Barp

[Orion V]

Why not just fix a different setting where they cannot save the photos? That works usually.

If someone really wants the photo, then they'll find a way to save it and use it. Even though I never use any of the photos you guys post but for my personal viewing, I still manage to save the pics I really like even after you disable right clicking the pics.

[stm_5307N]

If someone really wants the photo, then they'll find a way to save it and use it. Even though I never use any of the photos you guys post but for my personal viewing, I still manage to save the pics I really like even after you disable right clicking the pics.

Just remember that if you can see it on your screen, you can get the image on your computer no matter what. It's very simple to do.

[M. Parsons]

February 27, 2007: Updated the Longueuil section with photos of: 641, 1149, 1151, 4522, 4529, 4602, and 4701.

Updated the Montreal section with photos of: #4042, 4463, and 5055.

[stm_5307N]

February 27, 2007: Updated the Longueuil section with photos of: 641, 1149, 1151, 4522, 4529, 4602, and 4701.

Updated the Montreal section with photos of: #4042, 4463, and 5055.

Interesting previous operator paint scheme on 1151. Very nice pics your adding Martin. I hope there's more!

[M. Parsons]

Interesting previous operator paint scheme on 1151. Very nice pics your adding Martin. I hope there's more!

Alas, no more from Montreal and area.

[M. Parsons]

March 5, 2007: Updated the St. Catharines section with photos of: 54, 55, 753 (X2) and a group shot.

Updated the Port Authority of Allegheny County (PAT) section with 5 photo of #595.

[new.flyer.408]

How come whenever I try to browse photos on your site, I receive a "Forbidden" error?

[T6H-5307N]

I get the same problem now too

[M. Parsons]

The 403 Forbidden Error occurs because I have temporarily (possibly permanently) removed access to Barp to anyone but me. Whether I choose to return Barp is, naturally, up to me.

It all kind of revolves around the fact that I put out money for the website, spend a hell of a lot of time on it, and end up having to try to hunt down people for violating the copyright notice. My time is a lot better spent filing slides/ negatives/ prints, trading slides/ prints, painting models etc. and I just don't feel like dealing with crap. I'm doing everyone else a favor by putting images up, I'm not doing this for myself.

More than likely it will return in a few days. When ever I get around to drafting a far stricter copyright notice and investigating other options such as making the whole website password protected so that only certain people can access it.

Frankly, I understand now why a lot of people I have met who have tremendous photo collections have no interest in posting any great number of images on the internet.

I hope everyone understands.

[Aztek985]

That's a shame. Too bad people are stupid and steal the pictures you take, or don't ask for permission from the photo's original author.

[M. Parsons]

That's a shame. Too bad people are stupid and steal the pictures you take, or don't ask for permission from the photo's original author.

What are you talking about?

[Aztek985]

What are you talking about?

Well ... you said you were tired to tracking down people, so I said if they would stop stealing the photos you take with your camera, or if they would ask the author of the picture to use it, then there would be no problems, would there?

[TC60102N]

Well ... you said you were tired to tracking down people, so I said if they would stop stealing the photos you take with your camera, or if they would ask the author of the picture to use it, then there would be no problems, would there?

Appparently He "Owns" The photos that he scans...

[M. Parsons]

OK, I thought that all of this had been dealt with off of the board. I had decided to let the fact that Kyle's avatar was likely lifted from a group of images that was never supposed to be posted publicly, but was lurking on the Barp servers, go.

So, for those pushing this topic... No, the specific reason that I pulled Barp down was the use of multiple images of my own, mainly from Western Canada, on a Fotopic website. The owner of that website complied with my request to remove those images. However, I was already pissed off and it left me questioning Why do I run a website when I have to deal with this?

As well, I have had a few images used by a transit industry magazine without my permission. Most wouldn't think that's a big deal, but when all it takes is 60 seconds to formulate a brief email... there's really no excuse in my opinion not to try to make contact with the site owner(s).

Of course, these are not the only two examples of images being reused without permission. Previous problems have been anywhere from simply reusing and image without permission, to actually altering the original image so that any credits were removed.

