What did the English just do ?
Is this some bad April fools joke ?
Am I reading this correctly ? It has to be a mistake.
I hope it does not mean what I think it does.
This seems to be the ultimate corporate landgrab.
More here on it:
UK Passes Controversial Copyright Act, May Yield a ‘Firestorm’ of Litigation
How dare someone in a foreign country help themselves to my images because some thief posts them without identifying information?
Perhaps we could have a particular page to register these images on the appropriate site? Or could the whole site be registered as somewhere that a diligent search would have to be made first? This makes me really angry.
This sounds like a really nasty bit of asset grabbing. And the worst part is that at present, apparently, not only is an image owner charged for the privilege of registering his/her image, but only one company is responsible for receiving these registrations! Talk about a bottleneck - these politicians are idiots! If the report in the Register is accurate then I think we may need something written-in to the usage agreement on the RGB Stock website to safeguard our images, otherwise owners may feel compelled to withdraw them.
BBC are running the same story: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22337406
UK doesn''t do democracy. I mean, what can you expect from a country that allows outrages against individuals and family units like this...
Secret courts. Criminal convictions without representation or the opportunity to defend oneself.
Legal theft of intellectual property rights is only the tip of the iceberg.
Our low grade and criminally inept politicians are certifiable lunatics and liars.
Welcome to life in the EUSSR.
Does anyone do democracy? Anyway, democracy is mob rule. The only protection is a republic, but the greatest republic on the planet has become a combination democracy/fascist state and is fast spiralling downwards and taking everyone with them.
Fortunately, in this country we don't have to work hard at what we are going to be. We wag our tails and follow any white person who pats us on the head and tells us we're good boys. I stipulate white. This is also the reason we punish refugees. They don't look like us at all.
You could move to the UK and see for yourself what the flip-side of the "they don't look like us at all" coin looks like. Our borders are as porous as a pincushion made out of Swiss cheese that has had all of the cheesy bits nibbled away. The indigenous population of London, one of the largest cities in the world, is now an official minority.
I see problems in a lot of ways, but I do believe in taking in refugees. I believe we need to help people in terrible circumstances.
I was really referring to the fact that it wouldn't matter how helpful or kind China might be to us, even if it wasn't communist, we would still suck up to the white countries in preference because we are inherently racist. Our "White Australia Policy" was shameful - remembering that the Aborigines, whose country it was, were the wrong colour.
This latest garbage re images is just another demonstration of the power of big business to trample on all our rights, and their power to influence or control the politicians who are supposed to represent us.
The treatment of the Aborigines was shameful. While the Chinese are enterprising, hardworking and clever I certainly wouldn't trust their government any more than I'd trust the ones we get saddled with because people who keep voting in the hope of change haven't yet realised they are being conned.
The majority of people in the UK, myself included, don't have a problem with genuine refugees. Nor do we have a problem with people wanting a better life and are willing to work for it and accept their adopted country rather than treating it with contempt and undermining it.
What we do have a problem with is the open door policy that doesn't discriminate the good from the bad, the hate mongers, race hustlers and criminals from those who are genuinely seeking a new start. And then there's the policy of NOT deporting foreign nationals convicted of murder, paedophilia, rape and other violent offences because it would breach their human rights.
That's where the problem lies. The Border Agency has just been disbanded as unfit for purpose. I don't hold out much hope when it is reincarnated as something equally as inept. I just hope it isn't going to be run by G4S.
As for the representation of politicians and those alleged to be their puppet masters I have but one thing to say: there are more of us than there are of them.
Yes, but unless we hit them with sticks, will anything change?
I am appalled at the diatribe I have to read in a forum on a website about photographic (lets be more accurate - vector) images.
Racism is just a smidgeon beneath the surface.
#6 comments in and we are off on a conspiracy followed by at #7 a great take on democracy as being defined as 'mob rule' and refugees not looking like us at all, (I am now at a loss as to what a refugee looks like - facetiously I could suggest 'warthog' but I'll stay nice and give benefit of the doubt = different - Sri Lankan perhaps - so very different), oh it's impossible - where to begin with this - borders, 'our borders' so lets start - take a look at this reference at #8 from weirdvis http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4bd95562-4379-11e2-a48c-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2S29NZzQz (I can't force a link but go back to wv and take a look). What is this Daily Mail garbage all about? Nothing I can figure out that has anything to do with the indigenous population of London being a minority. Dur?
At #9 a bit of big business hate, fine, fabulous, but who and why?
At #10 we score a Chinese stereotype, then a suggestion that wv doesn't have a problem with "genuine refugees" (is there such a thing as a genuine refugee wv - who would it be, let's define them) and the UK has an '"open door policy" - please point to the evidence, and the assertion that foreign nationals aren't deported - again, where's the evidence for this?
There are many forums in which these matters might be discussed.
It is offensive to me that the unsubstantiated, racist, ethnocentric waffle being spouted here on a site about stock photography is allowed to occur. Who mediates this site? Lennie - as CEO - is this what rgbstock is about?
I came to a free stock photographic site to upload images that might be used by many NFP's, for free - basic and simple. If the sort of brazen garbage I just read is what this site is about I will certainly not hold back on representing a humanist opinion, but I re-state, it's not my preference to have to do so.
Dez, hitting them with sticks would be a start. :D
Stephen, don't take this the wrong way but please feel free to leave if this site so offends you. The title of this forum is General Chat. The photography forums are elsewhere. Trying to close down a thread you don't agree with by screaming raaaaacist!!!! is very childish and also libelous. That might work for Guardian readers but it doesn't cut any ice with me.
There is nothing racist about deporting foreign nationals who have committed violent crimes. Not all foreign nationals are African or Asian you see, quite a lot of them are white Europeans or white foreign nationals. And since I mentioned neither skin colour nor ethnicity where do you get off calling me a racist?
You are the one that is spouting brazen garbage and causing offence. Next time perhaps you'll engage your brain before letting your fingers run rampant on your keyboard in fallacious moral outrage.
BTW, if you chose to emit more of your poisonous wibble please be informed that your continuing contribution will be ignored. I only engage in dialogue with adults. You want a discussion on humanism, fine. You engage in ad hominem like your last post and you will be treated with silent contempt.
I believe in free speech. So do Humanists. It is the very core of their existence.
The Oxford Companion to Philosophy defines humanism thus:
"Believing that it is possible to live confidently without metaphysical or religious certainty and that all opinions are open to revision and correction, [Humanists] see human flourishing as dependent on open communication, discussion, criticism and unforced consensus."
So tell me, Stephen, where do you fit into that? Where, in the Humanist creed, does it say you must halt a discussion you don't like by calling people libelous names and appealing to authority to close down a thread in a general forum?
Anyone - particularly those in the UK - can directly petition the UK government if they find this legislation troubling.