THE MONKEY HOUSE
The Crystal Palace Foundation's favourite hangout...
The Crystal Palace Foundation's favourite hangout...
THE MONKEY HOUSE
Crystal Palace Foundation
As a long time and very loyal member of the Crystal Palace Foundation I should very much like to know exactly what they are supposed to have done that annoyed 'Falkor' (who he/she maybe).
It's too complicated to get into... Put it this way: The Crystal Palace Foundation are extremely unhelpful and only seem interested in politics surrounding the Crystal Palace as opposed to it's history. However, "they" did help one of my friends out once, so cannot be entirely worthless. "They" = the current few individuals keeping the charity alive, which is evidently crumbling. It hasn't always been this way. When the foundation was run by distinguished, honourable, gentlemen, the membership numbers were much higher and the events numerous. The publications were of a better standard with more enthusiastic writers. The current Chairman is the reason for the Foundation's downfall in my opinion. BTW, did you even get the joke above?
Crystal Palace Foundation
I did see the black 'humour' in your image but a joke it was not.
In all the years that I have been a member of the Crystal Palace Foundation I have found all of their Trustees nothing but helpful and knowledgable on the subject of the history of the Crystal Palace. There are a few Trustees that I would name particularly Eric Price, Martin Frelford and Melvyn Harrison (the current Chairman). They all with many others have been through many situations good and bad and have maintained and built upon the solid reputational rock upon which the organisations stands. I have purchased dozens of their publications, videos and DVD's over the years and found them all extremely helpful and great value for money.
You obviously have a lot of bitterness in your heart for the organisation - why do you not discuss your problems with them talk over your differences - unless you are following another and darker agenda...
Long may the organisation thrive and prosper.
In all the years that I have been a member of the Crystal Palace Foundation I have found all of their Trustees nothing but helpful and knowledgable on the subject of the history of the Crystal Palace. There are a few Trustees that I would name particularly Eric Price, Martin Frelford and Melvyn Harrison (the current Chairman). They all with many others have been through many situations good and bad and have maintained and built upon the solid reputational rock upon which the organisations stands. I have purchased dozens of their publications, videos and DVD's over the years and found them all extremely helpful and great value for money.
You obviously have a lot of bitterness in your heart for the organisation - why do you not discuss your problems with them talk over your differences - unless you are following another and darker agenda...
Long may the organisation thrive and prosper.
I bet you've not even understood it...I did see the black 'humour' in your image but a joke it was not.
Can you remember any examples? I guarantee by subscribing to threads participated by Tulse Hill Terry and myself, you will learn a lot more about the palace than you have ever learnt from the Foundation.In all the years that I have been a member of the Crystal Palace Foundation I have found all of their Trustees nothing but helpful and knowledgable on the subject of the history of the Crystal Palace.
I have discussed it with the Chairman to no avail... They are not rational people and have dark agendas themselves, but you fail to see it.You obviously have a lot of bitterness in your heart for the organisation - why do you not discuss your problems with them talk over your differences - unless you are following another and darker agenda...
Why visit their website, purchase their products and continue to support them when you can get more information by visiting the Sydenham Town Forum for free? What has been presented here over the past week or so is the real deal, but yet you've not made a single comment in appreciation. This can mean only one thing: you are not interested in the history of the Crystal Palace. You subscribe to the Crystal Palace Foundation and know some of it's key members because you feel more comfortable being part of a group (or cult as I call them), regardless of the subject (Crystal Palace). You don't like me because I am not afraid to share my opinion on Copyright, and you defend the Crystal Palace Foundation because, admit it: you are a sheep!Long may the organisation thrive and prosper.
The Crystal Palace Foundation
I have noted the pictures and comments and also your views on copyright.
Having been interested in the history Crystal Palace for some 35 years and researched it extensively the pictures unlawfully uploaded by you are certainly interesting but it is a great shame that you have no regard for the institutions from which they have been stolen - London Metropolitan Archives, Ebay sellers and buyers just to name but a few.
I will certainly continue to support the CPF, visit their website, and purchase their products (and call upon others to do the same) because I respect them and their vast knowledge of Crystal Palace history and I know that they would never uses images that are owned by other organisations or persons without permission or payment.
I am extremely disappointed that an honourable forum like this continues to allow you to upload these illegally obtained images and hereby call upon the the moderator to strike all the images from the forum and formally warn you that your views on copyright and theft of images is being monitored.
Having been interested in the history Crystal Palace for some 35 years and researched it extensively the pictures unlawfully uploaded by you are certainly interesting but it is a great shame that you have no regard for the institutions from which they have been stolen - London Metropolitan Archives, Ebay sellers and buyers just to name but a few.
I will certainly continue to support the CPF, visit their website, and purchase their products (and call upon others to do the same) because I respect them and their vast knowledge of Crystal Palace history and I know that they would never uses images that are owned by other organisations or persons without permission or payment.
I am extremely disappointed that an honourable forum like this continues to allow you to upload these illegally obtained images and hereby call upon the the moderator to strike all the images from the forum and formally warn you that your views on copyright and theft of images is being monitored.
Whatever your differences, with Falkor, And I have mine also inregards to copyright, your immediate ressort to veiled threats of this kind does you no good, nor supports your claim.
Indeed it would rather support those of Falkor.
As for the copyright involved with publicaly available 100 year old photos and postcard views goes, you would have some problem establishing ownership.
An old previously published photo may be available from several different places;how will you determine which of those sources objects to Falkor's use, and how will you prove which one of several it was copied from?
I myself have seen image copyright claimed in a publication which has used images from a public source, so Getty sticking their name on an image makes me swing to Falkors side in that case
I disagree strongly with Falkors views on copyright, but I feel you have rather shot your self in the foot here Mr Ford, and have done little but support Falkors views on the CP foundation.
Indeed it would rather support those of Falkor.
As for the copyright involved with publicaly available 100 year old photos and postcard views goes, you would have some problem establishing ownership.
An old previously published photo may be available from several different places;how will you determine which of those sources objects to Falkor's use, and how will you prove which one of several it was copied from?
I myself have seen image copyright claimed in a publication which has used images from a public source, so Getty sticking their name on an image makes me swing to Falkors side in that case
I disagree strongly with Falkors views on copyright, but I feel you have rather shot your self in the foot here Mr Ford, and have done little but support Falkors views on the CP foundation.
I'm a student and cannot afford most of the products and publications offered by the Cystal Palace Foundation. I do have respect for the foundation and think that what they do is great but the images uploaded onto this website are very interesting and this is the best way to find out about the History of Sydenham. The amount of free local history on offer is brilliant. Why should't photos be uploaded? there great and if they were not then harldy anybody would see them, making them useless to amateur local historians such as myself. the Foundation claims that it is "dedicated to preserving the history of the Crystal Palace" well good for them but everybody should see the pictures on this website before they are locked away. If uploading interesting parts of History onto a website is a crime then who is the victim?
I do not have any differences with Falkor - how could I as I do not even know him/her.
I do not have a claim to support.
I did not and do not issue threats (veiled or otherwise) and it is quite offensive to say that I do, I merely stated the fact that some agencies and organisations might not like their bought and paid for images being uploaded. That is precisely why image libraries now watermark their images, put low res copies on their website, chop corners off, etc.
Getty, Popperfoto, Mary Evans, Pathe, John Huntley, London Metroplitan Archives, National Art Library and the dozens of other museums, libraries, universities and picture libraries all make money out of selling images from a convenient and single source. If someone uses or purchases an image from a corporate (or auction site) source and then uploads that to the internet then the original owner financially loses out - that is not just fair especially where a museum, library or university is concerned. Money that they could have got back after spending in the purchase, upkeep, research or repair of the image(s) would be lost to them. If the money was not flowing the libraries would not continue to exist, or buy more archives or find new ways to offer them to us and what would we do then?
It is in my view quite wrong that Sydenham (and any other) Forum should allow this situation to continue even if the images may very well be rare, wonderful or interesting.
If in Falkor's (and others) view all images should free to use why is for instance that the Crystal Palace Museum adds "All Images © The Crystal Palace Museum" at the bottom of their Image Archive page?
As for the publications produced by the Crystal Palace Foundation I would strongly suggest that 'Nicholas' visits any local library because I have seen many CPF publications in most of them.
I do not have a claim to support.
I did not and do not issue threats (veiled or otherwise) and it is quite offensive to say that I do, I merely stated the fact that some agencies and organisations might not like their bought and paid for images being uploaded. That is precisely why image libraries now watermark their images, put low res copies on their website, chop corners off, etc.
Getty, Popperfoto, Mary Evans, Pathe, John Huntley, London Metroplitan Archives, National Art Library and the dozens of other museums, libraries, universities and picture libraries all make money out of selling images from a convenient and single source. If someone uses or purchases an image from a corporate (or auction site) source and then uploads that to the internet then the original owner financially loses out - that is not just fair especially where a museum, library or university is concerned. Money that they could have got back after spending in the purchase, upkeep, research or repair of the image(s) would be lost to them. If the money was not flowing the libraries would not continue to exist, or buy more archives or find new ways to offer them to us and what would we do then?
It is in my view quite wrong that Sydenham (and any other) Forum should allow this situation to continue even if the images may very well be rare, wonderful or interesting.
If in Falkor's (and others) view all images should free to use why is for instance that the Crystal Palace Museum adds "All Images © The Crystal Palace Museum" at the bottom of their Image Archive page?
As for the publications produced by the Crystal Palace Foundation I would strongly suggest that 'Nicholas' visits any local library because I have seen many CPF publications in most of them.
quote
"and formally warn you that your views on copyright and theft of images is being monitored."
reads like a veiled threat to me.
and even given that there may be a copyright issue here, Falkors views on the matter are his, and it is not yet a crime in this country to have a view of something contrary to another person.
"and formally warn you that your views on copyright and theft of images is being monitored."
reads like a veiled threat to me.
and even given that there may be a copyright issue here, Falkors views on the matter are his, and it is not yet a crime in this country to have a view of something contrary to another person.
I fail to see how that is a threat.
Strangely enough I too have an view and my view is as I said in my message "... and hereby call upon the the moderator to strike all the images from the forum and formally warn you that your views on copyright and theft of images is being monitored.". That is not and never can be construed as a threat (veiled or otherwise) of any sort - that is my request to the Moderator suggesting a course of action that he may or may not wish to take.
Strangely enough I too have an view and my view is as I said in my message "... and hereby call upon the the moderator to strike all the images from the forum and formally warn you that your views on copyright and theft of images is being monitored.". That is not and never can be construed as a threat (veiled or otherwise) of any sort - that is my request to the Moderator suggesting a course of action that he may or may not wish to take.
-
tulse hill terry
- Posts: 686
- Joined: 25 Jun 2007 01:33
- Location: sarf lunnen
Falkor's favourite hangout.
Seeing as we are moderating this forum by ourselves, I still don't see the point of the original post.
The Queen's favourite hangout, I could go on.
Falkors post must surely have been intended to be insulting, albeit in a cryptic way, and it's a cop out so say it's all too complicated to go into.
Don't post on a public forum, searchable by google, if you don't want a reaction.
Oi, I don't play pinball! My favourite hangout used to be here...Falkor's favourite hangout.
http://www.rankingbattles.co.uk/location.htm
Before that, the biggest place was in Picadilly but it closed down in 99.
It's funny how people like JVLFord come out the woodwork when there's a political discussion on the table; that's all the Crystal Palace Foundation are interested in. Shame we can't have a discussion like this about Crystal Palace local history. It's such a waste of time discussing rules and laws... No right turn before Catford Bridge... so what... Let's talk about the Monkey House instead!
fair enough falkor
a foundation tends to get conservative over time, aiming at administration, position, political correctness (i.e. claiming what everyone knows is not true at some level) and profit rather than your passionate love for any CP detail
they have told their version of the story and they are not hungry for new details anymore, that's obvious
i did find useful things both with the foundation and here at street level
do i detect classic british class separation in this discussion
or
who owns history (and its copyright)
repressing history through copyright ... hmmm ... iraq?
they have told their version of the story and they are not hungry for new details anymore, that's obvious
i did find useful things both with the foundation and here at street level
do i detect classic british class separation in this discussion
or
who owns history (and its copyright
)repressing history through copyright ... hmmm ... iraq?