Morning all. What's all this about The Daily Mail then? Fucked if I'm buying it to find out.
b3ta.com/board/3416789
A scan coming as we speak, apparently...
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:02,
archived)
A scan coming as we speak, apparently...
still using a scanner made in the stone age, and I need to get a replacement caveman for it
its coming its coming just shush till its ready
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:09,
archived)
its coming its coming just shush till its ready
What are you doing? Recreating it pixel by pixel by hand?
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:21,
archived)
you'd wish this is america... you'd have damage claims and all that and you'd never have to work again if you sued the daily mail
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:22,
archived)
unless it's a 100% original image.
A bit of asking would be nice.
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:24,
archived)
A bit of asking would be nice.
buy it.
if they find out that they sell more because of those spreads with b3ta pics, they might do it more often
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:03,
archived)
if they find out that they sell more because of those spreads with b3ta pics, they might do it more often
than buy a copy of The Daily Mail.
I wonder if they were on the board late last night...
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:04,
archived)
I wonder if they were on the board late last night...
but I'm lazy.
Explain yourself.
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:05,
archived)
Explain yourself.
man and wife team called Paul Daniels and Debbie McGee. They recently bought a lot of shares in Manchester United
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:09,
archived)
just long enough for someone to explain me the pun and provide me with the minimal background needed to understand why it's so controversial and why tickets to hell are being sold? :)
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:11,
archived)
are two kids that got murdered, the blokes face is the guy who murdered them, the ladies face was his missus who helped him out
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:10,
archived)
It's the face of a child killer and his girlfriend shopped onto the faces of his two victims.
How's that?
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:10,
archived)
How's that?
thanks for the explanations..
ok.. i understand the ticketing now :D
We also have such nasty persons here: Marc Dutroux
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:14,
archived)
ok.. i understand the ticketing now :D
We also have such nasty persons here: Marc Dutroux
and his idiot accomplice/girlfriend
superimposed on two of his victims
/taste (forever)
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:11,
archived)
superimposed on two of his victims
/taste (forever)
www.b3ta.com/board/3416317
SSG's a marvel really.
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:18,
archived)
SSG's a marvel really.
stops writing Asylum seekers spread TB stories i'm sure we will all do nothing but kitten pics. Woo to just about everything up this thread
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:10,
archived)
wondering if a daily mail employee was on the board last night scouring for pics to put in today's paper
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:07,
archived)
WE INTERVIEWED THE VICTIM, WHO SAID: 'RWAAAARRRRGH'! MORE ON THIS STORY ON PAGE 7 AFTER WE'VE FINISHED STALKING THE ROYALS
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:17,
archived)
I can't think of anybody at work (that I like) that buys the daily mail. Plus I don't have accss to a scanner for another hor or two.
But the sentiment is there nonetheless.
Oh, and MARNIN' everyone!
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:07,
archived)
But the sentiment is there nonetheless.
Oh, and MARNIN' everyone!
Every picture that people post on here has to have a swear word on it.
It can either
- be hidden and not apprently obvious, so the daily mail have the word "crayon fellating arse pianist" on there unknowingly
or
- have the word "FUCKCUNT" in huge letters over the image in a place where it can't be removed withot spoiling the image.
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:10,
archived)
It can either
- be hidden and not apprently obvious, so the daily mail have the word "crayon fellating arse pianist" on there unknowingly
or
- have the word "FUCKCUNT" in huge letters over the image in a place where it can't be removed withot spoiling the image.
also, i'd be a mite flattered if anyone thought my pictures were good enough to rip-off, but that's just me
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:13,
archived)
but after the flattery had worn off, I would wage holy war on the mail
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:18,
archived)
-Lionel Rich-Tea;
-A beaver with a bazooka;
-Ron Atkinson wearing a KKK hat;
-A grey cat covering the eyes of a beagle;
-A US roadsign with random arrows and the words "good luck" below;
-Two pilots cleaning the windscreen of their plane;
-The upskirt view of the Statue of Liberty that won a challenge a few weeks back;
-A dog eating with (perhaps) chopsticks;
-Two babies pointing at each other;
-A baby eating a black cat;
-An astronaut with no pants on;
-The "you can take the boy out of Liverpool ..." Rooney picture;
-Some kids looking up a piper's kilt;
-A mouse doing a Mission Impossible harness scene for cheese;
-A man looking for a turkey that's pretending to be a lamp.
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:17,
archived)
-A beaver with a bazooka;
-Ron Atkinson wearing a KKK hat;
-A grey cat covering the eyes of a beagle;
-A US roadsign with random arrows and the words "good luck" below;
-Two pilots cleaning the windscreen of their plane;
-The upskirt view of the Statue of Liberty that won a challenge a few weeks back;
-A dog eating with (perhaps) chopsticks;
-Two babies pointing at each other;
-A baby eating a black cat;
-An astronaut with no pants on;
-The "you can take the boy out of Liverpool ..." Rooney picture;
-Some kids looking up a piper's kilt;
-A mouse doing a Mission Impossible harness scene for cheese;
-A man looking for a turkey that's pretending to be a lamp.
oh and here is an exact copy of the credits they gave:
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:20,
archived)
they've included unshopped, clearly copyrighted pictures (such as the pilots, and the kids looking up the piper's kilt) without any credit whatsoever. I sincerely hope the picture agencies involved string 'em up.
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:23,
archived)
with a butterfly net and a ether-soaked rag
has been wasted?
Damn.
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:35,
archived)
has been wasted?
Damn.
the people who shopped those pics probably didn't give any credit to their original source, so they have no right to complain about not getting credit themselves.
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:27,
archived)
they have some kind of prior-agreed deal with news agancies like Reuters and stuff.
They are porbably also smart enough to know what they can get away with printing and what they can't.
Failing that, they will have more legal muscle than your average person off the street anyway - copyright is only any use if you can prove it in court.
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:30,
archived)
They are porbably also smart enough to know what they can get away with printing and what they can't.
Failing that, they will have more legal muscle than your average person off the street anyway - copyright is only any use if you can prove it in court.
I don't see what the fuss is about. I'd be pretty pleased to see a pic in the paper, regardless whether it was the mail or not.
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:31,
archived)
I have noticed recently that the people who had pictures 'stolen' by the papers were actually quite happy about it.
(,
Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:32,
archived)