Posted by unregistered user at 12/4/06 2:46 p.m.

Quite typical behavior for Microsoft. Complain that their stuff gets pirated while doing the same thing themselves. Just more of the usual Microsoft "Innovating"......

Posted by unregistered user at 12/4/06 2:50 p.m.

Not the most professional approach. But pretty funny. Censoring the image takes most of the point out of it. Just the CC logo would have been adequate. Or to have let Flickr handle it might have been more genteel but less satisfactory.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/4/06 3:33 p.m.

Mr. Kennedy may have had a point, but the way he did it was completely childish and unprofessional. Just a CC logo would have been much better and to the point. Good luck to him in getting any company to hire him, or work with his business… I know I wouldn't.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/4/06 4:38 p.m.

I am sure it was not an intended error, and we really have to make allowances ( and not hit people right away) for people who is doing something without malice.

wilson ng

Posted by unregistered user at 12/4/06 4:53 p.m.

querry:
Did Niall have copyright on the porn pic?
Those things are copyrighted, you know.

Posted by niallkennedy at 12/4/06 5:30 p.m.

Under what definition was the image classified as porn? Was there a depiction "intended to cause sexual excitement" as Merriam-Webster defines it? Or was it an emotional reaction?

I argue the image was not pornographic in nature but describing it as such is certainly more sensationalist.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/4/06 5:58 p.m.

ok . . . rephrasing . . .
querry:
Did Niall have copyright on the image?
Pictures are copyrighted, you know.

Also, did he have right to use the Creative Commons logo?

(as I understand is logos are not only copyrighted but also Trademarked -- but I ain't a lawyer or nuttin like that.)

Posted by unregistered user at 12/4/06 9:26 p.m.

BRILLIANT!

Not the post, I am talking about Niall!!!!!!!!! :)

Posted by unregistered user at 12/4/06 9:41 p.m.

If Microsoft can't manage to understand IP and licensing issues, we deserve what we get.

(A 'softie, who prefers to remain anonymous.)

Posted by unregistered user at 12/4/06 10:22 p.m.

prurient

Posted by unregistered user at 12/4/06 10:35 p.m.

If you steal a photo to post in your front window, you are an idiot if you don't know its origins or what the photo is.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/4/06 11:18 p.m.

The rest of the story ... Niall asked them to quit stealing from him, and they refused.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/4/06 11:28 p.m.

He should have just issued a DCMA takedown notice.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 12:07 a.m.

Re: The rest of the story ... Niall asked them to quit stealing from him, and they refused.

Niall only asked for it to be taken down after he switched the image.

A MS guy on the inside of this.

Posted by Leosia at 12/5/06 12:58 a.m.

I'm fascinated by the reactions to this. Niall Kennedy did the correct thing by replacing a photo with another - entirely up to him - and yet he is criticised by PC minded individuals, included Robert Scoble, because he might one day look for another job? That's missing the point.

Imagine the reaction from Microsoft if it had been the other way round - ceast and desist letters and multi-million dollar lawsuits!

America seems to have lost the plot right now. You can say or do what you want as long as the establishment agrees? It's a big problem if a comedian calls somebody a xxxxxx but it's perfectly okay for US soldiers to xxxx and xxxxxx teenage girls? Right. Even this message cannot be posted in full because I used objectionable language that people use every day!

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 1:39 a.m.

Brilliant. Replacing stolen images with potentially offensive ones is a brilliant prank and never fails to make me laugh. The people stealing the image deserve all they get.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 1:57 a.m.

Pretty damn hilarious. And who are these politically correct freaks that say they wouldn't hire a guy with a sense of humor? Could you possibly be any more boring?

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 2:32 a.m.

Censored porn or uncensored I've heard of but partially censored? Like a "girls gone wild" commercial? Playboy may own copyright to the magazines photo's but not the women photographed in what was called porn by some, art by others. If one buys or is given a copy of the magazine, the photos can be stuck onto windows, lockers, walls or used as bird house liners, or whatever library or not use, the owner of that edition sees fit.

What Kennedy?

Posted by J.Goodwin at 12/5/06 6:06 a.m.

