The MN Mail Column - what we think, and what we plan to do next... part 3

I'm no lawyer either but from my limited experience of working in copyright would have thought that the odd extracts that have appeared in various rags would certainly fall under fair use. I can't believe this could possibly be the case for a weekly column made up entirely of extracts from threads, which must surely constitute commercial use (such as is explicitly prohibited in MNHQ's copyright statement). If the copyright statement has any meaning at all then MNHQ could - if they had wanted to - have sent the DM a letter asking them to cease and desist or some such (which in itself would not be particularly expensive or complicated). But I can see that it would make far more sense commercially to allow the column to continue.

As you say though, if it continues to be as startlingly dull as the lunchbox one, it's hard to see any future for it.

SURELY the independent one was written by MNHQ? I had assumed that at the time?

"people were outraged not to have been quoted" some people, I didn't give a toss

I agree with Blu and paranoid about the fact that very similar things have happened many times before - the only difference now is that this is a weekly column (although I doubt that will be the case for long if they're all as jaw-flappingly inane as the one about sandwiches). We can all think of loads of instances of newspaper stories constructed around 'posters on the parenting site Mumsnet...'

And surely (although I'm no lawyer) the fact that this has happened so many times before without MNHQ wheeling out the legal cannons is one of the reasons why their legal position now is pretty tenuous. How would the argument go? 'We never objected before because the publicity was good for the site, but lots of our members hate the Mail so now we're going to vigorously assert our copyright.' Would that fly?

www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/mumsnetrsquos-messageboards-a-snapshot -of-modern-family-life-1712088.html

Is this not the same thing? There are lots of posters names revealed and a number of topics covered or maybe I am missing something

I think the difference Blu, is that you were asked. It does not appear that other MN's are going to be afforded the same luxury

Justabout - my mother doesn't read the DM, but she sits in hairdressers where people may well discuss Mn threads, there have been so many threads where people have talked about overhearing or recognising a MN anecdote.

I can understand why people feel uneasy - actually once, LH DID use an incident from my life in one of her articles, once, that I had posted on MN..(she asked me first) - and I was crossing my fingers that one of the protagonists did not recognise it, and giving myself a sharp reminder that I needed to be v careful when making any reference to anyone else. I understand why people feel uneasy, but I don't think the answer is attempting to ban any journalist from repeating stuf that is already public.

And, no - nothing to do with moldies, it was an ancient incident involving another journalist writing an article about MN and a range of 'alpha posters'. And there have been plenty of minor incidents over the years when people have said 'oi, i said that!' or 'why didn't they include what I said???' in response to reproductions of Mn quotes in the press.

at

okay. Look. This is Mohammed

BOF - .. - / .. ... / .- / -... .. - / -... - .-. .. -. . / .. -. / .. .- .-. - ... .. / -... ..- - / .. - .. ... / .- .-.. ... - / .. .. - .-. - .- -. - / - - / ... - . / .. . - .. .-.. . .-.-.- / -.-. .- -. / -. - ..- / .... .. -.. . / - .... . / - .... .-. . .- -.. ....

oh, I've just been deleted. .

MNHQ - if it helps you've deleted my post with the broken link. Next one has the correct one with the satirical link.

Sighs.

so the latest dull piece of pseudo-journalism is out when?

• .... .. ... / .. ... / . . - - .. -. . / ... - / -... - .-. .. -. . / -. - .--

oh ffs!

that should have read "headline generator"

try again

It was Mrs EB. But not for a couple of years.

read Carrie's post

LadyMuck - thank you for going back to find that post from Justine. I knew I wasn't imagining it! She definitely said that LH has been posting regularly under a different name since she flounced a couple of years ago.

I have good reason for taking a particular interest in this issue and have read the threads carefully and I hate to be accused of lying or at least being misleading.

However, I am amazed I haven't spotted LH under her new posting name. She had a very distinctive style. Like everyone else I am dying to know who she was after the flouncing but I know that name is not going to appear on this thread!

I have lost track of when MNHQ are going to update us on what has been agreed with the DM re. the future of this so-called column. Anyone know?

ah well just like one person's posting a lot is another person's 'sporadic posting',

one person's kind and compassionate is another person's rude and unreasonable. i remember her repeatedly screaming 'vile and disgusting' to me much to my on one thread as she can and i had seen her being measured most other times with others.

some people are so contrary sometimes.

part 3 sorry