Promax robbed my photo..........thieving bar-stewards
-<GB>-Carpy
http://ickenhamaerials.co.uk/DSCF1125.JPG
Here's the Promax PDF booklet for their new TV-Hunter DVB-T hand held meter.
http://www.promaxelectronics.com/downloads/products/ing/TVHUNTER.pdf
Check the photo on page 1. Looks familiar huh?
Then to add insult to injury, they've given me green cord trousers, a
receding hairline, and a shirt!
Dave Plowman (News)
You'd have thought they could have got rid of the old mount on the other
side of the stack given the amount of touching up they've done. And why
remove the chimney pots?
--
*'ome is where you 'ang your @ *
Dave Plowman da...@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
John Rumm
Not only that, you appear to be a giant if the scale of the pole etc is
anything to go by. Another neat trick is how you can stand behind the
mast, and appear in front of the reflector of the back mount aerial on
said mast. That's before getting onto the shadow on the side of the
giant being on the side facing the sun.
--
Cheers,
John.
/=================================================================\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\=================================================================/
fred
breach of your copyright.
No, really.
--
fred
BBC3, ITV2/3/4, channels going to the DOGs
Ivan
"John Rumm" <see.my.s...@nowhere.null> wrote in message
news:h5idndqVF5v6qL3W...@brightview.co.uk...
> -<GB>-Carpy wrote:
>> Here's an old photo on my website, taken by me a few years ago.
>> http://ickenhamaerials.co.uk/DSCF1125.JPG
>>
>> Here's the Promax PDF booklet for their new TV-Hunter DVB-T hand held
>> meter.
>> http://www.promaxelectronics.com/downloads/products/ing/TVHUNTER.pdf
>> Check the photo on page 1. Looks familiar huh?
>>
>> Then to add insult to injury, they've given me green cord trousers, a
>> receding hairline, and a shirt!
>
> Not only that, you appear to be a giant if the scale of the pole etc is
> anything to go by. Another neat trick is how you can stand behind the
> mast, and appear in front of the reflector of the back mount aerial on
> said mast. That's before getting onto the shadow on the side of the giant
> being on the side facing the sun.
>
> --
He also seems to be doing a pretty good job of balancing himself on such a
steep looking roof, considering that he doesn't appear to be using a roofing
ladder , unless of course he's standing on the top of a dormer that we can't
see.
larkim
> In article <liVTm.40112$Ld7.5...@newsfe14.ams2>, -<GB>-Carpy
Absolutely bloody right! Copyright theft is bad enough with consumers
nicking professional works, without companies nicking private
individuals photos.
You have to ask why it was beyond the wit of man / Promax to take a
photo of someone near to an aerial without have to take a fairly
ordinary photo of a roof (no offence!), touch out the old aerial and
replace and add a character that wasn't there! And to be happy with
what they produced!!
Time to serve a small claims notice on them if a polite conversation
doesn't result in payment / freebies!
Matt
larkim
> Here's an old photo on my website, taken by me a few years ago.http://ickenhamaerials.co.uk/DSCF1125.JPG
>
> Here's the Promax PDF booklet for their new TV-Hunter DVB-T hand held meter.http://www.promaxelectronics.com/downloads/products/ing/TVHUNTER.pdf
> Check the photo on page 1. Looks familiar huh?
>
> Then to add insult to injury, they've given me green cord trousers, a
> receding hairline, and a shirt!
And its on their Spanish and French international versions too -
http://www.promax.es/downloads/products/esp/TVHUNTER.pdf
http://www.promax.es/downloads/products/fra/TVHUNTER.pdf
Matt
-<GB>-Carpy
"larkim" <matthew...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d6f2ac4c-ea36-4323...@u7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
Matt
You really think they will care? It would be nice if I could squeeze a
TVHunter out of them, but I can't see it happening! My TV Explorer is in for
repair with Promax at the moment, so I'll wait until I've got that back
before I have a word about nicking my picture......
Doctor D
"-<GB>-Carpy" <ca...@nothanks.com> wrote in message
news:liVTm.40112$Ld7....@newsfe14.ams2...
Considering that was taken in the CP region, they've also downgraded the
quality of the aerial - but made it huge to compensate!
Surely you should wear some PPE ;-)
Java Jive
Have you been by the house recently? Does it still have the chimney
pots? Above all, does it still have the aerial you installed?
