EXCLUSIVE: Bono (U2) Gig - Sep 07 @ "The O2" UK

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
WildHoney said:
Hope it's true and that we can all get tickets :eyebrow:
Click to expand...

I hope it's true also Wild Honey

To the rest of the people on this board, I believe you should all mature a bit more. And you wonder why people prefer not to use this site, bootleggers refusing to share on this site and people on other sites warding people away from this site.

If you can't take good news, don't bother posting.

Have nice lives, I hope you don't treat your kids the same
 
Re: Re: EXCLUSIVE: Bono (U2) Gig - Sep 07 @ "The O2" UK

Headache in a Suitcase said:


i can do that too

monalisa.gif


Permission must be granted from me before use of this picture for any purpose (c) Headache in a Suitcase - All Rights Reserved
Click to expand...

:lmao:

Me and you, kid, me and you
Click to expand...

:shh:


Im just waiting for this writer to file a law suite for someone taking a picture of this person wrote...



Ok now on a serious note, even thought this IS the most obsered thing I've seen uin a long long long long time I think we should lay off chinchard41..
 
chichard673 said:


I hope it's true also Wild Honey

To the rest of the people on this board, I believe you should all mature a bit more. And you wonder why people prefer not to use this site, bootleggers refusing to share on this site and people on other sites warding people away from this site.

If you can't take good news, don't bother posting.

Have nice lives, I hope you don't treat your kids the same
Click to expand...

1) Look at the number of people registered at this site. I hardly think they're staying away in droves.

2) As far as pictures and boots go, people around here share pretty freely, hence our amusement that someone would be so anal about a picture they took of a piece of copywrited material that wasn't theirs in the first place, claiming exclusive rights to it. I'm still chuckling, actually. Thanks for that. :lol:

3) My kid is treated quite well, thanks. I took her to 8 U2 shows last year. :wink:
 
chichard673 said:

bootleggers refusing to share on this site
Click to expand...

WTF??? Dude,... why do we have a whole forum dedicated to sharing the music and bootlegs if we refuse to share?????


:scratch: can somebody explain the logics in this?
 
He's talking about the snobby bootleggers.. I wont mention any names :wink:
 
ive taken pictures of my bootlegs but refuse to share them, as people could steal them and make a fortune

once i hear back from the US copyright office i'll think about it
 
chichard673 said:


I hope it's true also Wild Honey

To the rest of the people on this board, I believe you should all mature a bit more. And you wonder why people prefer not to use this site, bootleggers refusing to share on this site and people on other sites warding people away from this site.

If you can't take good news, don't bother posting.

Have nice lives, I hope you don't treat your kids the same
Click to expand...

Okay I stook up for you and I see this right after I did my post... This is when I would like to delete my post...:wink:...

Yes also see all the people who everyday upload bootlegs on that part of the forum, I think we have a lot of people who are willing to share their bootlegs with other people..

And I am a kid...:wink:
 
:( :( :(

I begged my mom to go with me to my own show, offering to pay her way and she still said no. :lol:
I don't know many local U2 fans. It took me months to find one.
 
I started out the bigger fan, have been for years. She liked them well enough, but now that she's seen them, she's a diehard, too. :)

Maybe next tour you can travel? That's part of the awesomeness of it all. Not to crank up the cornball level or anything, but seeing shows and hanging out with groups of other Interferencers makes it that much better.
 
seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you people????

the guy posted some info about a potential gig that it seems no one else had picked up on, and instead of thanking him or showing remote interest in the original post and article, you lot pounce all over him about some inconsequential remark under his photos

i've seen a lot of chichards photos which are generally superb and i've also had my own photos nicked and reused without permission by people on this very site.
so what difference does it make if he wants to automatically stick a copyright on his photos before he posts any of them regardless of what they are, who gives a toss

seriously, wtf?

you're like small nasty children in a playground sometimes
 
It's just the fact that he put on a copyright on something that isnt even his...If we were to take the picture from him then he'd be doing the same to the person who wrote the article.
 
