Sugar Babies
Shemales

Author Topic: Can a SP request to delete AW pictures of her from UKP ?  (Read 2633 times)

Offline Bloody foreigner

As in the title.
Question mostly to the admin and mods.

Raj today noticed, that pictures I uploaded are gone from the reviews. My review is edited by Head1. What’s happened with them ?
I’m assuming it could only by SP request.

It’s for below SP - her AW profile is now empty

External Link/Members Only or External Link/Members Only

I don’t know any other situation like that. Does it happened before ?
Can I upload those pictures again without any consequences?

Offline daviemac

  • Board Moderator
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 25,013
  • Likes: 369
  • Reviews: 24
Where did the pictures come from, there aren't any on her AW profile.   :unknown:

Offline Bloody foreigner

I mentioned in first post, that her profile is now empty

There were from her public gallery on AW profile.
When I saw her, she had pictures with face, but after a month or so she blurred all of them. Maybe that’s the case.

Offline daviemac

  • Board Moderator
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 25,013
  • Likes: 369
  • Reviews: 24
I mentioned in first post, that her profile is now empty

There were from her public gallery on AW profile.
When I saw her, she had pictures with face, but after a month or so she blurred all of them. Maybe that’s the case.
I only asked in case they were from social media as those are not allowed to be posted.

If your review has been edited by Head1 he has removed the pictures, I don't know why.

As it was done by the site owner I personally wouldn't post them again, but it's up to you if you want to take a chance and repost pictures on a review 12 months old.

Offline Bloody foreigner

I won’t post them again. Don’t want to cause any problems for an owner and myself.

Thanks for replying.

Offline Fully Sated


...Raj today noticed, that pictures I uploaded are gone from the reviews. My review is edited by Head1. What’s happened with them ?
I’m assuming it could only by SP request...
I don’t know any other situation like that. Does it happened before ?
Can I upload those pictures again without any consequences?


Bloody Foreigner I suggest that you send a personal message to Head1. Clicking on the 'Contact' link at the bottom of every page will ewnable you to do so. It is a perfectly valid question that you raise and I too would be interested in the answer.

Offline Marmalade

Bloody Foreigner I suggest that you send a personal message to Head1. Clicking on the 'Contact' link at the bottom of every page will ewnable you to do so. It is a perfectly valid question that you raise and I too would be interested in the answer.

If he posted them as a hyperlink to her page and she deleted them from her page, nowt much to be done. Best to upload pics so they don't go away.  :hi:

Offline Fully Sated

If he posted them as a hyperlink to her page and she deleted them from her page, nowt much to be done. Best to upload pics so they don't go away. 

Looking at Bloody Foreigners previous reviews this year, he tends to actually post photos in the body of his reviews as opposed to posting a link to photos, but I am sure he will confirm.


...pictures I uploaded are gone from the reviews.


Offline Marmalade

Ah well. I doubt admin would remove them unless they violated the Rules. (I’m happy to be corrected). UKP has a raison d’etre after all.

I thought the question was amusing. I wanted to reply, “Of course they can request. Gives them something to do in between cleaning the dust off their phones and eating pies. They can also request that Santa Claus comes early.”

There even used to be a section where we could listen to their bleatings if we got bored. Poor little lambs.  :sarcastic:

Offline tantraman

I believe an SP can indeed request deleting any photos from a review, even if the photo may have been in the public domain (on AW or other escort sites).

I recall English Anabella requesting that her full-on face pics be removed from my UKP review, but she did this directly and politely via a post report to OldAdmin ...


Yeoboahs girl is moaning about the photos. 

She never moaned about the reviews by her pimp though when she first started.   :sarcastic: :sarcastic:

This is interesting.

Reading Anabella's post report, I wouldn't say it's "moaning". Unlike other SPs that want their face photos removed, typically coming over as demanding, threatening and abusive, Anabella first "appreciate(s)" this review and then politely asks "please could you take out my face pictures" with a deferential "if possible" and a considerate "Thank you". And lo and behold, I now note her face photos have been removed from my review.

I guess other SPs could learn that Admin is not averse to such requests, as long as they show courtesy and respect.

:hi:

... and OldAdmin obliged, whereas he'd always refuse those that had demanded the same with threats and/or abuse. I wonder if Emily did similar with a polite request directly with Head1, who of course has the final say-so on any such matter.

:unknown:

Offline Corus Boy

There is a lot of old and new law that may apply.

New laws were drafted for the Internet and may well be applicable world wide, but I'm no lawyer.

It is called Deep Linking!  The essence is that you are allowed to place hyperlinks on your website provided that they are to either the other sites 'Home Page' or to a main page of the site, but Deep Linking is prohibited.

