TNC Posted February 16, 2013 Report Share Posted February 16, 2013 If his 1969 31ft twin 60HP outdrive Senior hulled Chertsey Marine RMC Bahama really is my cousins ex "Mark Charles", I am sure my cousin would be interested. My father helped spec this boat and we borrowed it a few times. I can't believe Chertesy Marine made more than a couple of boats with similar spec in 1969. My cousin's boat was well known on the Thames when it was built, a superb fitout, which was held in high regard, even by my Thames wooden boat friends. My cousin was a bit of a "Mr Toad" type boater and got banned by the Thames Conservancy (ah!...those were the days, a proper navigation authority), for a month, for sinking a lock keepers punt! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ange Posted February 16, 2013 Report Share Posted February 16, 2013 Reading YBW he seams more than happy with his actions. Undoubtedly he feels justified and aggrieved. The silly man has shot himself in the foot as regards privacy to no end, because I'm sure with the support he's getting Jim will have his site up and running again in the not too far distant future. And now we all know not only the name of his boat but his name and where he's moored. I had a look at the thread in YBW and it did make me chuckle - a few knickers were getting twisted over an exchange of views that was very mild compared to some of the discussions on this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lameduck Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 (edited) Undoubtedly he feels justified and aggrieved. The silly man has shot himself in the foot as regards privacy to no end, because I'm sure with the support he's getting Jim will have his site up and running again in the not too far distant future. And now we all know not only the name of his boat but his name and where he's moored. I had a look at the thread in YBW and it did make me chuckle - a few knickers were getting twisted over an exchange of views that was very mild compared to some of the discussions on this forum. Edited February 17, 2013 by lameduck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lameduck Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 Undoubtedly he feels justified and aggrieved. The silly man has shot himself in the foot as regards privacy to no end, because I'm sure with the support he's getting Jim will have his site up and running again in the not too far distant future. And now we all know not only the name of his boat but his name and where he's moored. I had a look at the thread in YBW and it did make me chuckle - a few knickers were getting twisted over an exchange of views that was very mild compared to some of the discussions on this forum. The Minutes of the latest meeting of RUG 3 (13th February 2013) are out on www.riverusergroups.co.uk with their response to this issue. Tim Mountain was absent from the meeting. Interestingly, in the Minutes of the previous meeting (10 October 2012) under 'Reports from Group Members' " Tim Mountain passed on concerns about boats, mainly narrow boats, not displaying names." Why? So he could look them up on Jim Shead's website ? Les Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radiomariner Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 (edited) Now he might turn out to be a very nice chap, but this forum makes Tim Mountain appear to be both ill informed and self opinionated. Disasterous combination. Edited to add. My statement above has been picked up and posted elsewhere as being extremely insulting towards Mr Mountain. It is not so. It is a statement on how I observe this thread to be developing. Edited February 18, 2013 by Radiomariner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchcrawler Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 The Minutes of the latest meeting of RUG 3 (13th February 2013) are out on www.riverusergroups.co.uk with their response to this issue. Tim Mountain was absent from the meeting. Interestingly, in the Minutes of the previous meeting (10 October 2012) under 'Reports from Group Members' " Tim Mountain passed on concerns about boats, mainly narrow boats, not displaying names." Why? So he could look them up on Jim Shead's website ? Les I see he is also concerned about unlicensed boats, he could have looked at Jim's site and seen which ones they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray T Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 The Minutes of the latest meeting of RUG 3 (13th February 2013) are out on www.riverusergroups.co.uk with their response to this issue. Tim Mountain was absent from the meeting. Interestingly, in the Minutes of the previous meeting (10 October 2012) under 'Reports from Group Members' " Tim Mountain passed on concerns about boats, mainly narrow boats, not displaying names." Why? So he could look them up on Jim Shead's website ? Les Does the informed Mr Mountain not know that narrow boats are not required to have names? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDR Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 (edited) Does the informed Mr Mountain not know that narrow boats are not required to have names? I think they are required on the Thames, ideally on front and sides although I think there is an exemption for the front name, certainly I've never had a lockie comment on it. ETA from Thames EA site..... http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/static/documents/Leisure/Apr_2011_Final.pdf Q. Why do I need to display my boat’s name? A. If you own a power-driven boat on the River Thames, it’s a legal requirement for you to give it a unique name and display it on your boat. Having your boat's name clearly displayed helps our officers to contact you if there’s a problem, such as vandalism, theft or fire. It also protects you; if a boat is properly marked it reduces the chance of being wrongly reported for committing an offence. If you own a powered boat, you must display your boat’s name, exactly as it appears on your registration certificate, on each side of the bow and on the stern*. The name must be clearly marked in plain letters in the following minimum sizes: 5.1cm (2in) for a boat no more than 6.09m (20ft) in length. 