politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » ComRes phone poll sees Labour up 3 and UKIP down 3
This represents the highest combined two-party vote share since September 2013. Individually, it is Labour’s highest share for six months and the Conservatives’ highest since November 2012.
Looks like Scotland has rumbled Wee Mili winkie. Labour with a higher VI in England over Scotland right now, you'd have got good odds on that a while back...
It looks as if the Tories are going to walk this election. As people become more focused on the options available to them then logically they are going to vote Conservative.
Any voter who is yet to decide their vote because it will be based on a manifesto is assuming single-party majority government, and ought to be paying more attention!
I greet the news of Clarkson's sacking with contradictory emotions. He insulted a producer for 30 minutes, called him a "lazy Irish c**t", then punched him, so of course he was going to be deservedly sacked. But I was hoping that some compromise could be found. Who knows: maybe it still will...
Anyhoo, not what I came here to say. My question is "what are the boundaries?". BBC owns the rights to Top Gear, so if, say, Sky transmit a program called "New Gear" in which they review cars and have race challenges, then BBC can sue and would win. If they transmitted a program called "Clarkson, May and Hammond" in which they cook meals and have challenges not involving cars, then BBC may see but would lose. So my question is: what is the boundary? How different from Top Gear does the program have to be for it to not fall within BBC's rights
If you simply build on "Three middle aged guys cocking about -ambitious but rubbish" you are safe.
If you have 3 guys sitting on chairs on a dais saying "Time for the news", or have a "Big star - small car" segment, or deliver challenges in gold envelopes, you could be in trouble.
Yes, that's my reading as well
Yes, because delivering challenges in Gold Envelopes is copyrighted.
FFS.
Stop being moderateds.
It is quite possible that Top Gear as we know it will end with Clarkson, on the BBC, AND elsewhere, but the idea this will happen because taking a car show to another channel somehow infringes copyright - e.g. opening yellow envelopes! - is just retarded.
I know you can own the intellectual property of a format - Top Gear, Big Brother, Simon Cowell stuff for example - but I don't pretend to know how you define a 'format'. They are essentially franchises.
It shouldn't take long for the three Top Gear folks to reappear in a car based show, presuming they stay together, which Top Gear fans will love.
I love that Al Campbell was bitching about the frivolity of the media focussing on THAT photo....giving HufPo the perfect excuse to illustrate his article with THAT photo....
I greet the news of Clarkson's sacking with contradictory emotions. He insulted a producer for 30 minutes, called him a "lazy Irish c**t", then punched him, so of course he was going to be deservedly sacked. But I was hoping that some compromise could be found. Who knows: maybe it still will...
Anyhoo, not what I came here to say. My question is "what are the boundaries?". BBC owns the rights to Top Gear, so if, say, Sky transmit a program called "New Gear" in which they review cars and have race challenges, then BBC can sue and would win. If they transmitted a program called "Clarkson, May and Hammond" in which they cook meals and have challenges not involving cars, then BBC may see but would lose. So my question is: what is the boundary? How different from Top Gear does the program have to be for it to not fall within BBC's rights
If you simply build on "Three middle aged guys cocking about -ambitious but rubbish" you are safe.
If you have 3 guys sitting on chairs on a dais saying "Time for the news", or have a "Big star - small car" segment, or deliver challenges in gold envelopes, you could be in trouble.
Yes, that's my reading as well
Yes, because delivering challenges in Gold Envelopes is copyrighted.
FFS.
Stop being moderateds.
It is quite possible that Top Gear as we know it will end with Clarkson, on the BBC, AND elsewhere, but the idea this will happen because taking a car show to another channel somehow infringes copyright - e.g. opening yellow envelopes! - is just retarded.
I know you can own the intellectual property of a format - Top Gear, Big Brother, Simon Cowell stuff for example - but I don't pretend to know how you define a 'format'. They are essentially franchises.
It shouldn't take long for the three Top Gear folks to reappear in a car based show, presuming they stay together, which Top Gear fans will love.
Which brings me back to my original question: where is the boundary...
But they could still be there after the election, until one of them is replaced.
I think Gordon has set a precedent that if a leader doesn't win the election, he resigns the party leadership immediately.
So if Labour lose then Hattie will take over the leadership again until the new permanent leader is elected. Don't know who it would be for the Tories in that scenario.
I greet the news of Clarkson's sacking with contradictory emotions. He insulted a producer for 30 minutes, called him a "lazy Irish c**t", then punched him, so of course he was going to be deservedly sacked. But I was hoping that some compromise could be found. Who knows: maybe it still will...
Anyhoo, not what I came here to say. My question is "what are the boundaries?". BBC owns the rights to Top Gear, so if, say, Sky transmit a program called "New Gear" in which they review cars and have race challenges, then BBC can sue and would win. If they transmitted a program called "Clarkson, May and Hammond" in which they cook meals and have challenges not involving cars, then BBC may see but would lose. So my question is: what is the boundary? How different from Top Gear does the program have to be for it to not fall within BBC's rights
If you simply build on "Three middle aged guys cocking about -ambitious but rubbish" you are safe.
