• PhilSex (Philosophy of Sex ) - 1. Naughty Pictures

    1295996350
    Alicia D'amore [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 3512
    • Joined: 2 Feb 2008

    Doug wrote:

    Ok sorry for you KP but it does raise a point about other people taking non concenting photos

    celebs have to put up with the paparazie (spelling?) all the time and they clearly dont have ownership over those photots otherwise they wouldn't be in the mail or sun. (excluding those who have gagging orders on them)

    Just becasue they are famouse doesn't mean that they aren't people in their own right does it?

    The argument is whether they consent to it indirectly by consenting to being in the public domain. It could be argued that since it comes with the job, and you choose to take the job, you're consenting by doing the job. Since these days, just being famous pays! And part of "just being famous" is being photographed.

    Adx

    1295996496
    Doug [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major General
    • Posts: 536
    • Joined: 4 Jun 2010

    KittyPurry wrote:

    Yep I think it also applies to anything (original) you've ever written, from shopping lists to diaries. Copywrite is automatic I believe. I think images are (or rather should be) in the same category as written stuff. For example if I wrote a poem for DD and gave it to him - the copywrite would still be mine. He can look at it sure and write it out or whatever but it wouldn't be "his" to sell or publish. I think of photos in the exact same way.

    And yes sorry for me...it was RUBBISH! I do tend to attract a disproportionate amount of psychos...apparently sociopaths can pick out potential victims/prey based on just their walk...explains a lot (including why I am now practicing a "badass" walk to trick them!)

    xxKPxx

    shame thats not how it works in life though. Now you HAVE to copyright everything even ideas. If you have an idea and someone else hears about it and claims it as theirs, it is, nout you can do. And interlectual propertie (ideas) is massive money

    1295996543
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6342
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    KittyPurry wrote:

    Yep I think it also applies to anything (original) you've ever written, from shopping lists to diaries. Copywrite is automatic I believe. I think images are (or rather should be) in the same category as written stuff. For example if I wrote a poem for DD and gave it to him - the copywrite would still be mine. He can look at it sure and write it out or whatever but it wouldn't be "his" to sell or publish. I think of photos in the exact same way.

    And yes sorry for me...it was RUBBISH! I do tend to attract a disproportionate amount of psychos...apparently sociopaths can pick out potential victims/prey based on just their walk...explains a lot (including why I am now practicing a "badass" walk to trick them!)

    xxKPxx

    So it is some form of loan or license when someone gets a pic?

    But if someone buys that shopping list they own the rights, so if someone else takes a pic then they own the rights to do with it as they please?

    Haha! You don't strike me as a baddass walker!

    1295996658
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6342
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    Doug wrote:

    KittyPurry wrote:

    Yep I think it also applies to anything (original) you've ever written, from shopping lists to diaries. Copywrite is automatic I believe. I think images are (or rather should be) in the same category as written stuff. For example if I wrote a poem for DD and gave it to him - the copywrite would still be mine. He can look at it sure and write it out or whatever but it wouldn't be "his" to sell or publish. I think of photos in the exact same way.

    And yes sorry for me...it was RUBBISH! I do tend to attract a disproportionate amount of psychos...apparently sociopaths can pick out potential victims/prey based on just their walk...explains a lot (including why I am now practicing a "badass" walk to trick them!)

    xxKPxx

    shame thats not how it works in life though. Now you HAVE to copyright everything even ideas. If you have an idea and someone else hears about it and claims it as theirs, it is, nout you can do. And interlectual propertie (ideas) is massive money

    And some of us don't agree with copyright which is another moral issue!

    1295996668
    Dirty Red Angel [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 728
    • Joined: 16 Sep 2010

    KittyPurry wrote:

    Having thought long and hard about this I think whoever is in a photo has a sort of ownership of it whether it's of a naked or clothed individual and is of face/body/bodypart. I think the only way it can be someone elses property is if some kind of contract has been signed stating otherwise.