To be perfectly honest, I can't tell if that HSR artic image is indeed the one I actually scanned or not. However, Mr. Braniff previously had an image as an avatar that I had not intended for public release. My text is visible at the bottom of the image. A screen shot is attached.

So. For those wondering... I purchased a number of original slides from Bill Miller. So yes, I own those slides that I have scanned.

So, based upon the logic that seems to have been presented by Braniff and Kyle...

I have permission to use images from Peter Cox on my website, as does Peter (busdrawings.com).

Does that mean I can go and lift images from busdrawings.com, change the website on the image and call it mine, after all I have permission from Peter Cox to use his images?

See attached image, purposely degraded in quality as I want to make it obvious I don't want to actually use it on my website, I'm just making a point.

Why don't I lift Peter Cox images and reuse them on mine? Respect for others.

One option I have considered is removing all content from anyone else but the webmasters of Barp. Everything else I get will be kept for my own, private use and only sent to those who I trust.

It will be squirreled away, and with it, pieces of transportation history.

[Aztek985]

Did you ever think that these images you "purchased" are still held by Bill himself? You think we are a bunch of hackers or something? I have better things to do with my time than try to find your secret stashes of pictures. For reference, my avatar IS the one that you supposedly purchased, however it is not from your secret stash, I got it from John, who got it from Bill, in memory of the GM Artics. If your going to continue to whine and bitch about something so stupid, then you should consider keeping your site down. Leave me the hell out of this, I haven't done anything wrong.

*end rant*

[Orion VIII]

I think this is a matter that should be dealt with in private.

[kevlo86]

Moderator note: Please move all discussion regarding this conflict off the board please as these are turning into personal conflicts with each other.

[Aztek985]

Sorry Kevin, I have to defend myself.

Mike:

Firstly, Bill selling Martin that slide was Bill giving Martin the right to use that slide. It is still rightfully the property of Bill Miller.

John and Bill are good friends, so why would John have to buy those slides from Bill? Then John gave that picture to me, again, property of Bill, not Martin. Do you see Martin's copyright in the picture? That means I didn't take it from his website! John acquired this photograph, he did not steal it from anybody.

I never stated anywhere that Bill had not made copies of the slides. That information is unknown to me.

Finally, could you stop making things personal Mr. Mike? Your too stereotypical and we enjoy this hobby as much as you do. Since I did not steal this photo, I have every right to say, I would hate for people to steal my photography too.

[Enviro 500]

Sorry Kevin, I have to defend myself.

Mike:

Firstly, Bill selling Martin that slide was Bill giving Martin the right to use that slide. It is still rightfully the property of Bill Miller.

John and Bill are good friends, so why would John have to buy those slides from Bill? Then John gave that picture to me, again, property of Bill, not Martin. Do you see Martin's copyright in the picture? That means I didn't take it from his website! John acquired this photograph, he did not steal it from anybody.

I never stated anywhere that Bill had not made copies of the slides. That information is unknown to me.

Finally, could you stop making things personal Mr. Mike? Your too stereotypical and we enjoy this hobby as much as you do. Since I did not steal this photo, I have every right to say, I would hate for people to steal my photography too.

Not trying to be offensive, but just trying to say what I think of this issue:

As a photographer myself, I don't mind people using my photos of personal uses - feel free to download them from my webpage for your school projects, or even avatars here..........I don't mind, as long as the copyright stamp is still visibly shown, which is a way to respect the author's copyright. However, usage of photos for commercial purposes, or any usage that include any second parties other than the first person him/herself (in this case, publishing my photos on somebody else's website without my permission, or publicly exhibit my photos without my permission) I consider these as invasion of my copyright.

When Martin purchased the slide from Bill, this slide officially belongs to him, therefore, it is indeed the property of Martin. This is just a basic idea of any transactions - when you buy a bag of candies from Superstore, it is your candy as long as you paid for it............once Superstore gets the cash, that bag of Candy has nothing to do with Superstore anymore.

