23 April 2015
11 April 2015
When Busted for Copyright Infringement -- Let's Go Crazy!
 |
| Photo by Oreo Photography |
The latest efforts to intimidate photographers by trying to embarrass and humiliate them are the creation of a series of Facebook pages where they share images from the Facebook page of any person who ever commented on any post about them. They have even attacked photos of babies with the flag and pulled photos off personal Facebook pages to harass people. While we cannot know the identity of administrators of a Facebook page without intervention by law enforcement (which may eventually happen) or the administrators identifying themselves (by inadvertently outing themselves), it is quite obvious who is behind the bully pages. I have been hit a couple of times by them on Ha, So You Think You're A Photographer. A new page went up a few days ago and after stalking the commenters on Photo Stealers, they shared screen shots of comments made by me and another follower of the blog. Despite their feeble protestations that the pages are not administered by them, affiliated with them, or administered at their direction, it seems rather suspicious that the page tends to focus on bullying and attempting to humiliate people who commented on the original Photo Stealers blog or commented on Facebook posts about the blog. Another page, Selling the drama, went up a few days ago, on or about April 8, 2015, and immediately the page started posting images in an attempt to humiliate and embarrass people who comment on the Photo Stealers blog.
After they hit me on the Ha, So You Think You're A Photographer page, I warned my friends who commented on my post that they too were opening themselves up to bullying by that pair, and sure enough they were hit too, thus demonstrating the purpose of the page is to bully and harass. The Selling the drama page posted screen shots from Photo Stealers comment thread on the SJK story and then Ha, So You Think You're A Photographer immediately shared posts from Selling the Drama to their page, evidencing a close link between the two pages.
Since Facebook often refuses to remove public posts that are shared, absent violent, insulting, or blatantly bullying language in the description, photographers and others who find their work shared on these pages have taken matters into their own hands. They have been changing the description of their work to include a "thank you note" complete with links to the Photo Stealers' post about the couple suspected of running the pages. As many of the "thank you notes" have been removed by Facebook after being reported and as Ha, So You Think You're A Photographer has boasted about getting links removed and people banned, it is probably safe to assume that the administrators of Ha, So You Think You're A Photographer report the "thank you notes" as harassment. This begs the question, if the story on Photo Stealers is not about the administrators of Ha, So You Think You're A Photographer, why would they bother to report the post and have it removed? When Facebook removes the photographer's photo because the description violates the TOS, the photo is also removed from Ha, So You Think You're A Photographer's page as well. This means they have to go trolling Facebook for new photo victims. It would be adverse to the purpose of the page to report photos they have shared for posting a link that does not have anything to do with them, therefore, hello Billcie. If the two pages are not connected, why is Selling the drama creeping the Photo Stealers blog post and screen capping comments to share on their new Facebook page?
If the administrator(s) of Selling the drama are not the people outed by Bullshizer, Photo Stealers, and others, why are they stalking the comment section of Photo Stealers and posting screen caps to their page? Hmmmmmmm?
If the administrator(s) of Selling the drama are not the people outed by Bullshizer, Photo Stealers, and others, why are they stalking the comment section of Photo Stealers and posting screen caps to their page? Hmmmmmmm?
Below are several screen shots taken from the Ha, So You Think You're A Photographer and Selling the drama pages demonstrating the harassment that photographers and non-photographers alike have had to endure. I suspect that this situation will not improve any time soon.
Oh and it probably isn't a good idea to bash any image of the United States flag. Just ask Vanessa Hicks.