A Deep Link is a hyperlink that places/displays part/pages/pictures of the other site on your pages as if they were part of you site.

I think a link that displays a picture off a ladies AW website in your post would I judge to be Deep Linking and so an offence.  The usual first recourse is to contact the webmaster of the offending site and ask for the removal of the offending content, failure to do so could then result as a trip to the courts, with all the associated costs.

The other side is an issue of copyright, which can be a complicated issue but a starting point is probably that someone, somewhere,  owns the rights to everything on the Internet, save if it is over a certain age.

The copyright of pictures may lie with the photographer, the model or some other third party.

So to use an image without permission can result in legal action, the starting point to be contact the webmaster of the offending site and ask for the removal of the offending content, followed by the court route.

So if you download an image off AW or make a copy of it and then use it in a review, it is likely that you and/or the owner of this site you are in breach of someone's copyright.

Deletions;

AW deals with profile images in a convoluted way as far as I can work out.  Normally when a lady uploads a photo or other content onto her profile you would expect them to be stored in a folder on the AW server with the other data files of that profile, then if the lady deleted their profile all the data file would go with it and therefore break the links in your review and images would disappear and leave this icon in its place;

Hidden Image/Members Only

However the design of the AW site seems to locate the image file in a more distant place and deleting the profile deletes the pages that are displayed so they are not available and do not get displayed.

However with the AW method the pages disappear but any images that are Deep Linked to in these 'remote' folders will continue to work and display, until the AW administrator should delete, move or rename the said location.

I hope that this makes some sense and I repeat it is only my limited experience and I'm no lawyer.

Offline Fully Sated

I fear that we may be over thinking things here. I understand the copyright argument and if it were the case that this site was abiding by those laws, I doubt that any photo from Adult Work would be permitted, they would all have been removed.
I less so comprehend the Deep Link law. If there are photos that are posted in the Adult Work public gallery (be they of a face or otherwise) that the UKP site owner feels should not be posted here for any reason, it is up to him to clarify and amend the rules if need be.
I have contacted Head 1, asked him to look at this thread and post a reply so that we can abandon any more speculation and continue to post photos in accordance with the UKP Rules, whatever they may now be.

Offline Bloody foreigner

The pictures were uploaded to the UKP. I didn’t post hyper links.

I’m aware, that posting pictures from AW is a breaching their rules, but probably they would already made some legal moves if they would like to. 

I think this is important for everyone, who is adding the pictures to reviews. My review was edited in May and so far I didn’t hear anything from the owner, but would like to know if I can have any problems because of that. Or can my details, like IP be revelead. I might be overreacting and worry too much, but just want to have everything clear.

Thanks FS for sending message to the Head1. Let’s wait to see what he has to say about it.

Offline WelshClipper

Interesting article but no mention of the vast number of verification photos published in the verification threads. Those threads are a great source for a punter. I would have thought they would have been the first ones to come under scrutiny if it were a problem.

Just to be clear, I have little understanding of copyright laws  :unknown:

Offline Marmalade

If you use an original picture produced by the BBC like its logo you can bet your ass they may sue you. They have money. (Ill-gotten or not!) copyright actions are incredibly expensive to initiate and not much chance of AW doing it to protect some whore.

I don’t know if it is still the case, but old admin had the site located abroad as well as himself, which would have made exponentially more expensive and difficult.

In the UK, as I understand it, copyright is set out in the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. The key issue is whether what is taken is a “substantial” copy of the original work, which can be measured in terms of quality, as well as quantity. To qualify for copyright protection under UK law, a work (which can include a digital work such as a web page or photograph) has to be original and to comprise a degree of labour, skill or judgment. I don’t think putting her make-up on before doing a selfie would count somehow.

You could go after the ISP which would be a more common route, but as Anonymous and other hacker groups as well as puritanical MPs have failed to fuck up UKP I hardly think the average p4p should hold her breath. A very polite and reasonable request would surely be the best way to go (but let her read the Rules first!)

Offline Marmalade

I’m aware, that posting pictures from AW is a breaching their rules

But not breaching ours.  :D

Offline Gordon Bennett

Anything that can identify a person is deemed personal data and thus comes under the auspices of data protection legislation. A face photo would be regarded as personal data.
Therefore, someone whose face photo was on this site (or any site) could request it be removed under the right to erasure. Beyond that, the individual could claim the site was breaching data protection laws by holding the photo anyway. The expectation is that sites don't breach the law in the first place, the law's not about tidying up after complaints.
None of the escorts in the verification photos threads have given their permission for UKP to display their photos - that's a clear and obvious breach of data protection laws. The idea they made the photo public on another platform for 2 days 4 years ago is no defence whatsoever. In any case, even when an individual grants permission to hold/use their data they can then withdraw it at any point. Resorting to vague aphorisms like "fair usage" or "public domain" just do not stand up.
I'm sure there will be clashes when data protection laws crash into commercial law and copyright law but they are irrelevant in simple cases like photos on here.
BTW, I'm not digging out this site or anything - it's just readiest and most relevant example to use.