7.6cm (3in) for a boat between 6.09m (20ft) and 9.14m (30ft) in length. 10.2cm (4in) for a boat between 9.14 (30ft) and 15.23m (50ft) in length. 15.2cm (6in) for a boat exceeding 15.23m (50ft). *It is acceptable for owners of narrowboats to display the boat name in the traditional way on each side of the cabin. Edited February 17, 2013 by JDR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray T Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 (edited) I think they are required on the Thames, ideally on front and sides although I think there is an exemption for the front name, certainly I've never had a lockie comment on it. ETA from Thames EA site..... http://www.environme..._2011_Final.pdf Q. Why do I need to display my boat's name? A. If you own a power-driven boat on the River Thames, it's a legal requirement for you to give it a unique name and display it on your boat. Having your boat's name clearly displayed helps our officers to contact you if there's a problem, such as vandalism, theft or fire. It also protects you; if a boat is properly marked it reduces the chance of being wrongly reported for committing an offence. If you own a powered boat, you must display your boat's name, exactly as it appears on your registration certificate, on each side of the bow and on the stern*. The name must be clearly marked in plain letters in the following minimum sizes: 5.1cm (2in) for a boat no more than 6.09m (20ft) in length. 7.6cm (3in) for a boat between 6.09m (20ft) and 9.14m (30ft) in length. 10.2cm (4in) for a boat between 9.14 (30ft) and 15.23m (50ft) in length. 15.2cm (6in) for a boat exceeding 15.23m (50ft). *It is acceptable for owners of narrowboats to display the boat name in the traditional way on each side of the cabin. Ah, I stand corrected, thank you. If my boat were named Kingfisher would I have to have it temporarily renamed Kingfisher No24 or whatever when on the Thames. As it appears that on the Thames boat names have to be unique. Edited February 17, 2013 by Ray T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDR Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 (edited) Ah, I stand corrected, thank you. If my boat were named Kingfisher would I have to have it temporarily renamed Kingfisher No24 or whatever when on the Thames. On the Thames do boat names have to be unique? Technically yes, but if you were only making a transit from Teddintion to Oxford I doubt it would be a problem. I can't find any mention of it for any other rivers (stand to be corrected).This throws up another problem created by the loss of Jim Shead's site. Edited February 17, 2013 by JDR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TNC Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 I think they are required on the Thames, ideally on front and sides although I think there is an exemption for the front name, certainly I've never had a lockie comment on it. ETA from Thames EA site..... http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/static/documents/Leisure/Apr_2011_Final.pdf Q. Why do I need to display my boat’s name? A. If you own a power-driven boat on the River Thames, it’s a legal requirement for you to give it a unique name and display it on your boat. Having your boat's name clearly displayed helps our officers to contact you if there’s a problem, such as vandalism, theft or fire. It also protects you; if a boat is properly marked it reduces the chance of being wrongly reported for committing an offence. If you own a powered boat, you must display your boat’s name, exactly as it appears on your registration certificate, on each side of the bow and on the stern*. The name must be clearly marked in plain letters in the following minimum sizes: 5.1cm (2in) for a boat no more than 6.09m (20ft) in length. 7.6cm (3in) for a boat between 6.09m (20ft) and 9.14m (30ft) in length. 10.2cm (4in) for a boat between 9.14 (30ft) and 15.23m (50ft) in length. 15.2cm (6in) for a boat exceeding 15.23m (50ft). *It is acceptable for owners of narrowboats to display the boat name in the traditional way on each side of the cabin. I think they gave up with this at the time the Gold licence was introduced...the time the Thames got infested with "slugs", or "sewer tubes" Now the Thames cruiser owners moan about the increasing amount of barges that are appearing on the Thames, often needing a lock to themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keeping Up Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 The application form for a short-term licence also says " To avoid delay in registration and to reduce correspondence, if a visiting launch name is not available for Thames use, a set of adhesive plastic labels will be issued without charge for temporary display on the boat whilst it is on the Thames, and will be in the form of ‘VISITOR R (serial number)’. The characters on the label will form part of the individual name of the launch whilst it is visiting the Thames" OI believe this is the preferred option for the majority of narrowboats who visit the Thames. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUMPY Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 Your boats name fo the Thames is its name with the licence number as a suffix. From the last listing I have seen TM tender appeared un licenced! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grace and Favour Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 I wonder if there would be any objections if I re-named my boat: "Tim Mountain" ? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchcrawler Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 I wonder if there would be any objections if I re-named my boat: "Tim Mountain" ? Do you want too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grace and Favour Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 Do you want too? I was just wondering .............