    I think it was last year ... I was on the beach doing some circuit training on my own when I started feeling weird like I was bring watched but there didn't seem to be anyone around. Then sudenly a guy appeared a few meters away and walked really close past me ... it was a bit odd but I assumed I was just being paranoid. I carried on doing my squats when I heard a "click" of a camera phone right near me. I turned round and it was the same guy, no more than a meter away, with a big disgusting grin on his face and he walked away looking at his phone and grinning back at me. FUCKING FREAK! Technically he didn't do anything but take a picture of, I assume my bum, but I felt toatally violated and wish I'd punched him in the face and smashed his phone!

    xxKPxx

    I'd have wanted to take him phone and ram it up his own arse and ask how he'd like that picture?

    Aside from anything you didn't ask or consent for that picture to be taken. What an arse!

    1295996716
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6342
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    LittleKitty wrote:

    KittyPurry wrote:

    Having thought long and hard about this I think whoever is in a photo has a sort of ownership of it whether it's of a naked or clothed individual and is of face/body/bodypart. I think the only way it can be someone elses property is if some kind of contract has been signed stating otherwise.

    I think it was last year ... I was on the beach doing some circuit training on my own when I started feeling weird like I was bring watched but there didn't seem to be anyone around. Then sudenly a guy appeared a few meters away and walked really close past me ... it was a bit odd but I assumed I was just being paranoid. I carried on doing my squats when I heard a "click" of a camera phone right near me. I turned round and it was the same guy, no more than a meter away, with a big disgusting grin on his face and he walked away looking at his phone and grinning back at me. FUCKING FREAK! Technically he didn't do anything but take a picture of, I assume my bum, but I felt toatally violated and wish I'd punched him in the face and smashed his phone!

    xxKPxx

    I'd have wanted to take him phone and ram it up his own arse and ask how he'd like that picture?

    Aside from anything you didn't ask or consent for that picture to be taken. What an arse!

    That's what he said.

    I'm sorry.

    So sorry.

    1295996789
    KittyPurry [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 1315
    • Joined: 22 Aug 2009

    Doug wrote:

    KittyPurry wrote:

    Yep I think it also applies to anything (original) you've ever written, from shopping lists to diaries. Copywrite is automatic I believe. I think images are (or rather should be) in the same category as written stuff. For example if I wrote a poem for DD and gave it to him - the copywrite would still be mine. He can look at it sure and write it out or whatever but it wouldn't be "his" to sell or publish. I think of photos in the exact same way.

    And yes sorry for me...it was RUBBISH! I do tend to attract a disproportionate amount of psychos...apparently sociopaths can pick out potential victims/prey based on just their walk...explains a lot (including why I am now practicing a "badass" walk to trick them!)

    xxKPxx

    shame thats not how it works in life though. Now you HAVE to copyright everything even ideas. If you have an idea and someone else hears about it and claims it as theirs, it is, nout you can do. And interlectual propertie (ideas) is massive money

    Nope you don't! Brilliantly copywrite is automatic :D Obviously you have to write it down you can't just go up to Google and say "oh I thought of that search engine first but it was in my head" (shame!). But you don't actually need to do anything to get copywrite other than have proof of when you came up with the idea (posting it to yourself is a good way to do that).

    http://www.ipo.gov.uk/c-auto.htm

    xxKPxx

    1295996811
    Doug [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major General
    • Posts: 536
    • Joined: 4 Jun 2010

    Alicia D'amore wrote:

    Doug wrote:

    Ok sorry for you KP but it does raise a point about other people taking non concenting photos

    celebs have to put up with the paparazie (spelling?) all the time and they clearly dont have ownership over those photots otherwise they wouldn't be in the mail or sun. (excluding those who have gagging orders on them)

    Just becasue they are famouse doesn't mean that they aren't people in their own right does it?

    The argument is whether they consent to it indirectly by consenting to being in the public domain. It could be argued that since it comes with the job, and you choose to take the job, you're consenting by doing the job. Since these days, just being famous pays! And part of "just being famous" is being photographed.