C'mon, it was a copywrited newsclipping that he tore out of a paper, photographed, and then copywrited himself, as though we were all poised to steal this gem....and you don't see the humour (or the arrogance) in that? :huh:

Shit, if it were an original photo he had taken and watermarked, that'd be one thing. I wouldn't understand it - I've posted many band/meeting pics I've taken, and don't give a rat's ass who saves them...they're pretty much public domain, now - but I would at least respect his wishes. But this? It was fucking funny.
 
Like she said, if it was his picture to begin with and he wanted it watermarked, that's fine. But it's a newspaper article, which is public domain I believe. :shrug:

And yes, chichard has some wonderful pics from what I've seen :up:
 
VintagePunk said:
.they're pretty much public domain, now - but I would at least respect his wishes
Click to expand...

Yes, if you were to post a picture of something chances are that someone is going to take it then save it without permission, hands down..

But, if the person nicely requested for it to not be put around then that's a great idea but if someone takes it, just blast and annoy and yell at this person..

But also if you really want to get serious, then go to court and copyright it. If you photoshop something that says that you are serious and you say you copyright it when you really didn't you are sure to get blasted at, especially when you try to copyright something that isnt even yours! Plus the fact that you didn't even copyright it..
 
VintagePunk said:
C'mon, it was a copywrited newsclipping that he tore out of a paper, photographed, and then copywrited himself, as though we were all poised to steal this gem....and you don't see the humour (or the arrogance) in that? :huh:

Shit, if it were an original photo he had taken and watermarked, that'd be one thing. I wouldn't understand it - I've posted many band/meeting pics I've taken, and don't give a rat's ass who saves them...they're pretty much public domain, now - but I would at least respect his wishes. But this? It was fucking funny.
Click to expand...

firstly, its a copyright on the picture itself, not the article... the same way you wouldn't call someone stupid for sticking copyright on a picture they took of someones house with the argument that its not their house.

and yes, the irony in it is rather amusing, i'll agree with that... they way you guys behave isn't though

chichard does that with all his photos from what i gather, its probably automatic regrdless of what the photo is of or whether you think its a "gem" worthy of copyright or not.
he took the photo, its his right to watermark it if he likes without having people tear him a second one
 
Last edited:
digsy said:


firstly, its a copyright on the picture itself
Click to expand...

Firstly, you need a lawyer and an application to get things copywritten in the first place. :wink:
Putting watermarks on things is just an annoyance, nothing legal. Unless you have proper rights for it. Like Getty images.
 
ok so it may not be official, but at the end of the day the guy is just trying to protect his pictures, why is that such a big deal

and i'm not convinced thats true anyway, simply creating something grants you the automatic copyright to it.
if you want to sue for copyright violation for money then you need to have had it registered beforehand, but you can still assert a copyright claim even if it isn't registered
 
Last edited:
All right, what is so special about this photo to warrant a copyright? It's not his writing, it's not his publishing, it's not his newspaper, period. It's not his. If I go to a store, take a photo of the clothes and slap a copyright on it, it doesn't mean anything except I've wasted time taking a photo of things that don't belong to me.
It's just a way to gain internet fame and that's useless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

youvedonewhat
The Diaries. Part 1.
Replies
13
Views
2K
lharper
lharper
BlueSilkenSky
In The Stillness of the Evening ch. 8
Replies
3
Views
1K
GraceRyan
GraceRyan
BlueSilkenSky
In the Stillness of the Evening ch. 5
Replies
3
Views
1K
TaraCynara
TaraCynara
BlueSilkenSky
Dancing With The Devil ch. 38
Replies
21
Views
3K
BlueSilkenSky
BlueSilkenSky
BlueSilkenSky
Dancing With The Devil ch. 43
Replies
26
Views
2K
TaraCynara
TaraCynara

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom