Bubble trouble: Not-so-lazy cycling thief spotted balancing stolen lazy spa; Aussie cop stops helmet camera users; Police weed out cyclist towing 14kg of cannabis; Shaun Bailey LTN Tour de France vid deleted; Pidcock Gran Fondo + more on the live blog

Quote:

 We all know the Tdf clip was flagged because someone from another political affiliation reported it - lame.

No we don't. Youtube has loads of automated algorythms doing this nowadays both pre and post publication. There are also paid people to find these things as well on Youtube after the fact, used especially when the footage owners cannot be determined automatically. A bike race or a football match can be anyones for example. 

There is nothing stopping the video being reposted without the footage as well or should we allow Politicians to flout common law left right and centre. (Although as your support Johnson we probably know your answer).

My god you're naive.

The copyright claims are done by the people who own the copyright. Nothing naive about that.

alexuk wrote:

I think handing the decision to local residents is a good idea. We all know that some LTN's and bike routes in London have been shut down by petitioning from non-residents. Not every street wants to be LTN; so long as it is the residents that get the choice - I think this is a good thing? We all know the Tdf clip was flagged because someone from another political affiliation reported it - lame.

I always think its funny when you read about some consultation on a cycle lane or somesuch, and you read about how they have had comments supporting or opposing from some person who will never in their lifetime go anywhere near that piece of infrastructure...

Signing a petition for this, that, or the other, then yes I can see that anyone should be able to; but a consultation on some geographically specific matter (like a pop-up cycle lane or an LTN), then I can see the argument for you having to be Local to be able to comment.

Nevertheless, from what I've read, the majority of LTNs have been opposed by the people who drive through them (ie. the very people who are supposed to be inconvenienced by them).

I see no reason to exclude non-locals from consultations - an effective consultation should cover everyone who has an interest in or will be affected by the change. But it should also understand the perspective they're approaching it from - so require them to supply a postcode and some information about how they currently use the space, and then downweight their views appropriately when you analyse the results.

mdavidford wrote:

I see no reason to exclude non-locals from consultations - an effective consultation should cover everyone who has an interest in or will be affected by the change. But it should also understand the perspective they're approaching it from - so require them to supply a postcode and some information about how they currently use the space, and then downweight their views appropriately when you analyse the results.

Fair enough 

(I'm not sure that someone who will in their lifetime go nowhere near, for example, a proposed pop-up cycle lane could ever be said to have "an interest in or will be affected by the change"; "interested in", maybe, but not actually "having an interest in"; it'd be like me responding to a consultation on something taking place in the US).

They could still argue that they have an interest in, say, influencing the national conversation and policy around cycle lanes generally. And they might even have something useful to contribute to improving the scheme design.

A bigger problem is that most so-called consultations aren't really consultations at all - they're little more than simplistic surveys designed to produce some simple statistics that can be thrown around ("57% of people felt negative about the scheme (although we didn't bother to look at why they felt negative, and whether those concerns could have been addressed, or even whether they were completely contradictory, before we scrapped it)"). If you're not prepared to do the work to dig into, analyse, and weight the responses in the first place, then the output is devalued before you even begin to consider whether the respondents are local or not.

If Bailey wants to say that utility cycling is the same as the Tour de France, no one will prevent him even though it is daft and unhelpful.

If he uses copyright material without permission, the copyright owner will stop him doing that.

Awavey wrote:

... but a 2 second clip was unlikely to earn money for the rights holder ...

You understand that is irrelevent, right?

The copyright owner of any work is entitled to restrict how it is used by others, especially where used without permission, even if they are not making money from it now and have no intention (or chance) of making money from it in the future. 

Jetmans Dad wrote:

Awavey wrote:

... but a 2 second clip was unlikely to earn money for the rights holder ...

You understand that is irrelevent, right?

The copyright owner of any work is entitled to restrict how it is used by others, especially where used without permission, even if they are not making money from it now and have no intention (or chance) of making money from it in the future. 

Small sections of copyrighted material can be used in a "transformative" way or to add commentary in a newsworthy fashion. In this scenario though: He could have used screenshots instead, or not used copyrighted material at all when making his point.

Absolutely,or simply taken his taxi ride via Regents Park outer circle

Not irrelevant when it comes to determining if its fair dealing/fair usage, that's one of the tests used to determine if it is or not

You could post a link if you want? Some articles are picked up from the comments sections.

Edit: I typed in Shaun Bailey pro cycling and the only Standard article that came up was the one with the Bunny hops which was covered slightly last week. Is there another one where Bailey is not driving a big (lying?) battle bus around the whole of London?

Ohh, thought you had another one. Probably is this then which was posted back on the Khan bunnyhop article/blog.

Quote:

Ross Lydall on Twitter: "I had that ⁦@ShaunBaileyUK⁩ on the back of my bike this morning in St James’ Park. He clearly knows how to handle a bike. This is what he had to say about cycling... https://t.co/ArfeST28Ut" / Twitter

Bailey wouldn't be the first politician to attempt to face both ways on an issue, but his main message is 'if you hate bicycles, vote for me'.

HarrogateSpa wrote:

Bailey wouldn't be the first politician to attempt to face both ways on an issue, but his main message is 'if you hate bicycles, vote for me'.

After all, it is simply impossible to describe how pro-cycling he is......

Amazingly, he hasn't signed the climate safe streets pledge. So far out of the 20 candidates, only Sian Berry and Luisa Porrit have.