Escorts on T.V. tonight

[dreamer]

The term is "fair usage" -- but it essentially applies to coverage of "news." The segment Ms. Van Den Bosch did was hardly "news," but rather a "ratings booster," a marketing tool designed to help the station sell advertising -- or increase revenues. In other words, to make money.

It is referred as fair usage or fair dealings

Honestly, I doubt you would have much luck with the courts

She does not need your permission to do a story, and she can include you since you are the subject of the story.

Most lawsuits with the media are mostly about slander.

 

[JoyfulC]

Our daughter worked for a TV news station, doing production, for about a year and a half while in university. Her opinion was that they were dancing dangerously close to the line on this one, and may have gone over. Our daughter has encouraged us to get a lawyer. People often get away with a lot until it's challenged.

That said, a lawsuit isn't going to satisfy me. I'm not a huge believer that lawsuits settle much. For me, it's a matter of woman-to-woman.

How can women expect other people to respect our consent when we can't even respect each other's? This woman had every opportunity to ask me or at least mention to me that she planned to use my content this way. I never heard a word from her about it. She took what she wanted and what she thought she could use.

The thing too is that, there are a wealth of viewpoints out there. Like Alexa, I'd prefer not to be exploited by a local news show. But other agencies or independents might have viewed it as a promotional opportunity. So why not ask? Why not deal with those that consent?

I can't figure out if she was malicious (because I refused to do an interview with her -- although I refused politely and gave my reasons) or whether she just figures the rules of courtesy don't apply to her.

..c..

 

[JoyfulC]

Re: qwerty

Is the material really copyrighted? There is no notice.

Did you see where it says:

2004 © Joyful Spirit Entertainment
All content--photos, graphics, videos & text--are the property of Joyful Spirit Entertainment,
and are not to be used without written permission.​

intellectual property, such as ideas for patents, once published in the public domain, are no longer patentable. A copyright notice is required on literary works and you should probably have a registration to go along with it.

So according to what you've written here, if I decide to pirate some of Porsche's web video footage for use in my ads, it's legal? Or music from any ad in public domain?

I think you don't understand how this works.

It seems to me that something active needs to be done regarding protecting pics on the internet, which is a worldwide instantaneous publication. If there is no notice or lockdown how does anyone know that the material was'nt just published for the benefit of the world at large?

A "lockdown" isn't necessary -- if someone wants to take someone else's content, they can -- but not legally.

And with the right technology, it can be nearly impossible to lock down content. As in real life, if someone is determiend to break and enter, there's not much that will deter them.

Thieves are thieves. On the internet, it's probably better just to expose them as such -- and thereby rob them of the benefits of stealing -- than to wade through the legal process.

..c..

 

[dreamer]

Our daughter worked for a TV news station, doing production, for about a year and a half while in university. Her opinion was that they were dancing dangerously close to the line on this one, and may have gone over. Our daughter has encouraged us to get a lawyer. People often get away with a lot until it's challenged.

the fair use explanation is certainly one that walks a fine line, you never know how a court will decide

I did not see the story so I cannot comment on how they used your pics

 

[JoyfulC]

Neither the photos nor the video clip they used was essential to the story -- it was just production filler. And I'm sure they could have found local businesses with web sites that would have been delighted to consent to have their material used.

..c..

 

[DSmed]

Is there a suitably public forum such as a letter to the editors of say the Sun that might give you an opportunity for equal time? I'd suggest an email to the station like they show occaisonally at the end of the news, but I can't see them airing their own dirty laundry.

 

[too2shy]

I think we should all cut Max a break due to his enormous work in the community & his recent cancer treatments.

ah hell max is great. me and him always down drinks and eat those appetizers while we stare at the hotties at the functions we bump into each other at. who cares if he's a lush. fuck when i'm that old. i wanna be dead. if i aint. drunk will have to do.

 

[Mr. K]

Copyright was quite clear on site...

This isn't a case of "fair use."

At the bottom of Christine's home page it clearly states:

2004 © Joyful Spirit Entertainment
All content--photos, graphics, videos & text--are the property of Joyful Spirit Entertainment,
and are not to be used without written permission.

Each additional page on the site has the "2004 © Joyful Spirit Entertainment" at the bottom.

I bet that the individual responsible for this never thought that Christine would raise a fuss. She needs to be taught an important lesson. You should file a complaint with the station, the CRTC, etc...

Oh, and Happy Birthday, Christine!

 

[dreamer]

Re: Copyright was quite clear on site...

This isn't a case of "fair use."

At the bottom of Christine's home page it clearly states:

2004 © Joyful Spirit Entertainment
All content--photos, graphics, videos & text--are the property of Joyful Spirit Entertainment,
and are not to be used without written permission.

Each additional page on the site has the "2004 © Joyful Spirit Entertainment" at the bottom.

I bet that the individual responsible for this never thought that Christine would raise a fuss. She needs to be taught an important lesson. You should file a complaint with the station, the CRTC, etc...

Oh, and Happy Birthday, Christine!

sorry, yes it is an example of fair use, or at least the TV station thinks it is

now the courts may decide the TV station went beyond fair use in their coverage

fair use is an exception to the copyright laws, it does not matter whether or not a copyright warning is present

 

[Jabba]

Power to the people

Too2Shy:
"ah hell max is great. me and him always down drinks and eat those appetizers while we stare at the hotties at the functions we bump into each other at. who cares if he's a lush. fuck when i'm that old. i wanna be dead. if i aint. drunk will have to do."