I ask, because I'm not absolutely convinced it's actually the same
picture. I outlined the roof and chimney in their photo ...
http://www.macfh.co.uk/Test/Carpy_1.png
... and then tried to make the outline fit those in yours ...
http://www.macfh.co.uk/Test/Carpy_2.png
... it's a pretty good fit certainly, but not quite exact towards the
LHS, which I think it would have to be for it to be actually the same
photo. I think the photos are probably of the same house taken from
almost the same vantage point, but perhaps a yard or two apart.
Beside the chimney pots having been probably overwritten when they
grafted on the sky along with the absurdly huge aerial (I wonder what
the windage would be if it really were that size) and the levitating
giant installer, there are other differences in the picture as well,
which could indicate it's actually a different but similar house, but
I think the greater number of similarities suggest it's the same
house.
+ The bracket and the piece of older metalwork the other side of the
chimney look to be identical, though the mast may have been replaced
when touching up the original photo.
+ Zooming in, the pattern of bricks in the chimney and the gaps
between courses appear exactly the same.
+ There's a chip or bright patch on the (can't remember the
technical building term) front facing corner tile 5th course down
which looks the same in both.
- The crap on the roof has gone.
At very least, you can try complaining. For one thing, if the aerial
on the house is actually still the one that you installed (so I
suggest you go and check), then the picture is misleading. It's also
misleading in terms of the proportions of the aerial and the windage
it implies. It may also be that my drawing is insufficiently accurate
(which wouldn't be surprising), that they have actually used your pic,
and might come clean to your advantage if you press them!
On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 22:13:24 -0000, "-<GB>-Carpy" <ca...@nothanks.com>
wrote:
> Here's an old photo on my website, taken by me a few years ago.
> http://ickenhamaerials.co.uk/DSCF1125.JPG
>
> Here's the Promax PDF booklet for their new TV-Hunter DVB-T hand held meter.
> http://www.promaxelectronics.com/downloads/products/ing/TVHUNTER.pdf
> Check the photo on page 1. Looks familiar huh?
--
=========================================================
Please always reply to ng as the email in this post's
header does not exist. Or use a contact addresses at:
http://www.macfh.co.uk/JavaJive/JavaJive.html
http://www.macfh.co.uk/Macfarlane/Macfarlane.html
larkim
> "larkim" <matthew.lar...@gmail.com> wrote in message
I don't know if they will care, but if you are factually in the right
and get nowhere with a polite conversation then a cheap small claims
notice would at least prompt a response. Particularly where you are
a customer of theirs, I would have thought it would be excellent
customer relations to apologise for their error and compensate you -
even a bottle of whisky would be better than nothing!
Matt
Dave Farrance
I've used the "Gimp" to trace the roof with automatic near-colour
outline-tracing, then applied an exact 3:1 scaling between the two images,
and they're a perfect match. See here:
(This was inspired by Java Jive'a attempt, which was a good idea in
principle, but it needed a little refining.)
And the advice from various people about redress... I know that most of us
are too teccy for our own good, but even somebody like me knows what
"having a laugh" is.
--
Dave Farrance
John Rumm
Or a free repair on the Explorer...
-<GB>-Carpy
"Java Jive" <ja...@evij.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:g9j2i5djbilrhcp4m...@4ax.com...
It's the same photo. No doubt at all about that.
Peter Duncanson
The owner of the house might want a share of the "winnings".
--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)
Java Jive
artist in the family was/is my ex-wife)
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 08:18:47 GMT, Dave Farrance
<DaveFa...@OMiTTHiSyahooANDTHiS.co.uk> wrote:
>
> I've used the "Gimp" to trace the roof with automatic near-colour
> outline-tracing, then applied an exact 3:1 scaling between the two images,
> and they're a perfect match. See here:
>
> http://imgur.com/61nko.jpg
>
> (This was inspired by Java Jive'a attempt, which was a good idea in
> principle, but it needed a little refining.)
larkim
Why? You don't own copyright in the way that your house looks (unless
you built it, when I suppose you might). You have copyright in
something you create (i.e. a photo). If David Bailey wanted to take a
photo of me (why, I know not!) he'd own the copyright of the photo.
Imagine if every subject of a photo was able to make a claim for a
share of the royalties - there'd be a whole industry of celebs agents
charging paparazzi for snatched photos!!