If you have 3 guys sitting on chairs on a dais saying "Time for the news", or have a "Big star - small car" segment, or deliver challenges in gold envelopes, you could be in trouble.
Yes, that's my reading as well
Yes, because delivering challenges in Gold Envelopes is copyrighted.
FFS.
Stop being moderateds.
It is quite possible that Top Gear as we know it will end with Clarkson, on the BBC, AND elsewhere, but the idea this will happen because taking a car show to another channel somehow infringes copyright - e.g. opening yellow envelopes! - is just retarded.
I know you can own the intellectual property of a format - Top Gear, Big Brother, Simon Cowell stuff for example - but I don't pretend to know how you define a 'format'. They are essentially franchises.
It shouldn't take long for the three Top Gear folks to reappear in a car based show, presuming they stay together, which Top Gear fans will love.
Which brings me back to my original question: where is the boundary...
...And we've looped...:-)
Yes, I have to admit that you have run rings round me logically on this one
But they could still be there after the election, until one of them is replaced.
I think Gordon has set a precedent that if a leader doesn't win the election, he resigns the party leadership immediately.
So if Labour lose then Hattie will take over the leadership again until the new permanent leader is elected. Don't know who it would be for the Tories in that scenario.
There is no elected Tory Deputy.
I suspect Cameron will do what John Major and others before him did.
Act as Leader of the Opposition until a new Tory leader is elected.
Gordon Brown can do whatever he likes, but it's hard to argue that an election loser has any constitutional, moral or popular right to set a precedent for anyone else to follow.
But they could still be there after the election, until one of them is replaced.
I think Gordon has set a precedent that if a leader doesn't win the election, he resigns the party leadership immediately.
So if Labour lose then Hattie will take over the leadership again until the new permanent leader is elected. Don't know who it would be for the Tories in that scenario.
John Major resigned the day after the 1997 election.
But they could still be there after the election, until one of them is replaced.
I think Gordon has set a precedent that if a leader doesn't win the election, he resigns the party leadership immediately.
So if Labour lose then Hattie will take over the leadership again until the new permanent leader is elected. Don't know who it would be for the Tories in that scenario.
John Major resigned the day after the 1997 election.
But he still fulfilled the role of Leader of the Opposition until a new leader was elected.
Unlike Brown he asked his successor questions at PMQs as Leader of the Opposition
Whatever about the outcome of 2015, a person who enters a campaign Prime Minister and exits it as backbench chrysalis waiting to erupt into elder statesman is certainly an election loser.
Are Cameron or Miliband really going to want to hang around and take another couple of months of being taunted as a "loser" and getting mocked by the press?
Are Cameron or Miliband really going to want to hang around and take another couple of months of being taunted as a "loser" and getting mocked by the press?
Its the person who is in power who is in for a torrid time - I doubt the press will devote much, if any time to the 'loser' - the interest will be focussed on the PM and the loser's potential successors.....
Comments
Last pmqs ever ed vs Dave today?
But they could still be there after the election, until one of them is replaced.
I know you can own the intellectual property of a format - Top Gear, Big Brother, Simon Cowell stuff for example - but I don't pretend to know how you define a 'format'. They are essentially franchises.
It shouldn't take long for the three Top Gear folks to reappear in a car based show, presuming they stay together, which Top Gear fans will love.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DP1_w1VF_1Q
Goodnight.
Mike has banned me from using this picture of Ed for the smiling Eds
http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/article9409370.ece/binary/original/v3-miliband-selwynv2.jpg
...And we've looped...:-)
So if Labour lose then Hattie will take over the leadership again until the new permanent leader is elected. Don't know who it would be for the Tories in that scenario.
I suspect Cameron will do what John Major and others before him did.
Act as Leader of the Opposition until a new Tory leader is elected.
this is the best one for Dave, I reckon.
http://www.tvscoop.tv/wp-content/gallery/kids-tv-shows/captain-pugwash-pic-pa-147180168.jpg
Unlike Brown he asked his successor questions at PMQs as Leader of the Opposition
Alex Salmond: I would bring down any Tory minority government
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/03/alex-salmond-i-would-bring-down-any-tory-minority-government
https://twitter.com/jools_organic/status/580528772039983106/photo/1
Prominent emphasis on UKIP decline.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3010228/Tories-Labour-neck-neck-Ukip-support-slips-Parties-level-35-backing-Farage-falls-lowest-level-2013-just-10.html
- and I've met him!
Among those present at the ceremony today, Arnold Palmer. Another Class Guy.
I've met him too.
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2015/03/24/jack-nicklaus-gets-congressional-medal-of-honor.html