AIBU to think that MN are letting us down?

[MsHarry]

I have really enjoyed MN in the past, both for advice and sometimes for a laugh or a debate. I don't use other social media and feel I can express myself more freely amongst mostly other women and within the relative anonymity that a username provides. However in recent months i have seen thread after thread appear in the Daily Fail and now The Mirror and a live conversation on ITV's Loose Women!! Some of the subject matter is sensitive and could give OPs away. I know it's a public forum but sharing on here is not the same as publishing in a newspaper or an interview on TV . AIBU to expect a forum like MN, that used to feel pro women, to do more about this?

I personally don't mind thread stealing. I think its fair game but I also accept I've never put anything very personal on here.

An expert who's not taking very good care to get the details right today!

honestly it would be really tricky for mumsnet to act. It would be more realistic for a poster to act and for mumsnet to cooperate/offer support.

Oh you really do want to know!

It's quite boring really. If a claim is worth less than £10,000 there is a small claims court for these matters. No big costs orders.

It was set up to help photographers who have an image taken, that sort of thing. link follows.

People put way too much info on the internet. Everything is there forever so think about it. With mumsnet don't put anything too personal and name change a lot. I've been on here years but I namechange every thread (will do again after this thread). Just be careful. FB, twitter, instagram, mumsnet, none of it is really private.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/media_requests

Just noticed this. In answer to posters asking what I expect MN to do, I guess an open request for information with prior disclosure of their intention of writing an article using the content.

It is a PUBLIC forum - the online equivalent of loudly telling your business in the pub!

Journalists have ALWAYS got lines on stories from gossip, leaflets, overhearing things - this is just the modern equivalent.

Wanting a change to this I kinda understand BUT I think it's unrealistic to attempt to control the WORLD WIDE web. The technology would be a nightmare to design/implement even in supposedly closed countries like North Korea and China they haven't managed it.

Honestly this is why schools and youth organisations end up teaching children Internet safety because too many parents are clueless.

None of the reasons you give for THINKING you had an expectation of privacy make ANY sense.

In addition nobody is FORCING you to use mn. It's a choice, just as its a choice to use FB, Google or email (also NOT private btw - think that will come as a shock to op)

A choice to read, post on, post truthfully on mn. Choices have consequences - most adults get that.

I'm also surprised you think loose women is live or remotely credible journalistically speaking! It's a fluff show.

Weezol I've had "interesting" conversations with my mother re loyalty cards which she is convinced are purely to encourage you to shop at that shop. But yet she won't even use phone banking because "I don't want my bank details on some computer somewhere" - no amount of evidence I've shown her will convince her THEY ARE ALREADY on some computer somewhere. She's in her late 60's though and not a tech type person. I'm also bewildered by those 50 and under who are shockingly naive about the Internet.

The content also - makes NO difference legally! And actually on Reddit people post just as personal info if not more so.

www.gov.uk/government/publications/intellectual-property-enterprise-court-a-guide-to-small-claims

It would be really good fun if someone did start a case. I think they would win if the lifting was significant and there was no real reporting of current events exception. It's reasonably low stress - you could do it yourself without a lawyer.

We could also all put up copyright notices warning that our content was for use on mumsnet and in mumsnet products only (I think we license mumsnet to quote us in their books, etc). That would kill off any implied licence argument.

I may set up a sideline!

Oh Graphista are you lonely up there in your ivory tower?

"Just noticed this. In answer to posters asking what I expect MN to do, I guess an open request for information with prior disclosure of their intention of writing an article using the content."

But that's what you expect the journalist to do. What do you expect MN to do to prevent the DM lifting stories from MN threads? You claim that MN is letting us down, after all; what should they be doing differently, given that they don't own the copyright in your posts and have no legal standing to stop the DM publishing them?

Well as I now know tragic , MN don't own the copyright. When I started the thread I didn't so I rather naively wasn't aware it was acceptable to lift threads. I am absolutely clueless as others have told me, don't worry yourself with this thread, why don't you go out and do something less boring instead?

It will be interesting to see how GDPR will effect this behaviour - if they have no right to the information and no legal purpose then they shouldn't be gathering and disseminating if you can work your way back easily to the person involved - even if they have published it - unless you have their explicit permission (and situations of duress are taken into account)

Ivory tower? I think you need to learn the meaning of the words and phrases you use BEFORE you use them.

I'm FAR from in an ivory tower I just understand - as do MANY others proven on this and NUMEROUS other threads on the subject - that the Internet is not private.

Fwiw I'm a disabled Lp on benefits - ivory tower indeed!

What is GDPR?

Your moral high ground is what I meant Garphista .

No not moral high ground I just have basic common sense regarding how the Internet works - as do most other people

Ivory tower refers to ignorance of what life is like for most due to being in a position of privilege.

General Protection Data Regulation.

A rather important change in the law coming in soon.

How awful for you to realise that perhaps other don't have your common sense or insight. Why bother with this thread if it is sooo exasperating?
I am asking a genuine question. I am able to do that as far as I'm aware.

And I answered that question as did several others and you basically called me a snob!

I assume MN have given permission because the source material is from their website and MN say

This Web site and its contents are copyright Mumsnet, all rights reserved. Reproduction of all or any substantial part of the contents in any form is prohibited. No part of the site may be distributed or copied for any commercial purpose without express approval.

So MNHQ, did you give permission for this story to be run on TV here and in Australia and in print/online media? Were you contacted?

www.eugdpr.org/gdpr-faqs.html

Thanks ilovesooty

So MN does own the copyright Cotswold ?

Maybe that is why they have not responded to me.

Graphista Yup, only my loyalty card/FB etc conversations have been with people in their early 20's to people in their 50's.

Funnily enough, those that berated me for not joining FB and not banking on line (because it was incovenient for them) have gone all quiet recently.

I have had an advantage though, I worked on the fringes of tech in the period that the internet grew widespread. And I'm pretty cynical when it comes to getting things that are on the surface 'free'.

I do enjoy marketing algorithms though. The internet seems to pretty sure I'm a middle aged man with small children and an interest in car parts. I know why it thinks that (I look up historical events, use MN and bought a new set of masonry drill bits) but none of these assumptions is correct.