Matt
wrights...@f2s.com
> Here's an old photo on my website, taken by me a few years ago.http://ickenhamaerials.co.uk/DSCF1125.JPG
>
> Here's the Promax PDF booklet for their new TV-Hunter DVB-T hand held meter.http://www.promaxelectronics.com/downloads/products/ing/TVHUNTER.pdf
> Check the photo on page 1. Looks familiar huh?
>
> Then to add insult to injury, they've given me green cord trousers, a
> receding hairline, and a shirt!
You want to ask them for a freebie. My picture of Little Mo with TETRA
all over her clock has been widely used.
Bill
Mike Tomlinson
Rumm <see.my.s...@nowhere.null> writes
>Not only that, you appear to be a giant if the scale of the pole etc is
>anything to go by. Another neat trick is how you can stand behind the
>mast, and appear in front of the reflector of the back mount aerial on
>said mast. That's before getting onto the shadow on the side of the
>giant being on the side facing the sun.
>
Not only that, he's got his arse on back to front. Must be some
hangover.
The bottom half (the pants) is of someone facing the opposite way,
partially bent over.
And re: the photo of TVCunter, the Service List shown is of Spanish
channels. The first one isn't what some people might think it is.
--
(\__/)
(='.'=) Bunny says Windows 7 is Vi$ta reloaded.
(")_(") http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/windows_7.png
airsmoothed
>
> Not only that, he's got his arse on back to front. Must be some
> hangover.
>
> The bottom half (the pants) is of someone facing the opposite way,
> partially bent over.
>
> --
> (\__/)
> (='.'=) Bunny says Windows 7 is Vi$ta reloaded.
> (")_(") http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/windows_7.png
I hadn't noticed that! - photoshop disasters submission material
methinks.
-<GB>-Carpy
"-<GB>-Carpy" <ca...@nothanks.com> wrote in message
news:liVTm.40112$Ld7....@newsfe14.ams2...
Well I went into Promax UK, and asked if I could see whoever was responsible
for putting together this TVHunter PDF. They asked me why, so I said that
whoever did it had stolen my photo and I wanted to grill them about this.
They said Promax would never steal any photo, and it wasn't produced by the
UK team anyway - it was the Spanish lot. I assured them it was defnitely my
photo that has been used without my permission, but they said that's
impossible! I told them I would pursue the Spanish arm of Promax and see
what they say about it. Problem is, my Spanish is particularly poor, so I'm
a bit stuck on how to proceed from here! I reckon a free TV Hunter is
defnitely a goer, if I can push the right buttons and annoy them to the
point where they just want me to go away.....
Paul S
IMHO I don't think it matters a damn who produced the photo - They published
on their website so they are responsible.
--
Paul S
Paul D.Smith
>> the UK team anyway - it was the Spanish lot. I assured them it was
>> defnitely my photo that has been used without my permission, but they
>> said that's impossible! I told them I would pursue the Spanish arm of
>> Promax and see what they say about it. Problem is, my Spanish is
>> particularly poor, so I'm a bit stuck on how to proceed from here! I
>> reckon a free TV Hunter is defnitely a goer, if I can push the right
>> buttons and annoy them to the point where they just want me to go
>> away.....
>
> IMHO I don't think it matters a damn who produced the photo - They
> published on their website so they are responsible.
>
> --
> Paul S
There is a freeware program called SMerge which you can use to overlap their
photo over yours to show that they two really are the same, right down to
the tiles.
And I agree with Paul S, their company, their website, their problem.
Is there a lawyer in the house?
Paul DS
Dave Farrance
>Well I went into Promax UK, and asked if I could see whoever was responsible
>for putting together this TVHunter PDF. They asked me why, so I said that
>whoever did it had stolen my photo and I wanted to grill them about this.
>
>They said Promax would never steal any photo, and it wasn't produced by the
>UK team anyway - it was the Spanish lot. I assured them it was defnitely my
>photo that has been used without my permission, but they said that's
>impossible! I told them I would pursue the Spanish arm of Promax and see
>what they say about it. Problem is, my Spanish is particularly poor, so I'm
>a bit stuck on how to proceed from here! I reckon a free TV Hunter is
>defnitely a goer, if I can push the right buttons and annoy them to the
>point where they just want me to go away.....
Show them this:
--
Dave Farrance
Paul D.Smith
That's nice - what software did that for you?
Paul DS.
-<GB>-Carpy
"Dave Farrance" <DaveFa...@OMiTTHiSyahooANDTHiS.co.uk> wrote in message
news:s9ahi597d6fsv4i7q...@4ax.com...