    Adx

    erm being famouse isn't really a job (except big borther type things) and i disagree with that totaly. People like actors who don't have to do what they do, they are providing entertament, same with music artits, they deserve the same degree of privacy, yes what they do is in the public eye, but that doesn't give us the right to know 24/7 every little detail of their lifes. Yes they earn a lot of money but for every "Lady Gaga" (random example) there are thousands of people who haven't quite made it and are struggerling to make ends meet, same with any job, the top earn a lot but there are relitivly few of them compared to the number underneth. Just because they are succsessful does not mean that the public can pry on their life and know everything they do

    1295996873
    Doug [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major General
    • Posts: 536
    • Joined: 4 Jun 2010

    KittyPurry wrote:

    Doug wrote:

    KittyPurry wrote:

    Yep I think it also applies to anything (original) you've ever written, from shopping lists to diaries. Copywrite is automatic I believe. I think images are (or rather should be) in the same category as written stuff. For example if I wrote a poem for DD and gave it to him - the copywrite would still be mine. He can look at it sure and write it out or whatever but it wouldn't be "his" to sell or publish. I think of photos in the exact same way.

    And yes sorry for me...it was RUBBISH! I do tend to attract a disproportionate amount of psychos...apparently sociopaths can pick out potential victims/prey based on just their walk...explains a lot (including why I am now practicing a "badass" walk to trick them!)

    xxKPxx

    shame thats not how it works in life though. Now you HAVE to copyright everything even ideas. If you have an idea and someone else hears about it and claims it as theirs, it is, nout you can do. And interlectual propertie (ideas) is massive money

    Nope you don't! Brilliantly copywrite is automatic :D Obviously you have to write it down you can't just go up to Google and say "oh I thought of that search engine first but it was in my head" (shame!). But you don't actually need to do anything to get copywrite other than have proof of when you came up with the idea (posting it to yourself is a good way to do that).

    http://www.ipo.gov.uk/c-auto.htm

    xxKPxx

    ah ok did not know that,

    1295997290
    KittyPurry [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 1315
    • Joined: 22 Aug 2009

    WandA wrote:

    KittyPurry wrote:

    Yep I think it also applies to anything (original) you've ever written, from shopping lists to diaries. Copywrite is automatic I believe. I think images are (or rather should be) in the same category as written stuff. For example if I wrote a poem for DD and gave it to him - the copywrite would still be mine. He can look at it sure and write it out or whatever but it wouldn't be "his" to sell or publish. I think of photos in the exact same way.

    And yes sorry for me...it was RUBBISH! I do tend to attract a disproportionate amount of psychos...apparently sociopaths can pick out potential victims/prey based on just their walk...explains a lot (including why I am now practicing a "badass" walk to trick them!)

    xxKPxx

    So it is some form of loan or license when someone gets a pic?

    But if someone buys that shopping list they own the rights, so if someone else takes a pic then they own the rights to do with it as they please?

    Haha! You don't strike me as a baddass walker!

    I am da baddest assest walker in da worlds yo (or something). Nah I don't really want to walk like a gangster/cowboy (ok maybe a bit like a cowboy because they ARE cool) but I do want to modify the way I walk a bit to look less vulnerable. Apparently I do have a distinctive, childlike walk (I know I tend to stand with my back really arched and my belly forward like a child) so I probably walk a bit like that too. I'm getting a bit sick of being randomly targeted by lunatics so I figure every little helps!

    The writer of the shopping list would own the photo too ... if you take a photo of someone else's essay you can't hand that in as your own essay! I think photo's of person X or person X's work (writen, drawn etc.) belong to person X.

    Interstingly because I don't actually find this issue to be much of a grey area at all I now feel very suspicisious of myself - if anything appears black and white to me I start suspecting conditioning!

    xxKPxx

    1295997364
    Alicia D'amore [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 3512
    • Joined: 2 Feb 2008

    Doug wrote:

    erm being famouse isn't really a job (except big borther type things) and i disagree with that totaly. People like actors who don't have to do what they do, they are providing entertament, same with music artits, they deserve the same degree of privacy, yes what they do is in the public eye, but that doesn't give us the right to know 24/7 every little detail of their lifes. Yes they earn a lot of money but for every "Lady Gaga" (random example) there are thousands of people who haven't quite made it and are struggerling to make ends meet, same with any job, the top earn a lot but there are relitivly few of them compared to the number underneth. Just because they are succsessful does not mean that the public can pry on their life and know everything they do

    I class it as a job - you earn money by being famous. Sure you might get famous from another job but once you're there, being famous earns as much money as any other job would be.

