"on MN this week" in the Daily Mail

[StealthBearWipesBumOnDailyMail]

Thread no 2

i was going to post [nudge nudge wink wink]

DP - what do you mean you have to go out?? You have a RL???

Further advertisments:

one of these to find immigrants, single mothers, homosexuals, catholics, benefit claimants and women with cellulite

Thanks DP, so I take it you have a lot of string then?
And a no physical contact rule?
And you all speak standard English with a slight Southern accent?

DP inviting the SN boarders over to her place for a party where she will "show them a good time"?

Justine, I am horrified at your response to being reminded of the Mumsnet copyright page:

"We copied our copyright notice off someone else eons ago iirr - possibly Gina Ford - so not sure how efficacious it is tbh and as I've said we're in the process of changing it to sound far less stringent - Gerry's got the new stuff up her sleeve but she's on hols right now - but you're right it is a bit nonsensical because my understanding that it's not really a tenable position wrt to fair use, but as said, I'll check."

You must be conscious that some people have posted intimate stuff on here because they feel reassured that their details are going to stay within Mumsnet and not be used by anyone else for commercial purposes. They have felt this because YOU have told them so, in no uncertain terms. You state that no one but Mumsnet will be allowed to use things posted on here.

If the statement on the copyright page isn't true, Mumsnet has misled its members potentially quite seriously.

Additionally, that you have raised practically no objection to this DM journalist lifting what is essentially a whole thread (ie not just one or two funny unrelated quotes as other papers do), then stating that you have agreed between yourselves that she will not use anything sensitive or which could identify the posters, when the thread in question is clearly both extremely sensitive and can easily identify the OP, is frankly both astonshing and deeply disappointing.

Well, DP's generous offer will keep my teen Aspie happy. No need for all that conversation malarky and she didn't mention payment.

Well wenhave lost 2shoes as a member it seems, from the SN board goodbye post.

Sad.

Of curse you don't know who I am anyway. Do I like the anonymity of that?

Do I fuck as like!

Raising Kids looks OK on the hun factor though......

Mind I forgot:

I am not a troll and I know of moldiegate, Judge Flounce and don't have a contented little baby

correction, I said I won't be posting about dd on there. I will not be leaving mn, you have to fight from within to get change.

ooop sorry (I have outed myself by email to you btw)

So how come this didnt make athread of the day?

and how come the title in the most actice cuts off the DM mention?

Balloonslayer the problem is that this is very much a grey area - most websites will carry a copyright notice like ours - but it doesn't necessarily mean that it's enforceable - much like the libel laws and how the law views internet publishers it's a moving target and none of it has been thoroughly tested.

As said we're looking into what the very latest thoughts are on this and let you know. We'll also update our copyright notice today as we've intended to do for sometime - I've found the stuff that was on someone's to do list - after the last discussion about this.

RE not objecting to the DM lifting stuff as said that's because it is our understanding that they are within their rights to do so as this is a public forum but again, we will ask the inestimable Mark Stephens what he thinks and get back to you.

I'm sorry if you think we're being slack. All I can say in our defence is that we are not over-endowed with resources at MNHQ - part of the downside of not being overly commercial (which I think is what most Mumsnetters expect of us) is that we aren't raking huge amts of dosh to pay for lawyers, administrators, etc.

LilyOfTheMountain now you're being paranoid - it's me and Cath and BigTech around today... would that we had the time to mess with thread titles in active conversation!

The DM mention is coming up now in Most Active.

As for Thread of the Day...

I'm glad you're not leaving 2shoes.

see, i dont get why people would leave mn coz of this

i dont even get why its such a big deal?

But dude, you don't even get apostrophes

Lovely Mark Stephens, now there's a lovely man, every day that I don't wake up in Holloway I think how lovely he is

I think the difference between the MN books and the DM column is that the books have tended to focus on phases of child development so have a specific audience. By the time they are published those posters quoted will largely have "moved on" and any potentially identifying references would become less traceable over time to all but the most determined of stalkers. Also if the readership is, say, mums of toddlers , they aren't likely to be interested those now posting about kids a few years older. Presumably if MN were to do a subject such as Maternity Rights at Work , they would be more careful about the threads and responses used, since legal issues may be involved, but again these might already be outdated. The DM column is much more immediate, discussing issues potentially still live and raw, in an all too direct manner to a less targetted audience.

I wonder if the writer, having recently had articles published which include photos and references to her own family, may have lost sight that others may not be so willing to lay their own lives forth so publicly by a 3rd party and deserve to have their chosen degree of "privacy" respected .

ps we're more than happy to make this a dod - why not it's a fundamental discussion that we need to have - about privacy and copyright and the internet and all that malarkey. Don't think we ever shied away from discussing stuff like this have we? (except perhaps Moldies - did just wish that would go away in the end)

oh i get apostrophies man
just cant be arsed to use them

Oh cripes MP the round up - I'll go have a look now!

Justine, can you forward both parts of this thread to Leah Hardy (I know she may already have read them, but still it would make the point) and ask her to come on Mumsnet & respond?

If she's that decent & gets us so well then it's the least she can do!

I'm absolutely sure Leah H will have read these threads and I've dropped her a line to suggest she comes on but she's most likely terrified - I know I would be...