Superb Dave thanks for that. If you could possibly keep it hosted for a
while until I get this sorted out? I will report back with any progress!
Dave Farrance
I use the Gimp since it's free, but any photo manipulation app like
Photoshop or Paintshop should do. Once you've got your head around the
concepts of the canvas, layers, masks, and filters, then something like
that can be knocked together quite quickly.
--
Dave Farrance
Dave Farrance
>"Dave Farrance" <DaveFa...@OMiTTHiSyahooANDTHiS.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> Show them this:
>> http://imgur.com/JWZy1.jpg
>
>Superb Dave thanks for that. If you could possibly keep it hosted for a
>while until I get this sorted out? I will report back with any progress!
Cool. It's on imgur.com, which is a free image hosting site that requires
no user account to upload images, and it retains an image as long as
somebody views it at least once every 3 months.
--
Dave Farrance
Rayden
Promax UK's stance is it was "someone" in Promax Spain that stole the photo, and he doesn't work for the company anymore, and they aren't willing to offer anything as compensation except a verbal apology.
Pretty disappointed with their attitude really. I've been a loyal customer for years and would have been happy with some kind of freebie. Even a new mains charger for my TV Explorer would have sufficed. I've lost mine and refuse to pay the £100 or so they want for a replacement.
I'd love to know if there's a way to take this further, mainly because I don't like their attitude. I doubt it's a road worth exploring though? If anyone has a different brand of analyser which compares to the Promax ones then I'm all ears.
Jim Lesurf
<d55ab680-0cb9-4eed...@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com>,
Rayden <carpm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well after 2 years of using my photograph and another discussion with
> Promax UK, they have finally acknowledged they have been using my photo
> for the last 2 years, and have now removed it from all their literature.
> Promax UK's stance is it was "someone" in Promax Spain that stole the
> photo, and he doesn't work for the company anymore, and they aren't
> willing to offer anything as compensation except a verbal apology.
IANAL however taking what you write at face value: I think the legal
problem they would have is that regardless of whoever "stole" it, if
they've been using it without permission then they may have breached
copyright by doing so. AIUI it was down to them to ensure that "rights"
they think they were assigned were granted by a "someone" legally
entitled to grant them.
If reproducing copyright material without the copyright-owner's permission
ends up costing them, it is for them to decide if they want to take
action against the "someone" who mislead them.
cf below for how to check this.
> Pretty disappointed with their attitude really. I've been a loyal
> customer for years and would have been happy with some kind of freebie.
> Even a new mains charger for my TV Explorer would have sufficed. I've
> lost mine and refuse to pay the £100 or so they want for a replacement.
> I'd love to know if there's a way to take this further, mainly because I
> don't like their attitude. I doubt it's a road worth exploring though?
1) Ask your local CAB (who may have a legal clinic and/or can write a
legalese letter for you to the company in question).
2) Then if you wish, contact a lawyer.
A letter from either may well 'improve' their attitude if you have a
reasonable legal case.
But in the end, your decision how far to push. A lawyer with the
relevant experience may be able to advise on what level of damages
you might get, and if the issue is worth acting upon.
Slainte,
Jim
--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html
Robin
> problem they would have is that regardless of whoever "stole" it, if
> they've been using it without permission then they may have breached
> copyright by doing so. AIUI it was down to them to ensure that
> "rights" they think they were assigned were granted by a "someone"
> legally entitled to grant them.
>
> But in the end, your decision how far to push. A lawyer with the
> relevant experience may be able to advise on what level of damages
> you might get, and if the issue is worth acting upon.
>
uk.legal.moderated might give you a additional views. FWIW (ie v
little) my vague recollection is that:
a. you are not entitled to anything if PROMAX can argue they'd no
reason to believe that someone else had copyright; and more important
b. how much compensation you would get is typically based on the loss
you have suffered (eg how much less the photo is worth now because it
has been used by PROMAX) or on how much extra profit PROMAX have made
from using your photo (ie all those sales made from using that rather
than some other chimney etc) . Both likely to be small tending towards
.......?
(And their lawyers may have advised them to give you nothing for fear of
admitting more.)
--
Robin
PM may be sent to rbw0{at}hotmail{dot}com
Bill Wright
> Well after 2 years of using my photograph and another discussion with Promax UK,
they have finally acknowledged they have been using my photo for the
last 2 years, and have
now removed it from all their literature.
