Safe Speed Forums

Greater Manchester Police are looking for ways to waste their fines surplus again. With a leaflet this time...

Propaganda

I see SafeSpeed gets a dirty mark in there.

What I want to know is, are url's copyright and, if so, can we ask for that to be removed?

What was that "vehicle on a test drive"????
Sounds familiar.


Oh - goes on to say "there are many others - we know them all" --possibly they invented a few.

"if you hit someone at 40 mph -they have a 10% chance of survival,at 30mph it is 80%" source DFT think,slow down campaign.

Now look at the info given out on warks camera site

" The two halves demonstrate graphically that the survival rate of a child pedestrian hit by a car travelling at 40mph is just 20% compared to 80% if hit at 30mph."Source -"30 for a reason,THINK campaign"

The one third lie surfaces again - thought DfT had admitted it was a lot less than that.Suppose if people are gullible enough to read the rest ,they'll believe that too

My bolds - same source - must have thicker heads in Manchester

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

Good question. The safespeed on it’s own might be subject to legal constraints, but the www is certainly not copyright, nor is the org.uk bit – they are part of the Internet - conventions and hierarchical DNS domains, respectively.

They have published a fully qualified domain name (FQDN), not a full URL. As far as I know, url's (or hostnames or FQDNs) are not subject to copyright, any more than your name or street address is. The purpose of Uniform Resource Locators (http://www.w3.org/Addressing/) is to allow people to address you (us?), i.e. identify and locate. From memory, they are comprised of a protocol name, a host name and a relative file system offset that the server uses to fetch the required page. There was a case a few years back about deep linking, but I think it's gone away now. Basically, if people can link to you from a web page, your url is tied to the Internet. And a url can be in any device including, naturally enough, a printed document, or even person’s memory!

Anyone else got any more to add on this?

_________________
I stole this .sig

I agree BW, printing the URL of a site is not going to cause copyright issues, although if printed in a libellous context the action may be open to scrutiny for that reason.

However if someone was to buy a name (well lease it in reality) that infringed a copyright or trademark then a company is within it's rights to flex legal muscle, obviously the more money involved the bigger the muscle!

mikeroesoft.com and wimdows.com jump to mind.

This made me laugh



I am comforted a great deal in knowing that my (and everybody else's) posts are being closely monitored, the sense of security I get is overwhelming.
It's also good to know that £100's of the taxpayers hard earned is being invested to recoup a pissy £60 from the few (by comparison) who try to find a way to avoid it.

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?

Anyone want to buy a couple of numberplates pertaining to HGV's - they fell off the back of a lorry - honest Guv. You can do what you want with them, no questions asked!!!
Contact Ernest Marsh, Windermere!!
I'm in the phone book!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

[quote="Ernest Marsh]


Anyone want to buy a couple of numberplates pertaining to HGV's - they fell off the back of a lorry - honest Guv. You can do what you want with them, no questions asked!!!
Contact Ernest Marsh, Windermere!!
I'm in the phone book![/quote]

Now if they'd fallen off the back of a white van , with "safety ......." ---the origonals ,and copies would be in gresat demand.

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

Unless this glossy booklet is a spoof, I am lost for words.

Where is it distributed? Who will read it? What on earth are they trying to achieve? Presumably people flying to Bulgaria to avoid a speeding ticket is a common problem in Manchester.

It beggars believe that so much time and effort has gone into producing this firelighter. Have they really nothing better to do than pile so much money into collecting a few more £60 fines?

Of course, a hard-hitting public safety campaign like this will gain the unquestioning approval of their political masters. Cue for more funding...

Yes - always - the West Midlands Recycling Campaign needs more cash

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

Sorry to drag this one up again, folks. I’m still reeling in disbelief.

Ignoring for a minute the sheer wastefulness of this 12-page glossy at a time when Greater Manchester Police say they’re desperately short of cash, I am deeply disturbed by its Orwellian tone.

We know every trick in the book... Operation Cheetah is Greater Manchester Police’s powerful new response to the growing number of cheaters who fancy their chances of outwitting the justice system.

A highly skilled squad of specially trained and dedicated police officers will inspect every contested speeding penalty and where they suspect cheating they will personally visit the homes or workplace of those involved...

Good god, we’re talking about a speeding ticket here, not heroin pushers at the school gate.

They also list Safespeed as one of the the “trick dealers” who they “closely monitor” (better watch it, Paul).

Now, the biggest concern of all. As part of the ear-bashing, they tell us

1. The fixed penalty for speeding is £60 and three points

2. If the driver wishes to contest the prosecution in court, the number of points and the fine amount will be at the discretion of the Magistrate, up to the maximum limit of the offence. Be warned, however, if found guilty the Magistrate may give you a higher fine and more points than were previously offered to you to settle the matter.

Yes, we all know it happens. But isn’t this another Bill of Rights issue?

That it is the right of the subjects to petition the king, and all commitments and prosecutions for such petitioning are illegal;

For “petitioning the King” read “pleading your innocence”. You choose to go before Her Majesty’s courts to contest the case and are threatened with an extra penalty for doing so.

Talking of which, we haven’t even started on

That all grants and promises of fines and forfeitures of particular persons before conviction are illegal and void.

Any views?

Paul (Safespeed), I hate dragging this up to the top again if it's a boring subject but would be really interested in your (or anyone else's) view on the Bill of Rights question as regards the police threatening a bigger fine if you dare challenge the penalty notice.

edited

Thanks, Johno. That's exactly how I feel.

At risk of being disingenuous, might I suggest you get rid of that logo? This is not a site for debating Danish immigration policy (although I can sympathise with that too).

edited

Well free us from that flipping banner, would you . We already got the message.

edited

Stop being so childish, it is bloody irritating having a screenful of distracting graphics when I'm trying to read the forums.

edited

I'm not bothered by this one, it was your last one that annoyed me!

Who is The Boss? You mean Paul? I am absolutely sure he would want that banner removed, although he's too polite to say so.

The contributors can also claim a little ownership and we say get rid of it (do I speak for all?). It's not so much the message as the visual clutter which makes everything harder to follow. An intelligent person like you should understand that, Johno.