To point out that starting a thread with a negative comment about the Daily Mail does nothing to stop them?

[HennyPennyHorror]

People keep starting threads with "The Daily Mail are Wankers" and so on in the hope that it will somehow stop them using their thread as "news"

It does nothing. They just fish the bits out that they want to use and ignore the defamatory comments.

They don't copy and paste entire threads you know.

Even a user name like "DailyMailArses" will just result in them saying "A mumsnet user says she hates her neighbour because..."

So stop it.

I don’t understand why people post it either. If I was a so called scummy journalist I wouldn’t have any morals anyway so if wouldn’t bother me and maybe more inclined to use whatever was posted.

Also posters need to remember that this is a public forum open to everyone across the world so posts can be picked up and used anywhere.

NC as may be outing.
Long to avoid drip feed.
Old MN - screaming in the cistine chapel etc.
Daily Mail are cunts.

And now to begin my story...

Fair use is one thing - for current affairs, critical reviews etc. Lifting whole strings of posts is breach of copyright unless Mumsnet has given permission which of course they do.

As I say, Mumsnet did confirm when I directly asked that they do receive payment from DM. However, the thread that was on is no longer accessible. Funny that. It was the thread on 'Site Stuff' started by JustineMumsnet on 7th Feb 2019 entitled 'Mumsnet data breach - please read'

My issue is not that they do this, but that they try to hide it. If that is one of their sources of income they should be upfront about it. Just as they have to give a very long list of which companies they work with for cookies/advertising etc, they should also have to be much clearer about who they sell posts to.

youseethethingis blimey, must be a long story

Yanbu- it's totally pointless. They will rip the OP regardless

I think the idiots are the posters expecting some form of anonymity on a public forum by posting the pathetic anti DM rhetoric.

I assumed it was to stop the daily mail print screening it and ending up with your username splashed all over the news... if they quote bits they don't normally bother about who said it

@StreamsFullOfStars

Well it doesn't stop them because Mumsnet own the copyright to your posts and they sell them to the Daily Mail. They've previously confirmed this when I've asked, but funnily enough don't like to advertise it ..

Gosh - this is absolutely categorically untrue - we never EVER sell posts or threads to the Mail or any other outlet, we NEVER have done, we NEVER will, and we most certainly should not have told anyone that we do (because we don't). Very sorry if you've been mislead but it's absolutely, categorically, complete and utter balderdash.

@StreamsFullOfStars

Fair use is one thing - for current affairs, critical reviews etc. Lifting whole strings of posts is breach of copyright unless Mumsnet has given permission which of course they do.

As I say, Mumsnet did confirm when I directly asked that they do receive payment from DM. However, the thread that was on is no longer accessible. Funny that. It was the thread on 'Site Stuff' started by JustineMumsnet on 7th Feb 2019 entitled 'Mumsnet data breach - please read'

My issue is not that they do this, but that they try to hide it. If that is one of their sources of income they should be upfront about it. Just as they have to give a very long list of which companies they work with for cookies/advertising etc, they should also have to be much clearer about who they sell posts to.

Here's that thread - which post of Justine's are you referring to?

It's absolutely not the case that we have ever received payment from the Mail or anyone else for thread-lifts. It's simply not true.

I assumed it was to stop the daily mail print screening it and ending up with your username splashed all over the news...if they quote bits they don't normally bother about who said it

They just blur the name out. They also do it when a poster has a swearword in their NN.

I've never understood this either. If anything, it might attract their attention.
True, actually these people secretly want their posts lifted. Also not just the DM, so is it ok if the Sun, the Mirror or the Guardian lift it instead?

I don’t do it but it might work?

Are the DM really going to want to attract people to a thread that slags them off? Plenty of people I’m sure who are on MN would search a thread they’ve seen in the News?

You can't stop the lazy bastards unfortunately, so I agree it's pointless.

RowanMumsnet

On that thread, this was said (in response to posts referring to whether payments were being made to DM):

You retain all your rights to use but effectively grant MN a license to publish it/ sell ads etc.

In the context of the preceding posts, it looked like you were answering yes to the question of do you receive any payments from the DM?

Thank you for clarifying unambiguously that you don't receive any payments whatsoever from the DM.

And yes it's not just the DM either. I'm just more aware of that one because I have to watch what I post about someone who avidly reads that particular paper but would never see anything on Mumsnet.

I agree it is naïve to post anything on an open forum and then expect any sort of privacy or protection from reposting elsewhere.

As I say, Mumsnet did confirm when I directly asked that they do receive payment from DM. However, the thread that was on is no longer accessible. Funny that.

Do you still have the email from MNHQ, OP?

I figured that another reason start with 'the Daily Mail are scum' is so that if any of their readers did come looking for the thread wanting to read the full thing, that's the first thing they see. So the DM would be sending people directly to a post slagging off their paper.

Saying 'I do not give permission for this to be posted...' etc is pointless though.

Thanks StreamsFullOfStars

@StreamsFullOfStars

RowanMumsnet

On that thread, this was said (in response to posts referring to whether payments were being made to DM):

You retain all your rights to use but effectively grant MN a license to publish it/ sell ads etc.

In the context of the preceding posts, it looked like you were answering yes to the question of do you receive any payments from the DM?

Thank you for clarifying unambiguously that you don't receive any payments whatsoever from the DM.

Yep that's right - or any other media outlet - we never ever 'sell' thread lift stories or indeed any other stories.

We wouldn't have intended to create any ambiguity about that in our answers on the other thread but apologies if we did inadvertently.

Subtle bookmark so i can link this thread in the seemingly daily threads about this topic

Well that seems to have cleared that up. Thanks Rowan.

There was nothing remotely ambiguous in that statement from MN StreamsFullOfStars, you've made totally false claims on this thread because of your inability to comprehend a simple statement. Add to that your wilful misunderstanding of copyright law and the T&C's you agreed to when signing up to MN, you should apologise to MN and other posters on this thread who took time to patiently point out how wrong you are.

*So stop it.’

How rude.

It's all of these places though, everything is ripped off from somewhere! I remember reading a story on here (about an uber driver) that was used by the radio 2 thought for the day/ religious section as their own story. My eyes were rolling.

They're doing it to signal they're not a journalist, or whatever wanky clickbait writers for that shit-rag are called these days

Indicates nothing like that really. A writer for DM or anyone else could and probably has done it in the past hoping to add authenticity