Max isn't above using whatever influence he can to weedle juice out of a stone.
The CJOH gang are a collection of Carleton School of Journalism boneheads who have an infantile interest in sniffing other people underwear. Kinda' disgusting methinks.
I think we have enough numbers and power and money to influence the advertisers. After all, they are the biggest customers of this industry too.

 

[southstreet]

What makes me sick..

...and believe me when I say I know what I'm talking about with CJOH, is the fact that if you run a nursing home, the only thing you need to make your bingo night hit the 6:00 pm news is the fact that 'ole Max or JJ or Natalie or another of those hacks be invited to be chief bingo-caller.

...and f*** this shit about "lay off Max - he's done good work." If the CJOH and other journalists pointed their guns at their own once in awhile instead of only those they "deem" worthy of coverage, do you really think the lives of Max, Mansbridge, etc. would survive the scrutiny? Come on. Their double standard is so blatant, it deserves an ovation.

Sorry guys, as these schmucks have so often said "If you're in the public eye, the public has a right to know." Well, I'd love for some of their own public personalities to ante up.

 

[Ross Eyerie]

Re: Power to the people

Too2Shy:
"ah hell max is great. me and him always down drinks and eat those appetizers while we stare at the hotties at the functions we bump into each other at.

I thought the rumor was that Max Keeping was a little light in his loafers?? When you mean "hotties" do you mean "guys"?

Just curious.

 

[too2shy]

Re: Re: Power to the people

I thought the rumor was that Max Keeping was a little light in his loafers?? When you mean "hotties" do you mean "guys"?

Just curious.

uh no. lol. supposedly he does walk the other side.. but it doesn't seem to stop him from checking out good looking women. maybe he's bi?? dunno. dont care. he's aite in my books.

 

[slyjohn]

yawn.....

Anyone for Rigeau tonight?

Sly

 

[slyjohn]

I stop going there .... did they clean up a bit?

I was there the week before they got shot at ... and a few times right after... living on the edge.. yeah.

 

[OnTheWayOut]

slyjohn

Too bad I didn't see your post in time, I haven't been to Rigaud for a while .......

BTW, it was Frontierre that was shot up, not Hilltop.

 

[JoyfulC]

Re: What makes me sick..

Sorry guys, as these schmucks have so often said "If you're in the public eye, the public has a right to know." Well, I'd love for some of their own public personalities to ante up.

Yep, that's what I wonder about too. Some of the sleaziest people I've met since I've been in the business are news reporters. I figure they'd make a way better story than the rest of us.

But who exposes the people who do exposées?

Originally posted by JPsoHOT

WOW this whole thread is a lil much at this point. 7 pages of jargin over nothing. If your copyrights have been infringed upon then call a lawyer ASAP.

Its almost been a few days and most people have forgoten all about it already.
By next Monday most people won't even remember what was on the news this week yet alone what was on the nite before.

What? Do you work for CJOH? Another news agency? You sound suspiciously like an apologist.

There's really no excuse. I've since learned that **other** escorts and agencies were asked for permission to use content off their sites -- but I was never asked. How do you explain that?

I figure the sleazy reporter wanted to use my stuff and knew I wouldn't give permission -- so she didn't bother to ask.

There are a lot of sites in Ottawa that weren't used. There is no legitimate excuse for her using content off my site when I'd already made it quite clear to her that I did not wish to be involved. My content wasn't essntial to her story.

She's just a lowlife -- that's all.

..c..

 

[JoyfulC]

JP, you're probably right about a lot of this -- but there is a code between women. And this scummy woman (Van Den Bosch) violated that code. No means no -- and I told her explicitly no.

She claims she didn't need to ask my permission, but I've since learned that she asked some other people's permission to use content off their sites. So what gives? We were in communication -- it's not like there was any impediment to her asking me. I think she just knew I'd say no.

I agree, there's no such thing as bad publicity. That said, I don't really need any publiciity -- I do a pretty good job getting business all on my own.

I don't buy the explanation that when I posted a web site, I was asking for it.

More and more, this is starting to sound like rape defense -- "your honour, she was dressed in such a way as to invite it!"

If it was a man who did this, I might be a little more tolerant -- but a woman should have known better. There's no excuse for a woman to do this to another woman.

..c.

 

[Jabba]

Women's code?

JP, you're probably right about a lot of this -- but there is a code between women. And this scummy woman (Van Den Bosch) violated that code. No means no -- and I told her explicitly no.
...

If it was a man who did this, I might be a little more tolerant -- but a woman should have known better. There's no excuse for a woman to do this to another woman.

..c.

JoyC -
There is actually a code of conduct for women???
That's quite a concept. Who agreed to the rules? Can you tell me more?

 

[Metoo4]

Yhea there is a code of conduct for women, everybody know this!
It goes like this:
1- Bitching and backstabbing are acceptable against other women.
2- Bitching and backstabbing are also acceptable against guys who she dislike.
3- Bitching and backstabbing are also acceptable against guys who she used to like or love but are now turned into monsters, no matter if they did on their own or they got help from her.
4- Bitching and backstabbing are also acceptable against guys that are only monsters in her eyes or her female friend's eyes, no matter if everybody else like them.
5- Bitching and backstabbing are also acceptable against her female friends who don't see the same "monsters" as she does. No need to stop seeing those ladied as friends because they follow the same rules as her so they expect to be backstabbed.
6- Bitching and backstabbing are also acceptable against her female friends who see the same "stud" as they do if those female friends are flirting him even if she intended to flirt him herself, without telling their female friends of course. Her female friends should, like everybody else, read her mind and know her intention so, they should have stayed away. Same as previous point, no effect on friendship.

Ok, i feel like stirring shit today... I love to tease ladies! I know you girls are not like that... Well, most are not... Some are... Well...