SAFETY RELATED NEWS SHOULD NOT BE OWNED BY ANYONE BUT THE CONCERNED PUBLIC
UPDATE ;
It would appear that simplyinfo are not going to sue the blogger in question and we have agreed to move on and pursue our relevant roles and important work for these scientists and researchers .. Thank you simlyinfo team for your hard work and understandingThe beaviour recounted here in this Oped by Dun Renard by the Fukuleaks team has been noted by myself as well. It caused me to largely discount tham as a source and I promptly deleted the bookmark. I wonder what other information they are also hiding by this creeping censorship. Barrett Browns Persecuters (https://theintercept.com/staff/freebarrett_/ ) would be very pleased with their stance on copyright as would the UK Government (Julian Assange) and The USA Government (Edward Snowden) . So I suggest that he Fukuleaks team are more Corporate than caring.
I appreciate that they are doing but attacking people that promote their blogsite is like the situation that occoured recently by the Fine Brothers who tried to do a similar thing on You Tube.
A link to a responce to that can be found here (They lost 200, 000 subscribers in just a day or so after begining just a few take down notices);
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHSn-PaaZFY
I hope that the Fukuleaks Team backs off hastling a Fukushima father and concentrates their efforts at the conspiracy to cover up the health effects of nuclear disasters.
I hope that Fukuleaks doesnt want to go down the road of the Fine Brothers for that way leads to destruction.
Regrds
Shaun McGee
aka arclight
First I shared a short article of Fukuleaks on Radioactive Glass Nanoparticles, but Fukuleaks immediately harassed me complaining that I was infringing their copyrights and asking me to delete my article on my blog.
I told them you should be happy that I reposted your article, giving you the credits and giving your article link as the source, thus making your website more well known to those people who do not know it yet.
I cut by 60% their short article text, posting only 40% of it, as 40% sharing of an article text, if no money generating from it is considered by copyrights law as fair share and is usually tolerated.
But no it was still not enough good for them and still they pested me by email complaining, asking me to delete completely their article.
I told them, what kind of antinuclear people are you, as antinuclear don’t you…
View original post 456 more words
1 Comment »
Leave a comment
-
Archives
- December 2025 (224)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
- January 2025 (250)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS


Update ;
It would appear that simplyinfo are not going to sue the blogger in question and we have agreed to move on and pursue our important work for these scientists and researchers