Oh and it probably isn't a good idea to bash any image of the United States flag. Just ask Vanessa Hicks.
 |
| Photo by Heather Ann Photography |
 |
| Photo by Roy Barry |
 |
| Photo by Christopher Hoffman Photography, LLC |
 |
| Photo by 3Photography |
 |
| Post by About You Photography |
 |
| Unedited Version of Original Post Naming Me and Another Person Whinging About Links to Photo Stealers |
 |
| Example of the "Thank You" Note Photographers are Posting On their Photos Shared by ha, yadda yadda |
 |
| Post by Selling the drama evidencing they follow PS Blog comments |
 |
| Cross-sharing evidencing a connection between the two Facebook pages. |
 |
| False blogs about "us"? Hmmmmm |
JOIN THE CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS POST ON REDDIT
GET THE LATEST UPDATES ON TWITTER
Visit H Maria Perry Photography
01 April 2015
Freedom to Discriminate
The Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000bb-1 et seq.) signed into law by President Clinton applied to actions by the federal government that infringed on the free exercise of religion, notably Native Americans who used peyote during religious ceremonies. The federal law also set the standard as "strict scrutiny" which means basically that to interfere with a religious practice, conduct, or act, the government must have a compelling governmental reason and the burden placed on the religious act the by a governmental rule or law must be the least restrictive way in which to further the government interest. The federal RFRA has never applied to the states and was found to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court as applied to the states in 1997 in a case called City of Boerne v. Flores. As the federal RFRA does not and cannot apply to the states, states began enacting their own RFRA laws to prohibit government from infringing on the free exercise of religion.
As long as the RFRA or any state version of the RFRA applies only to acts that infringe on religion by the government, I have no problem with the law and most people do not have a problem with the law, as the First Amendment forbids actions by the government that (among other things) infringes on the free exercise of religion. Here is where Indiana ran afoul of the Constitution and infuriated a lot of people -- the Indiana law extends the protection to "persons" and since the Hobby Lobby decision by our Supreme Court, "persons" has come to mean not only human beings but also corporations and other businesses. Therefore, the Indiana version of the RFRA permits a "person" (individual or business) to exercise their "religious freedom" to the extent they are permitted to deny services to any other person whose beliefs, lifestyle, or any other characteristic, if providing services or a product to that person offends their religious views.
What this means, in plain language, is that a pizzeria owner can refuse to serve pizza to gay people and claim the protection of Indiana's RFRA statute in doing so as to serve gay people would offend their religious beliefs.
The federal RFRA was NEVER meant to provide a path to legalized discrimination at the state level. It protects the religious practices of people from governmental interference. It does not and can not protect "persons" (individuals or businesses) who choose to discriminate against others.
Much of the country was outraged by the Hobby Lobby decision and as Governor Pence and business owners in Indiana have come to learn is that the majority of people in the United States will not tolerate intolerance. We will not allow to stand a law that opens the door to legalized discrimination. We won't patronize the businesses of Indiana. Money talks and Governor Pence is back peddling fast, stating at a press conference that the law will be changed to prohibit businesses from discriminating against LGBT persons. In his own words, "Indiana is open for business" which I take to be a plea to halt the boycott of his state and "please continue to spend your money here." No, sir. We will not. Not as long as Indiana has legalized discrimination in place. Can we really make an impact by boycotting and shaming the bigotry? Just ask the owners of Memories Pizza.
28 March 2015
Today I Signed Indiana's Death Certificate
If this trend of "religious freedom" laws continues, and if Indiana is an indication of the future, it is also only a matter of time until we start seeing "Christians Only" signs at businesses. I haven't quite figured out how they will be able to test customers yet, maybe quiz you on the Ten Commandments or have you sign a declaration of some sort. Funny thing though, every atheist I know is more knowledgeable about the bible than most devout believers. That's why we are atheist. But I digress . . . . Crosses. Only people who wear a cross can come in the store. People with "Jesus Is My Co-Pilot" bumper stickers get a 10 percent discount.
Governor Mike Pence's "official" Facebook post about signing Indiana's bigot law into effect can be found here:
His first sentence would more accurately be stated, "Today I signed Indiana's economic death certificate and sealed my state's fate as a bigoted hell hole where no one will want to come. You're welcome."
Good luck, Governor. And good luck to the people of Indiana. You're going to need it.