Well, stealing or no, it's moronic and impolite to hotlink images.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 6:36 a.m.

Isn't that what the little kids do? I'd say Niall's career was pwned.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 7:10 a.m.

Justified - the blog team had no right to steal the pic and they are the ones getting bad press.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 7:43 a.m.

Two wrongs don't make a right.

Far better would be to replace the picture with a picture containing 1) a smaller version of the original picture, 2) the CCL logo, 3) URL, and 4) link back to the Flickr page.

That way, nobody would be offended, Microsoft would get slightly embarrassed and get the message, and Kennedy would show he has some class.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 8:37 a.m.

So, "'softie on the inside of this," why didn't you check on the image permissions? You're giving out half a story here...

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 3:57 p.m.

He should have used midget porn.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 3:58 p.m.

I love it. Glad to see not everyone has a stick up their @sses. To me, sense of humor is very important, even to teach a lesson. I'd work with him anytime.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 4:06 p.m.

He should have put up Goatse or tubgirl..

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 4:10 p.m.

For all those of you so quick to slam this man for his methods, let me ask you, would it have had any success if he chose a less shocking method? I seriously doubt it. Shock tactics seem to be the only way to get through to some people or organisations, otherwise you are wasting your time trying to be 'nice'. Microsoft are infamous for their flagrant hypocrisy, regarding their own attacks on so-called pirates. It's nice to see that someone can still rightly take them down a peg or two.

And yeah, it should've been midget porn.:D

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 4:10 p.m.

Theft is theft. Whenever I am alerted that someone is using one of my images and stealing my bandwitch, I usually replace it with a picture of goatse. I can proudly state that the offender learns his/her lesson.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 4:30 p.m.

Yeah, I'm too lazy to register.

Brilliant. If I was a woman, I would ask him to marry me. Microsoft needs a little wake up now and then, they sure don't seem to understand that most of the world think unneeded cease and desists and law-suits are mind-numbingly, and that maybe they sould lighten up. The only way this could have been better is if the "victim" was the RIAA or the MPAA.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 4:37 p.m.

Perhaps porn wasn't the best route, but neither would using a boring way to get the message across. You KNOW Microsoft would send lawyers if it had been their image ripped off, and the rest of the world can't respond with legal teams when Microsoft wrongs us. We need to get their attention in a very significant, and very public way. I can think of a half dozen embarassing, yet more tasteful image representations, but I certainly would not go the "politically correct" route. Not with Microsoft. With all of their resources and constant yammering about piracy and patents and playing by the rules, it very well should snap back on them. After all, we can't ever get money out of them, so a pound of flesh is about all we can hope for. Well done, Niall - next time go for a less pornographic, but equally humorous and embarassing image, though. Boring is never acceptable when dealing with large companies. You don't get on their radar by being dull.

As for those that suppose to assume that Niall is not worthy of employment or their business, by all means, stick with Microsoft and their high-brow consulting ilk. The rest of the planet doesn't take itself so seriously, and we all know that Microsoft us stunningly uncreative. My living may depend on them and their products, but that doesn't mean I have to like the way they go about things. Knowing the difference and being creative in how I deal with their needs is what my customers like about me. My dog has food in his bowl, so I must be doing something right.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 4:54 p.m.

porn was the best choice.. it makes a great headline! :D

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 4:56 p.m.

Oops, I thought you were talking bout Robert Gates. MS is like soylent green... tastes great til u realize...

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 5:00 p.m.

May I remind you all that the US is at war? This is no time to be worrying about these things.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 5:04 p.m.

I agree with unregistered user.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 5:24 p.m.

wah wah! I see so many posts calling the guy immature for doing this. Well he's brilliant, and you're boring. Who cares if you personally wouldn't hire him. You're too serious...put your powdered wig away and take a vacation.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 5:24 p.m.

18129

History of Kennedies effects on women has not been happily ever after in matrimony. Proposing to a Kennedy would make you somewhat liberated yet average, ho hum.

18137, and this groom will never be a war bride.

yuk!

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 5:45 p.m.