    If you know the conditions before you start, then it could be argued that you were aware and consenting when you started. I'm not sayin I necessarily agree. I'm not sure what my opinion is, but it could be argued.

    Adx

    1295997748
    Dirty Red Angel [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 728
    • Joined: 16 Sep 2010

    WandA wrote:

    LittleKitty wrote:

    KittyPurry wrote:

    Having thought long and hard about this I think whoever is in a photo has a sort of ownership of it whether it's of a naked or clothed individual and is of face/body/bodypart. I think the only way it can be someone elses property is if some kind of contract has been signed stating otherwise.

    I think it was last year ... I was on the beach doing some circuit training on my own when I started feeling weird like I was bring watched but there didn't seem to be anyone around. Then sudenly a guy appeared a few meters away and walked really close past me ... it was a bit odd but I assumed I was just being paranoid. I carried on doing my squats when I heard a "click" of a camera phone right near me. I turned round and it was the same guy, no more than a meter away, with a big disgusting grin on his face and he walked away looking at his phone and grinning back at me. FUCKING FREAK! Technically he didn't do anything but take a picture of, I assume my bum, but I felt toatally violated and wish I'd punched him in the face and smashed his phone!

    xxKPxx

    I'd have wanted to take him phone and ram it up his own arse and ask how he'd like that picture?

    Aside from anything you didn't ask or consent for that picture to be taken. What an arse!

    That's what he said.

    I'm sorry.

    So sorry.

    1295998100
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6342
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    KittyPurry wrote:

    The writer of the shopping list would own the photo too ... if you take a photo of someone else's essay you can't hand that in as your own essay! I think photo's of person X or person X's work (writen, drawn etc.) belong to person X.

    Interstingly because I don't actually find this issue to be much of a grey area at all I now feel very suspicisious of myself - if anything appears black and white to me I start suspecting conditioning!

    xxKPxx

    Hmmm. I don't agree with copyright in the current form anyway but it seems a bit drastic to claim you own some form of 'copyright' over any image featuring yourself, can that right never be sold (say as a glamour model)? Does this apply to your property? Can I rightly be unhappy if someone takes a snap of my pen, a tree or car owned by me?

    Does it apply to objects I've previously owned? If I sell a car I surely can't keep the 'picture' rights of it when I do? What singles out appearance as so different?

    1295998423
    Wilkibo [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Brigadier
    • Posts: 549
    • Joined: 10 Nov 2010

    I'm not really familiar with the law in this area but notwithstanding this, u can't just do as like as u like with ur own property! For example, I might own a rifle but I couldn't simply go around shooting people and I would assume the same principle applies to the use of any of ur personal property.

    1295998507
    KittyPurry [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 1315
    • Joined: 22 Aug 2009

    WandA wrote:

    KittyPurry wrote:

    The writer of the shopping list would own the photo too ... if you take a photo of someone else's essay you can't hand that in as your own essay! I think photo's of person X or person X's work (writen, drawn etc.) belong to person X.

    Interstingly because I don't actually find this issue to be much of a grey area at all I now feel very suspicisious of myself - if anything appears black and white to me I start suspecting conditioning!

    xxKPxx

    Hmmm. I don't agree with copyright in the current form anyway but it seems a bit drastic to claim you own some form of 'copyright' over any image featuring yourself, can that right never be sold (say as a glamour model)? Does this apply to your property? Can I rightly be unhappy if someone takes a snap of my pen, a tree or car owned by me?

    Does it apply to objects I've previously owned? If I sell a car I surely can't keep the 'picture' rights of it when I do? What singles out appearance as so different?

    Nope I don't think you own pictures of your stuff - just work you have created art/written work. I think appearence is different because...well ... it is! I can't explain why...maybe the uniqueness? I'm really not sure it's more a feeling than anything I can explain properly. I think it's vaguely to do with consent too. I will rack my brains some more.