30 January 2015
Rick Brattin Wants to Require Abortion Permission Slips
Anti-choice Republican Rick Brattin of Missouri wants to require women who seek abortions to first obtain a "permission slip" from the man who impregnated her. This "man" apparently thinks that women are still property and that the woman's body belongs to the man who manages to get his penis inside her vagina. Our Bodies! Our Choice! Not your choice Mr. Brattin! Sign this petition to put a stop to this insane legislation.
20 January 2015
08 January 2015
Charlie Hebdo's Brutal Attack on Islam
Publish! Publish! Publish!
Sony and the American people should take a lesson from the French and Charlie Hebdo about freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Last month, Sony caved to nebulous, anonymous threats and did not release The Interview after North Korea's little despot got his knickers in a twist about the film. I was outraged. Not because I planned to see the film, but because a little dictator on the other side of the world managed to take a bite out of free speech with mere threats. No one took to the streets in protest. No one.
Charlie Hebdo has, for many years, refused to be silenced by threats of violence. Following a brutal attack for exercising their human right to free expression, the people of France took to the streets in a show of solidarity. Cartoonists around the world unsheathed their pens, drew their deadly drawing pads, and fired off a series of deadly cartoon attacks on fundamentalist Islam.
The mere threat, with virtually no evidence of ability of the perpetrators (whose identity is still unknown) to carry out those threats, sent Sony scrambling to cancel the release of The Interview. We Americans boast that we are the land of the free and the home of the brave. Well, in my humble opinion, we weren't very free and certainly not brave when faced with a vague threat of violence.
Charlie Hebdo has given a big middle finger to the Islamic fundamentalists for years and says, "We will NOT be silenced by your hate and violence."
01 January 2015
SCOTUS Says Cops Don't Have to Know the Law
Heien v. North Carolina. Remember the name of this case. The Supreme Court has ruled that a police officer may violate your Fourth Amendment rights if he made a “reasonable mistake about the law.” You read that right. The Supreme Court has gone too far now! WE are required to know the law, i.e., the old adage, "ignorance of the law is no excuse."
In this case a fellow was pulled over for a violation that was NOT a violation of the law. The cop was mistaken and the driver was not in violation of the law which was the basis for the stop in the first place. Under the law (as it used to be) if the stop was illegal, then all evidence seized as a result of that illegal stop was not admissible in court. Fruit of the poisonous tree. As it is now, the stop can be illegal and any evidence seized used against you even if the cop thought he was stopping you for a legitimate violation, but he in fact was wrong about the law. In this case, the driver had only one brake light. The cop thought he was required to have both brake lights operating, so the cop stopped him and then searched the car. Turns out the cop was mistaken about the law, and only one brake light was required, therefore the cop had no legitimate basis to stop the driver in the first place, hence the search was illegal. The Supreme Court said, it doesn't matter if the stop was illegal and the evidence thus illegally seized IF the cop made a reasonable mistake about the law.
This begs the question: How many times can the same cop or police force be "mistaken" about the same law before it becomes obvious they actually know the law and are just using ignorance of the law as a pretext to stop and harass people?
Why are police officers not held to an even higher standard than those of us they are policing? How can they enforce the law without violating our rights if they don't know the law? Oh, right. Never mind. They have been violating our civil and human rights for decades now with little or no repercussions. The United States of America is slip sliding away into Fascism.
In this case a fellow was pulled over for a violation that was NOT a violation of the law. The cop was mistaken and the driver was not in violation of the law which was the basis for the stop in the first place. Under the law (as it used to be) if the stop was illegal, then all evidence seized as a result of that illegal stop was not admissible in court. Fruit of the poisonous tree. As it is now, the stop can be illegal and any evidence seized used against you even if the cop thought he was stopping you for a legitimate violation, but he in fact was wrong about the law. In this case, the driver had only one brake light. The cop thought he was required to have both brake lights operating, so the cop stopped him and then searched the car. Turns out the cop was mistaken about the law, and only one brake light was required, therefore the cop had no legitimate basis to stop the driver in the first place, hence the search was illegal. The Supreme Court said, it doesn't matter if the stop was illegal and the evidence thus illegally seized IF the cop made a reasonable mistake about the law.
