interesting topic, and thought it should carry on here

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Uk-Nuts-t308261.html

i think we should expand this to the whole of the EU and USA ...

Anyway

i recently read in the UK papers that all religious holidays will take part in UK schools... IE not only will they have Xmas, Easter ect off, but also the muslim holidays !...

there are so many more...

please add

Just read the thread. I'm speechless! I almost doubt the veracity of some of those restrictions, they're so ridiculous.

There's two main types here: Fear of litigation, and fear of being accused of discrimination.

Is it that litigation has become so fashionable? If so, is the infamously litigious American way to blame for this worldwide fear of being sued?

Not deported because of seperation anxiety for his cat? Psychological abuse for leaving a cow to sleep in the dark?

Whatever happened to Darwin's theory and evolution....let the weak die out because their genes are ruining the gene pool.

Whatever happened to Darwin's theory and evolution....let the weak die out because their genes are ruining the gene pool.

very interesting,

Any links to the stories?

I have found that most of the Health & Safety myths are just that, hokum.

Fireman can no longer use the pole for fast descent, conkers no longer allowed in the play ground, egg and spoon on sports day all banned by the health and safety executive, all hokum I am afraid.

And when the daily mail is mentioned in dispatches, I would rather read the daily star.

As for banning certain activities because of H&S reasons, it is a lack of knowledge and understanding that is the problem, not any H&SE directive.

As for the back stroke thingy, limited information elicited as usual, it is only during certain peak times and when people are swimming in lanes.

A simple risk assessment would determine this a risk and prohibit the backstroke in certain instances and certain time periods, any other period of time, no problem.

Any links to the stories?

I have found that most of the Health & Safety myths are just that, hokum.

Fireman can no longer use the pole for fast descent, conkers no longer allowed in the play ground, egg and spoon on sports day all banned by the health and safety executive, all hokum I am afraid.

And when the daily mail is mentioned in dispatches, I would rather read the daily star.

As for banning certain activities because of H&S reasons, it is a lack of knowledge and understanding that is the problem, not any H&SE directive.

The urban myth is a treasured part of every conservative's arsenal of "proof".

Any links to the stories?

I have found that most of the Health & Safety myths are just that, hokum.

Fireman can no longer use the pole for fast descent, conkers no longer allowed in the play ground, egg and spoon on sports day all banned by the health and safety executive, all hokum I am afraid.

And when the daily mail is mentioned in dispatches, I would rather read the daily star.

As for banning certain activities because of H&S reasons, it is a lack of knowledge and understanding that is the problem, not any H&SE directive.

The urban myth is a treasured part of every conservative's arsenal of "proof".

I told my wife about the singing shop worker story yesterday and she's been mad all day. She didn't believe it. I found the link and now she thinks everyone in England and America should stop buying music till the "heart and brain police" are gone. Not bad for someone that's never read Orwell, Bradbury or Huxley the prophets of these last 100 years. It's all coming true.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotlan...ral/8317952.stm

I suppose it all comes down to the intellectual property debate.

If you write a song do you have the right to charge people to sing it? Would your wife let this woman pick fruit from her garden without paying for it?

In Sweden it's now days forbidden to sing the national anthem at the end of the school year.

It might upset the immigrants.

I suppose it all comes down to the intellectual property debate.

If you write a song do you have the right to charge people to sing it? Would your wife let this woman pick fruit from her garden without paying for it?

If someone wrote a song my wife liked, my wife would probably pick the fruit herself and offer it as a gift. I'm sure you're just paying devil's advocate but surely you see that's a silly argument.

I think that what matters is if the music is being used in a commercial situation. Then the copyright owner is entitled to be paid.

Copied this from the Daily Telegraph the other day and e mailed it to a mate. Sorry I can't find the story now so can't provide a link (I'll be back if I can).

"Women without children should be allowed maternity leave, survey says

Women who do not have children should be allowed to take maternity leave, allowing them time off from the workplace, according to a study.

