking questions, taking pictures etc etc does not seem to happen.
Even the BBC posts street shots from Google instead of going to visit, and they can hardly claim they are underfunded.
The whole system is rotten to the core. Media corporations afraid of upsetting their advertisers or the establishment.
It is a case of “Don’t rock the boat, just take the pay cheque”.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I agree, Sandy. Few actually do real journalism these days.
It’s all about making as much money as possible as quickly as possible, and in some cases it’s about doing your best to get one of their tacky little baubles.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Saying No is the wrong approach. Instead say Yes, my fee is £20,000 per picture. If they then go on to publish anyway, that’s implied consent they accept your fee and you can invoice for it. Much easier to sue for non-payment than to try and prove breach of Copyright as I understand it.
LikeLiked by 7 people
Yes, that’s definitely the best idea.
Thank you for your request. I’m pleased to inform you that you may use the photographs for a fee of £*****.
Use of the photographs will be taken as an acceptance of these terms. Please private me for my account number.
Kind regards.
LikeLike
This is a beautiful place. I am quite astonished that there are only 2410 people of sense in the Universe.
Just saying.
LikeLiked by 3 people
That many?
LikeLiked by 2 people
eddjasfreeman
Apparently.
Quite astonishing really.
And you, dear sir are among that host!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m honoured.
LikeLiked by 1 person
LOL Small and Bijou!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bijou, moi?
LikeLiked by 1 person
A wee jewel!
LikeLiked by 1 person
OK. It is hard to be in a tiny minority that has right on it’s side. It is harder yet to be bijou. Which I thought referred to tiny houses that were otherwise pretty.
The point trispw is that you appear to run a counter-cultural site here, one that I completely admire.
It is a privilege to be allowed to comment here. I find knowledge through folk I would never otherwise have met. Your friends, and now mine, appear to span the globe. Quite surreal perhaps?
Quite how you did that is a mystery wrapped in an enigma.
It may be a slow burn, but I’d assume that people excited by your agenda may become a majority over time.
You, and Mark Frankland, are kind of my hero’s.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Mark Frankland is one of my heroes too.
Now there’s a man we can all admire, even if we aren’t of the same political views. The work he does in Dumfries is amazing.
LikeLike
Edit:
You and Mark Frankland are my kind of hero’s.
Edit over.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think it was Wings who said, when they ask, say ‘OK, that’ll be £100,000’, then that’s a contract if they use it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, they are unlikely to ever want mine, but if they do, I’m on that like a rash.
Munguin could do with £100,000 to stock his wine cellar up.
LikeLiked by 1 person