This begs the question: How many times can the same cop or police force be "mistaken" about the same law before it becomes obvious they actually know the law and are just using ignorance of the law as a pretext to stop and harass people?
Why are police officers not held to an even higher standard than those of us they are policing? How can they enforce the law without violating our rights if they don't know the law? Oh, right. Never mind. They have been violating our civil and human rights for decades now with little or no repercussions. The United States of America is slip sliding away into Fascism.
You can read the Supreme Court's opinion here:
30 December 2014
Dancin' in the Street
Ellen recently issued a dance dare to her audience members. They can take video of themselves dancing behind people and to record and upload the video for a chance to be on her show. Alexander Bok took the dare and it didn't end well for him. A few NYPD officers roughed him up and verbally abused him before throwing him to the ground. I think Ellen should have this fellow on her show to talk about what happened to him.
Watch the video here:
21 December 2014
All I Hear Is Crickets
I have had it with Cricket Wireless. I paid for a new phone, activation and a new line to my account, but did not receive a confirmation email of my purchase. I became concerned so I checked my online bank account to see whether the purchase was completed. The money for the purchase was in fact withdrawn from my bank account, but there is no pending order with Cricket. After waiting for nearly an hour, the online Cricket support representative claimed that they had no record of my purchase. I talked to no fewer than 4 people over the course of several hours. all of them said that they have no record of a purchase and could not help me. Finally I gave up and contacted Cricket support via email. Now they admit they have my money, but do not offer to complete my order.
20 December 2014
Post-Racial America
Post-racial America sure is a racist place! Take, for example, this post on Facebook, which displays a photo of Jessica Lane Chambers, who was murdered recently in Panola County Mississippi, kissing a black fellow. Ms. Chambers was set on fire in her car. The investigation continues and the police are not sure who might have committed such an atrocity, but the white pride peeps have it all figured out. Depending on which comment you read, it was either the black boy she was kissing or perhaps a white person who was so utterly and self-righteously disgusted with the "race mixing" that she got what was coming to her. White people saying that a white girl kissing a black boy deserved to be burned alive . . . . Think about that. Take all the time you need.
Visit H Maria Perry Photography
12 December 2014
RWW News: Violent Calls For Lynching Obama At Anti-Immigration Rally
And then the cops showed up in riot gear, tear gassed them, cracked a few skulls with their batons and arrested them . . . . Oh wait, those were white folks threatening to murder the President. Never mind. Nothing to see here. Just 'Murikans exercising their First Amendment right to peacefully protest.
08 December 2014
I Would Die For You . . .Unless
I Would Die for You, Unless . . . .
© 2009 Helen Maria Perry Bascom
All Rights Reserved
Visit H Maria Perry Photography
22 November 2014
Get Ready 'Murika! Mike "I Cannot Spell" Carr Wants To Be President!
If you have been waiting for a candidate from the Constitutionalists Opposition of Deception party, your wait is over! America, meet Mike Carr.
He starts off just like every other politician. "My Fellow Americans, My name is Mike Carr and I’m running for president of the United States of America" but then it's all down hill from there. Candidate Carr's platform is an amalgamation of every conspiracy theory from chemtrails, to the Illuminati, and some sort of Masonic devil worshiping cult stuff. His biggest hangup seems to be Nazis. He sees them everywhere.
I'm not entirely sure where to begin with this one. I am not even sure how I stumbled upon his page on Facebook but I noticed a post where he misspelled the word "dying." Just to poke a little fun, I corrected his spelling and reminded him that poor spelling was the downfall of Dan Quayle. What followed was a rapid and disturbing descent into batshit crazy.