It found that 74 per cent of women would be in favour of being allowed to take a six-month break, or even longer, as mothers are allowed to do when they give birth. More than two-thirds of those in favour were mothers themselves. "

Maybe they should give the whole lot the rest of their lives off work, it might stop them whinging about the glass ceiling.

doubt it some idiot men are still whinging about women having rights at all. so while those muppets still put the glass-ceiling in place then women have the right to complain about it.

I think that what matters is if the music is being used in a commercial situation. Then the copyright owner is entitled to be paid.

Recently a hairdresser's salon was in the news here in Auckland because the proprietor was playing music for her patrons and the snoops for the record company alleged that she was using the music for commercial purposes. The law supports the record company.

Isn't this happening in the bars in Thailand?

doubt it some idiot men are still whinging about women having rights at all. so while those muppets still put the glass-ceiling in place then women have the right to complain about it.

Can you see though that the pendulum has swung too far? The right to keep your job while on maternity leave is now stretching to a wish for the right for all women to take off 6 months, child or no child.

Surely, then, the argument must stand for every worker to take off 6 months, regardless of gender?

Don't get me started!!!!!

I think that what matters is if the music is being used in a commercial situation. Then the copyright owner is entitled to be paid.

Recently a hairdresser's salon was in the news here in Auckland because the proprietor was playing music for her patrons and the snoops for the record company alleged that she was using the music for commercial purposes. The law supports the record company.

Isn't this happening in the bars in Thailand?

Absolutely.

Thailand's strict adherence to copyright laws is a byword worldwide. Do you think I would have bought all those cheap DVD movies if I hadn't believed the disks were of low cost construction?

Correct. Everyone knows the artists themselves get paid peanuts in royalties and the rest of the high price goes to keep the recording company execs in private jets, expensive hotels, promotional junkets, drugs and parties. Since the Pantip retailers have none of these expenses their price is about correct. They could probably afford to pay the artist the same royalties and still make a profit.

If a "star" makes millions while the guy playing at the local pub struggles to make a living there seems to be a problem with the cost structure of the entertainment industry. Unfortunately the artists themselves are mostly to blame for allowing it.

I think that what matters is if the music is being used in a commercial situation. Then the copyright owner is entitled to be paid.

I agree with that. In the news article it was mentioned:

The village store where Mrs Burt works was contacted by the PRS earlier this year to warn them that a licence was needed to play a radio within earshot of customers.

When the shop owner decided to get rid of the radio as a result, Mrs Burt said she began singing as she worked.

I'm not sure what that's about, but don't radio stations pay royalties upfront for the benefit of any persons who may be listening in? What's the deal with that?

I have to say, reading this has certainly been interesting. It seems to me that some people are looking for any reason to pick apart the place, find negativity and reasons to hate. You see it here on TV with people who rant on about how bad Thailand is, how awful Thai people are, and go on and on about every little thing that seems to make their lives a misery.

How are you people who go on and on about the stuff back home any different from these people?

I don't think the comparison is fair, SBK. Firstly because the complaining about things "back home" is more comentary and discussion about the odd and illogical way of some things, like overly PCedness.

Secondly, the gripes of those whiny TVers are more about "Why isn't Thailand more like good old England/You Ess of A", whereas here we are not making any comparison except to logic, reasonableness, and common sense

I could very well don my rose-tinted glasses and find good in everything, everwhere. But I would be hiding from reality.

I don't think the comparison is fair, SBK. Firstly because the complaining about things "back home" is more comentary and discussion about the odd and illogical way of some things, like overly PCedness.

Secondly, the gripes of those whiny TVers are more about "Why isn't Thailand more like good old England/You Ess of A", whereas here we are not making any comparison except to logic, reasonableness, and common sense

.

My bad, I guess I misinterpreted this part of the whinge:

Check on these they are not jokes they are real events, bugger cant wait to get out and back to semi sane Thailand.

ok. I see your point.

I have to say, reading this has certainly been interesting. It seems to me that some people are looking for any reason to pick apart the place, find negativity and reasons to hate. You see it here on TV with people who rant on about how bad Thailand is, how awful Thai people are, and go on and on about every little thing that seems to make their lives a misery.

How are you people who go on and on about the stuff back home any different from these people?