Offline Marmalade

As I think I’ve pointed out: there’s a difference between what the law says you can do in theory and what a particular individual can do in practice. So good luck on getting anywhere with your (non-existent) free legal aid on that one   :rolleyes:

But do keep up the good work for mumsnet. If I were to give an SP advice I could think of better things: however I’d rather support punters.  :cool:

Offline Head1

  • Site Owner
  • Moderator
  • **
  • Posts: 2,016
  • Likes: 55
  • Reviews: 0
Just to clarify
If I get a request to remove any images and I think the reason warrants it I will remove them

Offline sensualencounter

Anything that can identify a person is deemed personal data and thus comes under the auspices of data protection legislation. A face photo would be regarded as personal data.
Therefore, someone whose face photo was on this site (or any site) could request it be removed under the right to erasure. Beyond that, the individual could claim the site was breaching data protection laws by holding the photo anyway. The expectation is that sites don't breach the law in the first place, the law's not about tidying up after complaints.
None of the escorts in the verification photos threads have given their permission for UKP to display their photos - that's a clear and obvious breach of data protection laws. The idea they made the photo public on another platform for 2 days 4 years ago is no defence whatsoever. In any case, even when an individual grants permission to hold/use their data they can then withdraw it at any point. Resorting to vague aphorisms like "fair usage" or "public domain" just do not stand up.
I'm sure there will be clashes when data protection laws crash into commercial law and copyright law but they are irrelevant in simple cases like photos on here.
BTW, I'm not digging out this site or anything - it's just readiest and most relevant example to use.
I completely agree. I think it’s wrong that the verification pics are captured and preserved.

And well done to Head1 for allowing pics to be removed.

Offline Marmalade

I completely agree. I think it’s wrong that the verification pics are captured and preserved.

And well done to Head1 for allowing pics to be removed.

He said if he thinks there’s good enough reason. He’s not removed the verification pics threads, at least yet, which many active punters find among the most valuable threads, as you can see by their usage. Not that your opinion (or mine) counts: it’s up to owners and admin.

Have you thought it might be better perhaps to wave your fluffy opinions of right-and-wrong on U.K. escorts or some other p4p trash-moan site where I’m sure they would be gleefully appreciated? Maybe even get you a freebie.  :dash:

Verification pics help active punters to see what they are going to get for their hard earned dosh, and in some cases expose the outright deceptions of p4ps.


Offline Bloody foreigner

Just to clarify
If I get a request to remove any images and I think the reason warrants it I will remove them

You didn’t clarify what was the reason to delete them (if you don’t mind sharing with us) and can I post these pictures again ?

Offline daviemac

  • Board Moderator
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 25,013
  • Likes: 369
  • Reviews: 24
You didn’t clarify what was the reason to delete them (if you don’t mind sharing with us) and can I post these pictures again ?
Do you really need things explained in words of one syllable, Head1 owns the site and he's given the reason for picture removal as if he thinks the reason warrants it. He doesn't need to explain further.

Feel free to post your pictures again but as it was Head1 who removed them in the first place I'm fairly sure they won't be the only things to be gone from the site after they are removed again if you do. 

Offline Fully Sated

You didn’t clarify what was the reason to delete them (if you don’t mind sharing with us) and can I post these pictures again ?

Bloody Foreigner, I would respectfully suggest that this thread is now over. Starting this thread was perfectly valid in my opinion, you have established that you have not contravened any current UKP Rules and the seemingly 'unwarranted' removal of those photos may have had implications for anyone else that posted Adult Work photos.

The Site Owner has stated that he was contacted and as a result has deleted the photos. I would advise you against reposting the images. From what I glean from his short statement, I have the impression that Head1 has 'shared' as much information as he wishes to. This is a privately owned site, not a 'democracy' and there is one person who can made and break his own rules at will.

I feel that if you were to post the images again after Head1 deleted them, you may have your membership revoked by attempting to, very publicly reverse his action. I very much enjoy reading your reviews and seeing the photos that you post. I for one, would like to see that continue. These are just my thoughts, for what they are worth.