I really don't understand most of your folks. If he had used a CC logo, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

Sometimes immature and unprofessional gets things the attention they deserve. If MS is going to invest the time and effort they do in educating people about piracy, they sure had better not engage in it themselves...

They got caught with thier hand in a cookie jar. They deserve it.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 5:57 p.m.

I'd like to point out two things. Nobody lost any money. Nobody got hurt. That having been said, please continue your gauntlet of judgment.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 6:04 p.m.

Hurray for porn!

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 6:04 p.m.

I say way to go. To all the people who say that he was acting "immature": You have a lot to learn about the real world, no matter who you are and what you do. It was his image on his account, Microsoft was using his bandwidth without his permission. not nly that, he has the right to change his own images to whatever he wants. It's not like he changed Microsoft's server.

Microsoft put themselves in this position, which is why they're all apologies and no accusation.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 6:06 p.m.

Okay, someone has got to say it...

Perhaps Microsoft wanted to be Microhard. Ugh, that was awful.

Like the other guy said "Hooray for porn!"

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 6:23 p.m.

If I were that guy I would find the sickest all midget-anal-horse action and use that.

THAT would teach Microsoft a lesson.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 6:58 p.m.

OMG PWNED

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 7:31 p.m.

The "omg immature" commentors need to call the waaaahmbulance. It was funny. Get over it.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 7:46 p.m.

Wow, Creative Commons... how trendy. What a pile of hippie bull. Fair use is fair use. Maybe MS should give the whiner his fair percentage of the $0.00 they made from that grossly commercial blog injustice.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 7:52 p.m.

Perhaps porn wasn't the best route, but neither would using a boring way to get the message across.

Is this not the point of Goatse? Thumbs up for Niall. Gross, and effective ... apparently.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 8:06 p.m.

i wouldve done the same thing.
fark em

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 8:46 p.m.

I'm shocked, not by the usage of the partially censored pornographic image, but by the response here. Someone is stealing something of yours and trying to make a profit on it, what would you do?

I'd embarrass them too. Those of you who think he should have been more responsible deserve to be sued by a criminal breaks into your home, but slips and fall on your icy driveway while trying to get away.

The irresponsibility in this report lies solely on the shoulders of the person who posted the illegal link. The embarrassment should as well. Niall Kennedy didn't break any rules on Flickr, and had no responsibility for anyone who was linking to the image.

Oh my god, partial nudity. Here's a solution, don't look if you don't like it. Unless of course you didn't evolve eyes that can turn in their sockets, a neck that can turn, or eyelids you can close. If that's the case, you should go back to church and pray for a more intelligent design.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 8:47 p.m.

What's all this junk about his methods being "unprofessional?" What on Earth gave you guys the idea that Niall has some obligation to be professional to people who steal from him?

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 8:53 p.m.

he should have linked a .jpg virus.

not that MS doesn't pass on enough viri already, but...

Posted by unregistered user at 12/5/06 9:07 p.m.

Outstanding!

I'd hire him.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/6/06 12:01 a.m.

Bottoms up mate and glad to see ya moon MS with some Creative expression and for those uptight judges out there loosen up your collars before Niall cuts his dominatrix loose on ya!

Posted by unregistered user at 12/6/06 4:27 a.m.

It seems to me Niall did the right thing. Those who cry about his methods are most probably also upset about David's use of a slingshot against Goliath.

Posted by Mark Argentino at 12/6/06 5:41 a.m.

Very interesting turn of events. I know how they feel as I've had others take house images from this page on my site and do the same. I emailed the person that was using my image and then I changed the image to an igloo. The person emailed me back about 2 days later and was so upset with me.

Funny, what goes around comes around!
All the best!
Mark

Posted by unregistered user at 12/6/06 6:58 a.m.

LOL Micro$oft pwned...
I'd be more sympathetic if they didn't keep releasing tripe & calling it an os

Posted by unregistered user at 12/6/06 9:03 p.m.

porn why porn when 2 monkeys do it. in fronmt of a camera that should be called porn and have those monkeys arrested

Posted by unregistered user at 12/7/06 6:17 a.m.