No, I think you're misreading. I think people are commenting on how the nature of government has changed from being a servant of the populace to becoming its master. This isn't something new historically, but I think many people thought we might have moved beyond that in our societies and would not be trapped forever in a cycle of ignorance/abuse of power/revolt.

Anyhow, I don't see how it's the same as the Thailand whiners at all. Those folks whine, yet stay.

The comments are not against the populace, but against some overzealous 'jobsworth' who interferes with the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness desired by most in any country.

The PRS / Thai equivalent have been cmplained about in both scenarios - and to my mind quite rightly. As Sibey and others have pointed out, the big money goes to the marketing arm - not the guys (and gals) with the artistic talent who first develop a new song / painting / play or whatever. They are paid a small royalty for their pains, whereas the Daddy Bigbucks of the artistic world pursue every last dollar they can make from releasing / re-releasing / franchising / sequelling / best of ... / golden hits of ... / tunes of the 70's / other 'collections' of rebranding existing marketable product.

The artist is worthy of his hire - but once a song is out in the public domain, surely anyone is entitled to hum, sing, whistle or tap-dance to it - for their own pleasure, even if it does not please the folks around them?

even if it does not please the folks around them

I'd have just busted her for disturbing the peace.

Can you see though that the pendulum has swung too far? The right to keep your job while on maternity leave is now stretching to a wish for the right for all women to take off 6 months, child or no child.

Surely, then, the argument must stand for every worker to take off 6 months, regardless of gender?

Don't get me started!!!!!

I never commented on the maternity leave issue. Only on one posters irrelevant attempts to slag off women & suggestion that we(women) should not expect equality when it comes to pay. But it is yet again easy to attack & target women in a totally unrelated arena instead of focusing on the very few who proposed the idea of maternity leave for all women instead. Pathetic & boring & oh so predicable.

Can you see though that the pendulum has swung too far? The right to keep your job while on maternity leave is now stretching to a wish for the right for all women to take off 6 months, child or no child.

Surely, then, the argument must stand for every worker to take off 6 months, regardless of gender?

Don't get me started!!!!!

I never commented on the maternity leave issue. Only on one posters irrelevant attempts to slag off women & suggestion that we(women) should not expect equality when it comes to pay. But it is yet again easy to attack & target women in a totally unrelated arena instead of focusing on the very few who proposed the idea of maternity leave for all women instead. Pathetic & boring & oh so predicable.

Pathetic & boring & oh so predicable.

Can be applied both ways. Nobody is begrudging a woman, or any other human being, a fair days pay but when they start wanting maternity leave for babies they've never had what about us blokes? Shouldn't we be allowed paternity leave even though we are single? Don't you see how this kind of cr@p undermines all the work towards equality done by the preceding generations.

Also the whole issue of any kind of maternity/paternity leave opens up a bag of worms.

Lady 'A' is good, but not exceptional, at her job and she tends to go sick at the drop of a hat but anyhow she goes and gets pregnant and wants her six months maternity leave. Her employer is forced to hire a temp to fill in her position in the company until she returns. This temp, lady 'B'. is the bee's knees and does the job twice as good as lady 'A' and never takes a day sick and is never a minute late. Six months passes and lady 'A' waltzes back in demanding her job back so her employer is forced to let go the temp to take back a second rate employee.

Children (parenthood) is not compulsory.

Just to put things back in perspective here.....

The key words of the article are "Women without children should be allowed maternity leave, survey says".

There's no suggestion of it actually occurring, some survey company has run around asking people if they fancy having six months off when they feel like it. These people were apparently women.

This is a long, long step from it being implemented.

And another thing.

The Telegraph is a rag anyway. I'd take about as much notice of "News of the World".

Children (parenthood) is not compulsory.

Absolutely, but necessary, I'd say, for at least a certain %age of the Human Race.

Just to put things back in perspective here.....

The key words of the article are "Women without children should be allowed maternity leave, survey says".

There's no suggestion of it actually occurring, some survey company has run around asking people if they fancy having six months off when they feel like it. These people were apparently women.

This is a long, long step from it being implemented.

And another thing.

The Telegraph is a rag anyway. I'd take about as much notice of "News of the World".

Come come scead. Lets not inject a bit of common sense into a good whinge.