Rights to use photos for non-commercial purposes do not require money to be involved - just ask, and credit the photographer, and you're good to go! If I post someone else's photo as my avatar here, I would ask the photographer first, just to show that I do respect and honour the copyright of the author.

Overall - we're just having a little misunderstanding here............Martin purchased the photo from Bill Miller directly, and you got the same photo from a friend of yours; therefore, it is natural that Martin might have some uneasy feelings and thought you have stolen the photo. However, your friend (John) should probably ask Bill if he could pass on his photo to someone else, or instruct the receiver to strictly use the photo for viewing - and nothing else.

Again - it's just a little misunderstanding, neither side is at fault. So, take it easy!

Dave

[Aztek985]

As far as I know, John did inform Mr. Miller.

[TC60102N]

Overall - we're just having a little misunderstanding here............Martin purchased the photo from Bill Miller directly, and you got the same photo from a friend of yours; therefore, it is natural that Martin might have some uneasy feelings and thought you have stolen the photo. However, your friend (John) should probably ask Bill if he could pass on his photo to someone else, or instruct the receiver to strictly use the photo for viewing - and nothing else.

Again - it's just a little misunderstanding, neither side is at fault. So, take it easy!

Dave

Agreed, I should have asked Bill, All it takes is a trip to the bus station, Bill and I never really talked about passing on photos, He only knew most of his older photos I acuired (through anybody) Were being passed along to Kyle.

The thing that gets me is that I apologized to Martin, he seemed understanding of the situation so as far as I'm concerned the matter is over. So people like "Mike, From Edmonton" need to butt out and mind their own business. This is between Martin and I and like I said, AFAIK the matter has been dealt with.

I will say no more on this topic.

[M. Parsons]

The thing that gets me is that I apologized to Martin, he seemed understanding of the situation so as far as I'm concerned the matter is over.

That was my understanding as well. As BC Transit correctly noticed there was a bit of a misunderstanding. I am by no means saying I was 100% right. Just Kyle seemed to come to the wrong conclusion about why I pulled Barp without even talking to me.

As a co-webmaster of Barp with me, mike from edmonton has any right to discuss anything related to Barp.

Anyways, end of story. It's too bad that everything that has happened in this thread, did happen.

[D40LF]

When did Mike become co-owner? Hadn't noticed that before!

Whatever happened to Ken?

BTW I did notice that there was a mistake in the St.Catharines page. You had the photo of 8029 described as 8133.

I hope you do bring this site backup. It was a great one that I often turned to when researching.

[Felix]

When did Mike become co-owner? Hadn't noticed that before!

Whatever happened to Ken?

BTW I did notice that there was a mistake in the St.Catharines page. You had the photo of 8029 described as 8133.

I hope you do bring this site backup. It was a great one that I often turned to when researching.

Martin said on January 15th 2007, page 4 of this thread:

Ken Baker is a live and well. He's just got some problems in his life that require his attention more than the bus hobby does at this point. I can't see this changing anytime soon. For the time being, he's not directly involved with Barp. Mike Dasher has stepped up and is going to be working with me on Barp. We're still working on getting Mike set up, and I'm starting to play around with the way Ken has a few things set up. My next project is to add another button for a new page, and work on the FTD, and update the links page. I've also had to set up a new email address as I have no clue how long the other address has gone unchecked. I can only assume it's been too long. So, if anyone ever sent email to Barp and never got a reponse, that's why.

Further, it's my understanding that Ken might be selling some items from his bus collection, and #22 is more or less up for sale. If anyone wants to know more, PM me.

[M. Parsons]

Further, it's my understanding that Ken might be selling some items from his bus collection, and #22 is more or less up for sale. If anyone wants to know more, PM me.

Ironically, I spent some time today with Ken, the first time I've seen him in many months and for that matter even really talked with him.

Things seem to be going better for him. He has a better job that he is enjoying.

He is hanging onto #22 for now, and doing a bit of work to it, including installing an air shifter as he was having a few problems with the cable shifter. He also now has my 1969 side roll sign from an ETS GM... This would have been from the same group of buses #22 was apart of.

We spent a few hours checking out various buses around Edmonton as well as taking photos.