    With models it's different because they sign contracts to sell their rights over to the photographer/newspaper. The fact that they do that infers to me that they own the rights to begin with to be able to sell them...if that makes sense?

    xxKPxx

    1295998603
    BashfulBabe [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 767
    • Joined: 24 Apr 2010

    So when you consent to your photo being taken what control should you have over the image afterwards?

    Depends on the situation, really. On a very basic level, the copyright belongs to the creator (photographer), and as long as (s)he's obtained consent, then they are their property to do with as they please, contractual specifics aside. From a purely legal standpoint, I don't see how I would have any claim if someone else took a picture of me, willingly and knowingly, and then showed it elsewhere, unless I'd made some form of stipulation at the time. Obviously there are certain social constructs in place that go against that, such as in a relationship where it is usually assumed that the photos are not to be shared with anyone outside of the relationship (except where there's a clear understanding between the individuals themselves), but while it's a 'self-evident fact' that intimate acts within the relationship are somehow sacred ground, I can't see how it can overrule outright law.

    I think perhaps it's all of our responsabilities to be clear when entering such muddy waters as these: if you are trading photos, state clearly that they're for personal use only, or whatever sharing options you're comfortable with. Professional situations should be covered by agreements or contracts anyway, so we can probably safely ignore them. Situations where there's an agreement that the photographer can use the pics, because it's assumed they'll only be in their portfolio or perhaps a small showing that hardly anyone will see, again, I think that falls under 'personal responsability' and it shoudl be made clear at what point free permission to use your image ends.

    Is there a valid reason the photographer shouldn't be able to do what they want when the same objection wouldn't be met concerning a snap of you in the street?

    It's the level of intimacy. People can see you every day as much as they like, but that doesn't mean they have the right to come peeking in your windows at night. Same is true of pictures, some are taken in the public domain, and thus are public property (to a degree, I know there are some legal issues with rights to your own image and junk), but those taken in private are subject to certain privacy rules.

    Can you 'remove' the rights of the photographer to prioritise your rights (imagine causing harm to someone's livelihood to keep your 'dignity')?

    There are some cases where the reverse is true: think of celebrities or public officials who've had photos - often taken prior to any apparance in the public eye - and who've had their lives turned upside down, jobs lost, general mayhem, all because someone sold The Sun a rudie pic.

    I don't think either party should have their rights removed, but if you let someone take your picture with your consent but without any stipulations as to what can and cannot be done with it, then it should default to the copyright holder has all the rights, end of story.

    Does the context in how they were taken make a difference? Do you have less rights over 'selling' your body as a model compared to having a spur of the moment horn as a OH?

    there does have to be a certain amount of difference, because if a model - with, presumeably, a contract and very specific set of agreements - runs into problems, then there's a black and white set of rules that either have or haven't been followed; if a partner or an ex-partner breaks an agreement, chances are you won't have it on paper, so all you have is your word versus theirs. Thus, the best they could ask for is plausible claims to an agreement.

    What is the shape of the informal contract when you pass on pictures (is non-sharing an unwritten clause?)? If there are unwritten clauses what form do they take?

    I don't think so. I do treat photos shared with me with a default of "my eyes only", and try my best to delete or destroy them as soon as I'm able to after a relationship ends if it's in that context. But I'm not naive enough to believe that everyone thinks the same way, and if something goes horribly wrong, I don't want to feel like it's my own fault for not being clear: this way, I'll know it's because the guy is a dick, and enough of a dick that I'd feel ok about kicking up ten kinds of shit about it.

    1296000216
    sweetlove666 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 2007
    • Joined: 17 Nov 2008

    WandA wrote:

    I've planned a series! I have a series of philosophical questions I've thought about that in some way relate to sex. Seeing as some of us love a good debate why not actively create one for all the super clever people to chime in to. Of course I'll stop if it falls flat on it's face but hopefully it'll bring a bit of thought, insight, musings and pondering! Forgive the long-winded title, it just allows easy searching.

