Warning about posting in the Relationships Topic on Mumsnet

[bibbitybobbityyhat]

Don't do it if you don't want your personal stories lifted and splashed all over the Mail Online.

The DM used to restrict themselves to copying and pasting mainly made up (Penis Beaker), lighthearted or neutral threads.

But now they are quite happy to publish deeply personal and very identifying threads too from people posting at crisis point.

I do actually foresee Mumsnet's inability to prevent this being the end of the website tbh. Or MN as we know and love it, anyway.

I know we've had a zillion threads about this already, but I just want to remind people again:

Don't post on Mumsnet if you don't want your thread to be reproduced in the Mail Online.

MN have gotta be in on this, the mail credits the site by name which benefits MNHQ - if it wasn't a reciprocal deal with MNs blessing they'ld just say "on a parenting website" or something to get around it.

At the very least, MN are not making it difficult or appearing to object in any way

MNHQ need to actually clarify their position on this. With Justine in line for honours though they probably won't for now

Why can't MNHQ put a stop to this? The daily fail basically copy and paste no journalism involved. I get this is a public forum so you obviously need to be mindful of what you post but still it's disgraceful.

I bet that 'I used to be a teenage prostitute' thread gets lifted, too. My warning has been poo-pooed.

I think the only answer is to amend our user names to an anti-Daily Mail slogan. But it has to be 'subtle':

OVIENNAHATESLAZYJOURNALISM

I was on the thread that got used.
It is a disgrace tbh.

And seriously, dont national newspaper have something else more important to do that trolling relationship? I don't know, national [politics, environment, real news and investigation for a change? Rather than something that is clearly deeply personal and requires no fucking work from them. Lazy and incompetent!

MNHQ Ive always thought that MNHQ had the copyright on the content of the website. Could you explain how you can agree for ANY newspaper to publish these details with your seal of approval?? Because they've had it if they have nicely mentioned MN
This is going against everything that this side was about.
What will be next? The SN board, the life limiting illness threads??

Tinsel MNHQ have commented on many of the threads started about the Daily Mail with their position.

I want to know the copyright position.

Changing to anti-Daily Fail names doesn't help. Nor do sweary ones.

Either the Mail black the names out or other papers pick the stories up instead.

Nerr it's a pubilc forum and don't post anything you don't want people to read etc etc doesn't address the fact that MNHQ actually do have some ownership over what's published on here and as such it's hard to believe there is nothing they can do at all to at least make it harder for the papers to publish direct screen shots?

Amending usernames does nothing, they can just call you a user or something.

It is lazy. I guess it's a simpler way of doing the old "problem pages" where people would write in for advice on some salacious topic and someone would laboriously reply.

Sadly I think the nature of the Internet is changing over time too, and it's no bad thing to be reminded that this isn't a confidential place really - I often wonder if someone's mum/sister/in-law/mate/friend could spot them on these threads and cause some trouble.

If it helps, the daily mail comments section suggests the readers are sick of it too, and also think it's inappropriate.

I think it's the same as if you wrote and posted a comment on a Guardian article and the Daily Mail then wrote a story about your comment quoting you and the source. They are crediting Mumsnet who owns your post (and can publish it in a book or sell the rights of your post to a third party). That's how they are not breaking copyright laws. You are meant to understand you are posting on a public site. Match isn't a public forum and you don't give match the right to reprint your personal info in the terms and conditions you agree to when you use their service.

That's not what I'm saying, trolls.

Er, I wasn't addressing you, Liney, so not sure why you decided my post was a response to yours

Ah sorry Liney.. You made the match comment... Apologies thought it was the OP. I don't know what you're saying then but you asked why and that's why

Whatever.

There is a hyperlink in the article that takes the reader straight to the Mumsnet site if clicked on.

Yes, I saw that, Carole. 'Want to read more?'

Like an advertorial.

Anyone know if they would still be able to publish the story if the poster explicitly removes consent in the post?

I imagine it's like that fake Facebook thing that occasionally surfaces; 'I deny Facebook the right to my images etc'. If you post on here, you've accepted MNs terms and conditions.

Maybe relationships needs to be approved users only and mnhq threaten litigation If dm publish. Something to do with copyright
It's a shame as it ruins it for people literally in emotional pain who like the anonymity of mn to deal with really heavy stuff.

It's killing a lot of goodwill on the site.
Mnhq must be able to see isp addresses to see who the culprits are and like I said, you can only use the relationship facility if you've been a member for a certain length of time or get special permission from mnhq to post.

I'm sure there must be a way to lock it down ...and I'm not techy at all.

It's not just Relationships though; what's to stop them raiding the special needs forums?

I hope they can will and do something.
This is the best site going for relationship advice and would be heartbreaking to lose/ not use it.

People will just fade away if they feel under threat...not just big brother is threatening you but splashing your details all around.

Low life despicable scum.

Oh heck...I don't go on that one.

So, mnhq really like to look at security issues if they want th ebest site on the internet to continue to be used as an excellent resource.