1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. REC.PHOTO.DIGITAL

  • Twitter violates photographer rights

    From RichA@21:1/5 to All on Tue Nov 30 16:47:34 2021
    https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/1465683094581792771?s=20

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bill W@21:1/5 to All on Tue Nov 30 18:54:55 2021
    On Nov 30, 2021, RichA wrote
    (in article<[email protected]>):

    https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/1465683094581792771?s=20

    Which right does that violate? They are not stopping anyone from taking
    photos in public places, like one state tried to do, and might have actually done. I don’t think I agree with their policy, but I don’t see any rights violation.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From nospam@21:1/5 to RichA on Tue Nov 30 20:36:25 2021
    In article <[email protected]>,
    RichA <[email protected]> wrote:

    https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/1465683094581792771?s=20

    twitter is not violating anyone's rights.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From RichA@21:1/5 to nospam on Wed Dec 1 06:22:59 2021
    On Tuesday, 30 November 2021 at 20:36:32 UTC-5, nospam wrote:
    In article <[email protected]>,
    RichA <[email protected]> wrote:

    https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/1465683094581792771?s=20

    twitter is not violating anyone's rights.

    Sure they are. Using this as a template, ALL journalistic and other, non-commercial use of a person's image could be prohibited.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From nospam@21:1/5 to RichA on Wed Dec 1 09:37:52 2021
    In article <[email protected]>,
    RichA <[email protected]> wrote:

    https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/1465683094581792771?s=20

    twitter is not violating anyone's rights.

    Sure they are. Using this as a template, ALL journalistic and other, non-commercial use of a person's image could be prohibited.

    twitter is a private platform and they get to decide what content they
    want to carry. forcing twitter (or any platform) to carry content they
    do not want to carry violates *their* rights.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Incubus@21:1/5 to nospam on Thu Dec 2 09:50:36 2021
    On 2021-12-01, nospam <[email protected]d> wrote:
    In article <[email protected]>,
    RichA <[email protected]> wrote:

    https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/1465683094581792771?s=20

    twitter is not violating anyone's rights.

    Sure they are. Using this as a template, ALL journalistic and other,
    non-commercial use of a person's image could be prohibited.

    twitter is a private platform and they get to decide what content they
    want to carry. forcing twitter (or any platform) to carry content they
    do not want to carry violates *their* rights.

    It's a bit more complicated than that. Twitter and Facebook say they
    are carriers but behave like publishers when it suits them. The two
    roles have very different legal responsibilities.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Incubus@21:1/5 to RichA on Thu Dec 2 09:42:45 2021
    On 2021-12-01, RichA <[email protected]> wrote:
    https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/1465683094581792771?s=20

    "Let's unpack what that means".

    I really hate the way that woke Leftists speak these days.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From nospam@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Thu Dec 2 08:03:01 2021
    In article <[email protected]omain>, Incubus <[email protected]> wrote:

    https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/1465683094581792771?s=20

    twitter is not violating anyone's rights.

    Sure they are. Using this as a template, ALL journalistic and other,
    non-commercial use of a person's image could be prohibited.

    twitter is a private platform and they get to decide what content they
    want to carry. forcing twitter (or any platform) to carry content they
    do not want to carry violates *their* rights.

    It's a bit more complicated than that.

    no, it's not. it's actually quite simple.

    Twitter and Facebook say they
    are carriers but behave like publishers when it suits them.

    they do not say they are carriers, nor does that even matter.

    The two
    roles have very different legal responsibilities.

    myth.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From RichA@21:1/5 to RichA on Mon Dec 6 18:07:16 2021
    On Tuesday, 30 November 2021 at 19:47:38 UTC-5, RichA wrote:
    https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/1465683094581792771?s=20

    Twitter's Marxist censor policy backfires on them, horribly:

    https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-59547353

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)