b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » XXX » Message 3416976 (Thread)

# No scanner, but the pics are as follows:
-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)
# pretty much
oh and here is an exact copy of the credits they gave:

















(, Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:20, archived)
# Bizarrely,
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)
# Good things will come of it. FACT!
(, Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:24, archived)
# Woo!
Nice to see someeone getting recognition!
(, Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:28, archived)
# Hurrah
(, Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:29, archived)
# what a cunt
(, Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:30, archived)
# "Ponteland"?
That's an odd way to spell Shepherd's Bush.
(, Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:31, archived)
# that's where I'm from
I don't live in London any more
(, Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:33, archived)
# So all the time I've been sitting outside your house
with a butterfly net and a ether-soaked rag
has been wasted?

Damn.
(, Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:35, archived)
# The thing is
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)
# Aye, but
(, Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:28, archived)
# I would guess
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)
# I agree
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)
# Exactly
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)
# absolute bastards!
none of my images appear to fit any of those descriptions ;)
(, Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:29, archived)
# I'm going to complain
none of those images are mine
(, Tue 6 Jul 2004, 9:30, archived)