What was it a picture of?
>
> Promax UK's stance is it was "someone" in Promax Spain that stole the photo, and
e doesn't work for the company anymore, and they aren't willing to offer
anything as
compensation except a verbal apology.
>
> Pretty disappointed with their attitude really. I've been a loyal customer for years
and would have been happy with some kind of freebie. Even a new mains
charger for my TV
Explorer would have sufficed. I've lost mine and refuse to pay the £100
or so they
want for a replacement.
The three Promaxes we have will all charge from any 12V DC supply, such
as any old PSU. I think the current drawn is 2.5A max. The plug is
slightly bigger than the 'normal' one, but CPC sell them.
Bill
Rayden
I've never been able to find the correct DC plug size on CPC. The Promax seems to be 5.5mm x 2.5mm (12mm long). Have just ordered some from ebay and will see if they fit......
Rayden
Graham.
>
> now removed it from all their literature.
>
> What was it a picture of?
--
Graham.
%Profound_observation%
Bill
<d55ab680-0cb9-4eed...@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com>
, Rayden <carpm...@gmail.com> writes
>Well after 2 years of using my photograph and another discussion with
>Promax UK, they have finally acknowledged they have been using my photo
>for the last 2 years, and have now removed it from all their literature.
>
>Promax UK's stance is it was "someone" in Promax Spain that stole the
>photo, and he doesn't work for the company anymore, and they aren't
>willing to offer anything as compensation except a verbal apology.
>
>Pretty disappointed with their attitude really. I've been a loyal
>customer for years and would have been happy with some kind of freebie.
>Even a new mains charger for my TV Explorer would have sufficed. I've
>
>I'd love to know if there's a way to take this further, mainly because
>I don't like their attitude. I doubt it's a road worth exploring
>though? If anyone has a different brand of analyser which compares to
>the Promax ones then I'm all ears.
Still makes an appearance elsewhere on the web though
http://www.dastv.co.uk/shop/docs/TVHUNTER.pdf
--
Bill
( A different one )
Max Demian
news:j393mj$qdc$1...@profound-observation.eternal-september.org...
>
>
>>
>> now removed it from all their literature.
>>
>> What was it a picture of?
>
> http://i.imgur.com/JWZy1.jpg
Well the modified one won't work as it's pointing in the opposite direction
(if that's any consolation).
What's the man supposed to be standing on?
--
Max Demian
Bill Wright
They have got them, but I don't know the stock number. Some time ago I
ordered one of every possible type in order to discover which was the
correct one. If you're stuck on this tell me and I'll have a look and
see if I can figure out the stock number. I think I might have some
still in their packs.
Bill
Bill Wright
The latter point is irrelevant. You could get the same nutrition from a
tin of spam bought from Asda as you could one bought from Morrisons, but
if you bought it from Asda you would need to pay Asda.
By the way when I reply to your messages
Bill
Bill Wright
>> now removed it from all their literature.
>>
>> What was it a picture of?
>
>
Is that a spanner in your pocket or are you just glad to be aerial rigging?
Bill
Bill Wright
> "Graham." <m...@privacy.com> wrote in message
> news:j393mj$qdc$1...@profound-observation.eternal-september.org...
>>
>>> now removed it from all their literature.
>>>
>>> What was it a picture of?
>
> Well the modified one won't work as it's pointing in the opposite direction
> (if that's any consolation).
>
> What's the man supposed to be standing on?
>
And why is he ten foot tall? That paste up was done by someone who
doesn't know the true size of a chimney. But count the bricks.
Bill
Brian Gaff
however long, and say if this is a final invoice and thank them for using
your photo supply agency.
Brian
--
Brian Gaff - bri...@blueyonder.co.uk
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Rayden" <carpm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d55ab680-0cb9-4eed...@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com...
Well after 2 years of using my photograph and another discussion with Promax
UK, they have finally acknowledged they have been using my photo for the
last 2 years, and have now removed it from all their literature.
Promax UK's stance is it was "someone" in Promax Spain that stole the photo,
and he doesn't work for the company anymore, and they aren't willing to
offer anything as compensation except a verbal apology.
Pretty disappointed with their attitude really. I've been a loyal customer
for years and would have been happy with some kind of freebie. Even a new
mains charger for my TV Explorer would have sufficed. I've lost mine and
refuse to pay the Ł100 or so they want for a replacement.