Offline Rochelle

  • Service Provider
  • Posts: 1,539
  • Likes: 2
You didn’t clarify what was the reason to delete them (if you don’t mind sharing with us) and can I post these pictures again ?
Seriously? His post regarding the matter was enough and you shouldn't need further clarification.
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Offline Bloody foreigner

The Site Owner has stated that he was contacted and as a result has deleted the photos. I would advise you against reposting the images. From what I glean from his short statement, I have the impression that Head1 has 'shared' as much information as he wishes to. This is a privately owned site, not a 'democracy' and there is one person who can made and break his own rules at will.

He didn’t stated, that he was contacted. We can just assume, because he deleted the pictures.

I understand from where you all coming from, but with all respect I’m not satisfied with the answer. That’s all.
Would be good to have at least annotation in the review, that pictures were removed and to not post them again. Not only for me, but for others who would like to add them again.

I won’t push further. You can close the thread.

Offline sensualencounter

He said if he thinks there’s good enough reason. He’s not removed the verification pics threads, at least yet, which many active punters find among the most valuable threads, as you can see by their usage. Not that your opinion (or mine) counts: it’s up to owners and admin.

Have you thought it might be better perhaps to wave your fluffy opinions of right-and-wrong on U.K. escorts or some other p4p trash-moan site where I’m sure they would be gleefully appreciated? Maybe even get you a freebie.  :dash:

Verification pics help active punters to see what they are going to get for their hard earned dosh, and in some cases expose the outright deceptions of p4ps.
Just because I look dispassionately at the whole anonymity aspect really doesn’t mean I want a freebie ffs. Punting is supposed to be fun and anonymous for both parties. Just because you pay to fuck doesn’t mean the escort waived her right to anonymity’s day you own her. I’m sure you wouldn’t want your face on the internet associated with punting.

Offline daviemac

  • Board Moderator
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 25,013
  • Likes: 369
  • Reviews: 24
He didn’t stated, that he was contacted. We can just assume, because he deleted the pictures.

I understand from where you all coming from, but with all respect I’m not satisfied with the answer. That’s all.
Would be good to have at least annotation in the review, that pictures were removed and to not post them again. Not only for me, but for others who would like to add them again.

I won’t push further. You can close the thread.
You aren't satisfied with the owners answer,   :wacko: Head1 owns the site he covers the cost of running it and provides it free of charge for the benefit of punters. He does not owe you, or anyone else any explanations, if you don't like that then log off and don't come back before the option is taken away from you.

If any pictures are removed then it is with good reason, just accept it.

BTW you don't decide what threads get closed or locked.

Offline Rochelle

  • Service Provider
  • Posts: 1,539
  • Likes: 2
He didn’t stated, that he was contacted. We can just assume, because he deleted the pictures.

I understand from where you all coming from, but with all respect I’m not satisfied with the answer. That’s all.
Would be good to have at least annotation in the review, that pictures were removed and to not post them again. Not only for me, but for others who would like to add them again.

I won’t push further. You can close the thread.
:rolleyes:
The site owner deleted the photos, yet you need to be explicitly told not to repost them? The mind boggles.
:wacko:
« Last Edit: October 11, 2020, 06:24:02 pm by Rochelle »

Offline 90125

  • Forum Admin
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,518
  • Likes: 16
  • Reviews: 0
You didn’t clarify what was the reason to delete them (if you don’t mind sharing with us) and can I post these pictures again ?

Hidden Image/Members Only

Offline Dutchmaster

Interesting article but no mention of the vast number of verification photos published in the verification threads. Those threads are a great source for a punter. I would have thought they would have been the first ones to come under scrutiny if it were a problem.

Just to be clear, I have little understanding of copyright laws  :unknown:
good point, I love the verification photo thread, it give you an idea if the person your meeting, a lot of sps pictures are really old and that’s why the verification thread is great.

Offline Marmalade

Just because I look dispassionately at the whole anonymity aspect really doesn’t mean I want a freebie ffs. Punting is supposed to be fun and anonymous for both parties. Just because you pay to fuck doesn’t mean the escort waived her right to anonymity’s day you own her. I’m sure you wouldn’t want your face on the internet associated with punting.

Sorry,but this point has been covered too many times before.

Simple answer 1: The Rules.
Simple answer 2; You’re full of shit.

No offence.  :hi:

Offline sensualencounter

Sorry,but this point has been covered too many times before.

Simple answer 1: The Rules.
Simple answer 2; You’re full of shit.

No offence.  :hi:
Well that was a pretty childish and nonsensical response.

Offline Marmalade

Well that was a pretty childish and nonsensical response.
I am the child of truth. Naturally you can’t understand it having shown your ears of full of fluff.  :sarcastic:

Offline Marmalade

Just for the record senselesschunter, I don't ignore people very often on here but I'll try to make an exception for you since, however many hints you get, you just don't get it.