    My first topic is:

    "Who owns naughty pictures and what can you do with them?"

    i do have some pictures of myself, and obvously i own them as i am the model and i took them. I'm tackling this on a legal standpoint, as im not a philosopher and the law is a good basis to start with, although it might not always be correct or moral and law is about the only thing i can do with confidence. i think legally its the person who takes the pictures is the one whom has ownership, from a copyright standpoint anyway.

    So when you consent to your photo being taken what control should you have over the images afterwards?

    The idea of consent is a tricky one both legally and morally. the law is that someone must have consent to take the pictures intially. If the picture is being used for commercial purposes such as being sold the subject does have a right under copyright law to stop the use of images if they are derogatory or will damage the subjects chance of work.

    Can you 'remove' the rights of the photographer to prioritise your rights (imagine causing harm to someone's livelihood to keep your 'dignity')?

    obviously this issues has been covered by part in the last answer i did. there are certain rights in copyright law. and also as a right to a private and family life there could be grounds for injunctions that have become more prevalant in recent years. ( yes at the moment it only affects the wealthy and newspapers but its application is still valid for other memebers of the public)

    What is the shape of the informal contract when you pass on pictures (is non-sharing an unwritten clause?)?

    this is one purley for morals. verbal contracts are very hard to enforce. a possible solution is whitin the issue of consent and informed consent. a person could be said to have made an invalid consent if they didn't know that there was intention to post pics online or use them for commercial gains. Again the right to a private and family life might come into it too, and laws on harassment if you find the pictures posted to your work/ parents. I don't think that in a situation where the photographer and model are romanitc partners would result in a legally binding contract as such but there may be other ways both civil and criminal to persue if the worse did happen

    In professional modelling i assume there's a contract thats written and signed for shoots, and being paid for your time as a model will most likley mean that you relinquish any copyrights you have over an image as it is done in the course of employment and is therefore the employers property. the fact that a person is paid to model would make it a stronger case for a contract than not.


    1296000483
    Paddy89 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Captain
    • Posts: 67
    • Joined: 20 Nov 2010

    Peronally I'd say it's the same rules as a dvd; you own the actual, physical material, but not what's on it. So if you have photos of someone else you would own the bit of paper, but not what is printed on it. I'm not 100% but I think that is pretty much what the legal system would say if the receiver of the photos started posting them around everywhere and being malicous. Obviously depends on the individual scenario.

    As for general copyright, yeh it's automatic. I do a little scriptwriting and whilst what I write is legally mine, it's proving it that can be a potential problem.

    1296001134
    sweetlove666 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 2007
    • Joined: 17 Nov 2008

    Doug wrote:

    shame thats not how it works in life though. Now you HAVE to copyright everything even ideas. If you have an idea and someone else hears about it and claims it as theirs, it is, nout you can do. And interlectual propertie (ideas) is massive money

    Ideas alone are not copyrightable. ideas and themes have to be "fixed" i.e written down, stored electronically, on film or audio before any copyright is protected.

    for any of us who do reviews we have copyright in those reviews.

    not everything written is given a copyright protection, it must be of quality ( deemed by the judge at trial) or of artistic merit.

    1296001570
    Paddy89 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Captain
    • Posts: 67
    • Joined: 20 Nov 2010

    sweetlove666 wrote:

    Doug wrote:

    shame thats not how it works in life though. Now you HAVE to copyright everything even ideas. If you have an idea and someone else hears about it and claims it as theirs, it is, nout you can do. And interlectual propertie (ideas) is massive money

    Ideas alone are not copyrightable. ideas and themes have to be "fixed" i.e written down, stored electronically, on film or audio before any copyright is protected.

    for any of us who do reviews we have copyright in those reviews.

    not everything written is given a copyright protection, it must be of quality ( deemed by the judge at trial) or of artistic merit.

    Not wanting to spin this thread off on a tangent, but do you? I haven't read all LH's T&Cs, but I'd have thought they'd have a clause that gave them ownership of any and all reviews and freedom to use them for marketing purposes. Most places seem to, but I could be wrong here.

    Post a reply to this thread

    Please sign in to post messages to the forum.