This guy must be a Poe. No one is this insane and not institutionalized.
14 November 2014
State Representative Sledgehammers Homeless People's Possessions
Five-term Hawaiian Representative Tom Brower (D-WTF?) has waged his own war on the homeless in his state. He has taken the streets with a sledgehammer in search for homeless people in hopes to destroy any possession they may have. Brower says he's "disgusted" with homeless people in his state and informed the Honolulu Star-Advertiser about his…
13 November 2014
Ted Cruz Gets A Whoopin' On Facebook
Ted Cruz comes out against net neutrality and in favor of allowing ISPs to control the flow of information, just because President Obama is in favor of net neutrality. His base is tearing him a new one over on his page. Check it out. Some of the comments from his "supporters" are hilarious.
Next up, President Obama endorses breathing, Ted Cruz turns blue from holding his breath.
Renew America Stole My Photo
For the record, once and for all, and finally, my photograph Blood Money is NOT in the public domain. This is my copyrighted photograph.
I created this photograph as an anti-war piece during the Iraq war to illustrate the billions of dollars the war contractors were making in Iraq. Since I created this photograph,it has been stolen thousands of times. I have sent DMCA take down notices to so many websites I have lost count.
The most popular use of my photograph is to illustrate anti-abortion sites. Now Renew America is in on the big grab of my photograph. If they only knew that I am a pro-choice, anti-war, pro-gun-control, ultra liberal, their heads would explode.
I sent an email to the author and to the website demanding that my photograph be removed immediately.
I also sent them an invoice. It's not likely they will pay me.
Stop stealing my photograph!
09 November 2014
Gun Owner Responsibility
Another child was shot and killed in Kentucky when a mother left her 5 year old son alone with a loaded rifle and his baby sister. He shot his sister and killed her. No charges will be filed against the mother.
Read about the death here and the prosecutor's decision not to file charges:
http://www.lex18.com/news/no-charges-to-be-filed-in-shooting-of-toddler-by-her-five-year-old-brother/
Here is what I propose:
All gun owners must take reasonable steps to secure weapons in their homes, including trigger locks on guns when children live in the home or frequently visit the home. Guns must be stored, unloaded, with trigger locks and the safety engaged if the gun has a safety mechanism. Loaded guns or guns without a safety mechanism must be stored in a secure gun safe or other locked, secure area inaccessible to children under the age of 16.
Gun owners who fail to take reasonable precautions to secure a weapon in their home, automobile, or any other place where the gun is kept and a child under the age of 16 finds an unsecured gun and uses it to shoot himself or another person intentionally or accidentally, and that shooting results in the death of the victim shall be guilty of criminally negligent homicide.
Gun owners who fail to take reasonable precautions to secure a weapon in their home, automobile, or any other place where the gun is kept, will be guilty of assault in the first degree when an injury is caused by a child under the age of 16 who finds an unsecured gun and uses it to shoot himself or another person, intentionally or accidentally, and that shooting does not result in the death of the victim.
It's time to hold responsible gun owners responsible.
Visit H Maria Perry Photography
30 October 2014
Tea Party Zealot Posting About ‘Liberal F*ggots’ And ‘Muslim’ Obama Gets Secret Service Visit
**
Drew Walker loves America - his version, anyway. This angry Tea Party zealot has been posting insane rants on Facebook for quite some time, ranting about liberal "f*cking f*ggots" and our Muslim President Barry Soetoro. "Every one of these douchebag motherf*ckers in DC needs to be relieved of their duty immediately, including Obama and that f*cking…
23 October 2014
Pro-Life Tea Party Christian Todd Kincannon: Execute All Ebola Patients (Screenshots)
Todd Kincannon, former director of the South Carolina GOP and staunch pro-lifer (when it's convenient, given that he supports abortion when it and time travel could eliminate someone he hates) has a solution to that whole Ebola…thing. In a series of tweets, Kincannon explained that his solution to the problem presented by the virus can easily…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