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred_D Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 As Mr Mountain's privacy is so important to him, please respect it and DO NOT watch this YouTube clip of him and his boat 'Harpagon' on the Thames. (From about 5 mins in to the end). Enjoy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUMPY Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 As Mr Mountain's privacy is so important to him, please respect it and DO NOT watch this YouTube clip of him and his boat 'Harpagon' on the Thames. (From about 5 mins in to the end). Enjoy! Priceless! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray T Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 (edited) Magnificent. Is he: a) Going to get this taken off Utube? b ) Going to get the Beeb to destroy all copies as this clip is obviously an invasion of his privacey? Assuming the Clip is Mr Mountain and his boat Harpargon. Edited February 17, 2013 by Ray T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUMPY Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 U-tube is easy just get the beeb to register a copyright complaint. But then he possibly got paid for that clip so that might be OK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chloe Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 (edited) I am pleased with the way things have gone with Jim Shead. Jim should win his case! Thanks Richard for keeping us all in touch with him and informing us with updates. Well done to McEvedys Solicitors & Attorneys Ltd, for getting involved pro bono. I agree with Mayalid we may need inforcements on YBW! Have they not read what this Tim Mountain wrote originally on their own forum in 2005? I cannot find it now!!!, but have seen it in this thread on this site. Thanks RWLP on page three of this thread as http://www.radcotcru...c.php?f=5&t=107. I note that Tim Mountain has never apologised for what he called Jim and that nobody on ybw has commented on the language used in his original post! Jim! Hope to see your site back up and running soon mate!! You didn't just write a boat list - Everything else you wrote was very informative and interesting too! Edited February 17, 2013 by Chloe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grace and Favour Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 I am pleased with the way things have gone with Jim Shead. Jim should win his case! Thanks Richard for keeping us all in touch with him and informing us with updates. Well done to McEvedys Solicitors & Attorneys Ltd, for getting involved pro bono. I agree with Mayalid we may need inforcements on YBW! Have they not read what this Tim Mountain wrote originally on their own forum in 2005? I cannot find it now!!!, but have seen it in this thread on this site. Thanks RWLP on page three of this thread as http://www.radcotcru....php?f=5&t=107. I note that Tim Mountain has never apologised for what he called Jim and that nobody on ybw has commented on the language used in his original post! Jim! Hope to see your site back up and running soon mate!! You didn't just write a boat list - Everything else you wrote was very informative and interesting too! Your link ain't complete Chloe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuscan Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 10,111 views tells you everything we need to know about the usefullness of this site Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mayalld Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 And respect goes out to McEvedys Solicitors & Attorneys Ltd, for getting involved pro bono. MtB P.S. Interesting point they raise that had not previously occurred to me... For Mr Mountain to own the copyright in <something>, he needs to have been it's author. Mr Mountain is not the author of his boat registration data. Spot on. There is not, and can never be any copyright issue here. Mr Mountain didn't create anything, and as such he isn't a copyright holder. It is extremely unlikely that the navigation authorities own any IP rights in the data either (facts are facts, and you can't gain copyright protection over them). The only possible copyright that may exist is that the Navigation Authority may own copyright in the arangement of the facts, or a database right in the data that they supply to Jim. Either IP right can be circumvented by the simple expedient of re-keying the data received from the navigation authorities (which is not a huge task for a small team). The problem is that some people imagine that copyright and data protection are there to allow them to control what information about them is published online. They lack the intelligence to understand that this isn't true, and throw copyright around as a catch all when what they mean is that the site is a "breach of what I like". Such people are nothing new to me, as we get a fair crop of people horrified that their mothers maiden name is there on-line for all the world to see. (It isn't copyright and we have an appropriate registration with the Information Commissioner), which is why I recommended ORG, they do know about this stuff. The interesting twist to this is that whilst the domain host took down the site because it didn't want to become embroiled in a legal issue, it is entirely possible that they will end embroiled in any case. Jim's site was useful for us, but also carried adverts that will have brought Jim some income. The closure of the site will have resulted in a financial loss for Jim. That could mean that Mr Mountain's little stunt will end up costing him money. If he has made a spurious claim of copyright infringement, and as a result Jim has lost money, he can claim damages from Mr Mountain. Which would be SUCH a pity..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boathunter Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 I wouldn't like to get on the wrong side of you lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now