I'm not sure you people who think Niall did something wrong used your head when deciding. It was his account(Niall's ), he and only he has rights to files he places there. So he goes through sorting his files, editing them, updating them or what ever he wants to do with HIS files and yes, some of them may very well be porn that he bought and paid for and therefore legally owns. and while he is shuffling his files around, one of them gets a new name. mean while there is an illegal link pointing to one of his files in his account. Suddenly that illegal link points to a different file. OR he intentionally sorted his files around, updated them, changed the names around. They are his files in his account, its his right to manage his files they way he wants. And yet you people think that both MSFT and Niall did something wrong ? you are saying I can't update or edit my files because someone may be illegally linking for public display to my property ?

Posted by unregistered user at 12/7/06 11:24 a.m.

This is not ethical. He should have change the image to a text such as "this image is used without permission" to get the point across rather than to shame.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/15/06 3:58 p.m.

I did not see the blog entry to keep that in mind with these comments which are based on the article and the posts.

So..
1st: there was no actual theft by MS (as read) they linked to a pubically viewable picture. Correct?

This is a common practice all over the internet and a long establised and accepted one. Some people frown on this practice though as they feel that it's 'stealing' their bandwidth. There are Numerous methods for preventing this.

IF MS had actually 'stole' the pic (copied it) when he updated his pics it would NOT have been reflected in the blog.

Most (porn/art) pics DO have a copyright on them and it's more likely that Niall violated copyright by "POSTING" (not linking to) the picture (even if modified) without the original publishers (owners) permission. He probably should have linked to it. ;)

Just my take on it.

Posted by unregistered user at 12/18/06 2:11 p.m.

So Microsoft. The real stupid isn't that they used an image without permission it is that they used a LINK to an image they had no control over. When will those idiots learn a thing or two about security?

Posted by unregistered user at 12/27/06 1:48 p.m.

I call it ironic.

Microsoft spends millions on protecting their software from pirates, making consumers jump through hoops. And yet, they hotlinked a pic without a thought.

It serves them right for not respecting others. Then again, when was the last time MS respected anything? Oh, that's right, when they can profit from it!

Posted by unregistered user at 12/27/06 9:00 p.m.

The MS employee who swiped the photo is presumed to know the cc rules. If he does not, he lacks a trait or two critical to successful social interaction. Either way he's a bad hire for anyone unless he knows how to make mends.

Niall used an appropriate media to communicate an appropriate message. Caviat Emptor.

Lastly, the creator of a work is not obligated to do the CC license research for dweebs. Dweebs wanna play - they gonna get spanked.

Posted by unregistered user at 4/28/07 1:43 p.m.

All the people talking about how the porn pic was copyrighted need to review their copyright law. Believe it or not, it does qualify under fair-use since the image was derivative (by censoring) and not used for the same purposes for which it was intended (I hope). It's more akin to sound sampling and distortion.

Also, "cease and desist" is harsher. It is essentially legal action. This is making an informal point, which is a lot more courteous believe it or not. Finally, as to his looking for another job, put a sock in it. He was undertaking an action as a private person, it didn't have to be professional. That an employer would judge him for that means only that he would avoid a company that is small minded and backward-thinking.

This whole thing with Companies firing people for blogs and so forth is a blurring of the distinction between private and professional life, and I expect this won't be the last we hear of it.

Posted by unregistered user at 10/12/07 2:43 a.m.

I am glad to have the change to read all. Very useful information for all who has interest in this area. I personaly had great advantage from these informations.

Plase Visit My Sites.
Evden Eve Nakliyat
Sürücü Kursu
Hırdavat
Kale Kapı
Pimapen
Evden Eve Nakliyat
Ehliyet
Pdks
Evden Eve Nakliyat
Evden Eve
Kurye
Motorlu Panjur
Google Reklam
Web Tasarımı
Pimapen
Kale Kapi
Lastik
Lastik
Web Tasarım
Gayrimenkul

Posted by unregistered user at 11/4/07 11:49 p.m.

ƒfƒŠƒwƒ‹
ƒfƒŠƒwƒ‹