Take a look at this: http://www.isagaylord.com the poor guy had a really funny idea that was a parody of the BBC news website and they've shut him down. Firstly, I think it's out of order from a public company, and secondly can they even shut him down? He's just doing an obvious comic parody, he's changed the html code and modified the images so all thats left is similar styling. grrrrr this type of stuff makes me angry.
The BBC is much too serious to allow for such foolishness -- tea and biscuits in the proper manner or not at all. And I thought the British pride themselves on a sense of humour, as Monty Python, The Office, and Mr. Bean appear to show. Isn't overestimating one's own importance more a French thing? Interesting point you raise about the public company issue, too. Perhaps the majority of British taxpayers enjoy a good parody.
They can be serious. Thats what we expect from a news provider. But that do not give them the right to violates other right to free spech. The guy was using a similar but not identical logo and dising.
I know, I just keep thinking that as he isn't using any of their code and he's changed the images he can't really be doing anything wrong.
Why can't people take a joke? Because some people got sticks shoved so far up their butts that it dents their brains.
The BBC can't take a joke. Primarily I believe that this is based on the fact that they are funded by an illegal tax. The BBC call their services FTA & FTV (Free to Air $ Free to View) it isn't f'in free. I have to pay a £126 per year for the pleasure of owning a TV. The BBC are funded by this licensing fee and supported by the government. As far as I'm concerned things created by the BBC should be available for use by those that pay the license fee - effectively we are shareholders in the BBC. One thing I'd really like to see is some one with enough money challenge the license fee - I believe that it could be shown as illegal. As far as I know there is no other household commodity that I have to hold a license for in order to own.
The laws in the UK are a lot more strict on stuff like this - no First Amendment with all it's history/legal tradition like the U.S., and British courts have been a lot less lenient across the board where speech appears to "damage" somebody (i.e., libel, etc.).