Narrow Boat World Article About Our Incident at Hillmorton on 25th August

[John Holden]

 

Not quite.

 

"Public domain" in the American English sense means "free of copyright". This usage has gained widespread worldwide popularity through the open source software movement.

 

"In the public domain" is a British English phrase used to mean that something is not a secret.

 

Information published on this forum can therefore be said to be in the public domain, though each posting is the copyright of its author.

 

For what it's worth, England & Wales copyright law does not have an explicit concept of "public domain", hence the existence of legal tools such as CC0 and PDDL to allow people to effectively renounce the copyright in their works. Collections of names and addresses can actually be copyrightable in the UK, but that's another question and an exceptionally complex one.

 

I once had somebody argue that if something could be seen by the public it was therefore in the public domain and therefore not covered by copyright.

I suggested that they should pop down to their local library where by their definition they would find books by JK Rowlings that were in the public domain, that they should run off a few thousand copies and see if Rowlings lawyers agreed with their definition of public domain.

 

The format of a list of names and addresses may be covered, the actual names and addresses can not be.

 

The suggestion in the post I responded to suggested that as the information was in the public domain it was available to all to use.

 

I'm sure that you know far more about the subject than I do but I do have a lot of people arguing that if something was available to view it was therefore in the public domain and thus free from copyright.

[patty-ann]

I duno either way, I wasn't there.

 

Going back to your point though, I agree that CRT need to make sure that lockies understand that they should only act on the instructions of the person in control of the boat. Whether I, as the person at the controls is actually in control, is another story!

Playing devils advocate..if lockie obeys instructions of him on boat and incident occurs due to following instructions whose liable?

The one who did the act or the one who gave the instructions?

I thought we were all responsible for our actions..that we have to evaluate what we do and form opinion as to rightness of action..

Would the boater giving instructions have to prefix his instructions with "I take full responsibility...."

Edited October 31, 2015 by patty-ann

[Tecka]

Morning all,

 

I just wanted to make a quick post to clarify a couple of things.

 

Firstly, I have nothing but respect for both Alan and Allan. They are both trying to highlight issues as they see them although in very different ways about the same instance. Trying to decide which is the best method is one of those unanswerable questions as there are so many factors.

 

Secondly, regarding the RA / MS stuff. It doesn't actually matter, the main thing is the avoidance of it happening again. This discussion goes a long way to that, It's made me more aware for sure.

 

Thirdly, reading through it seems to me that what is needed is for the VLK to listen to any crew member. As Tony (or MtB) noted if the term skipper was taken to mean the person at the helm only then a crew member anywhere else wouldn't be listened to. A point I hadn't considered before tbh.

 

Have a good day all.

[Graham.m]

I suggest that what has now grown into 8 pages of consideration and discussion of minor and incidental details can be condensed into one simple question, and that is : ~

 

Do C&RT intend to continue exposing boaters to the risks that inevitably arise from authorizing volunteers, who are apparently incapable of seeing that a boat only a few feet away from where they're standing is seriously hung up, to involve themselves in the operation of locks?

 

Volunteer Lock Keeper do some sterling good work.

 

However, I think CRT has to decide if its volunteers lockies are there to assist as requested or are in charge of the lock and responsible for its safe operation.

 

Also maybe it has to be part of their instructions that if anyone of the boat crew says drop the paddles there is a problem, they drop the paddles first and then check, not check and argue before dropping the paddles.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

Morning all,

 

I just wanted to make a quick post to clarify a couple of things.

 

Firstly, I have nothing but respect for both Alan and Allan. They are both trying to highlight issues as they see them although in very different ways about the same instance. Trying to decide which is the best method is one of those unanswerable questions as there are so many factors.

 

Secondly, regarding the RA / MS stuff. It doesn't actually matter, the main thing is the avoidance of it happening again. This discussion goes a long way to that, It's made me more aware for sure.

 

Thirdly, reading through it seems to me that what is needed is for the VLK to listen to any crew member. As Tony (or MtB) noted if the term skipper was taken to mean the person at the helm only then a crew member anywhere else wouldn't be listened to. A point I hadn't considered before tbh.

 

Have a good day all.

Avoidance of it happening again can be achieved in one of two ways. Either stop using VLK's to assist/help boaters and divert them into other activities that benefit the waterways or ensure that they are given sufficient training to recognise emergency situations and act appropriately. Edited October 31, 2015 by Allan(nb Albert)

[gazza]

How are they supposed to know who the skipper is?

The skipper will invariably be the one wearing a wide brimmed hat and often looks like Harold Shipman

Occasionally he will be wearing a captains hat - not often encountered it must be said.

 

Now and again a stout gobby women may also be the skipper.

 

Everyone else appears to get on with it without needing to be called skipper or captain.

 

HTH

[nicknorman]

Everyone else appears to get on with it without needing to be called skipper or captain.

HTH

Quite right, no need to make a meal out of it.

 

Personally I am quite happy just to be called "Sir".

[Tecka]

Avoidance of it happening again can be achieved in one of two ways. Either stop using VLK's to assist/help boaters and divert them into other activities that benefit the waterways or ensure that they are given sufficient training to recognise emergency situations and act appropriately.

 

 

Personally, In my opinion, there is another way. CaRT clarifies that the crew is in charge and the training becomes unnecessary.

[Alan de Enfield]

Quite right, no need to make a meal out of it.

 

Personally I am quite happy just to be called "Sir".

 

Is that not spelt "Cur" ?

[gazza]

Quite right, no need to make a meal out of it.

 

Personally I am quite happy just to be called "Sir".

Sounds good to me!

 

I can't repeat what Mrs Gazza calls me - it's supposed to be a family orientated forum.

[Laurie Booth]

 

I once had somebody argue that if something could be seen by the public it was therefore in the public domain and therefore not covered by copyright.

I suggested that they should pop down to their local library where by their definition they would find books by JK Rowlings that were in the public domain, that they should run off a few thousand copies and see if Rowlings lawyers agreed with their definition of public domain.

 

The format of a list of names and addresses may be covered, the actual names and addresses can not be.

 

The suggestion in the post I responded to suggested that as the information was in the public domain it was available to all to use.

 

I'm sure that you know far more about the subject than I do but I do have a lot of people arguing that if something was available to view it was therefore in the public domain and thus free from copyright.

The news on television is in the public domain.

[Paul C]

Something can be copyrighted but published so that its in the public domain. Its publication doesn't wipe out the copyright.....

 

ETA: public domain is more to do with secrecy/privacy.

Edited October 31, 2015 by Paul C

[Guest]

Something can be copyrighted but published so that its in the public domain. Its publication doesn't wipe out the copyright.....

In fact there is/was a statement on here (can't find it while on the phone) that says something like "the copyright of posts lies with the respective owner' implying the copyright of Alan's original post about the incident lies with him??

[Alan de Enfield]

In fact there is/was a statement on here (can't find it while on the phone) that says something like "the copyright of posts lies with the respective owner' implying the copyright of Alan's original post about the incident lies with him??

 

Earwig Ho

 

"This site shall be governed by the laws of England and Wales. Anything which may be construed as illegal activity may be reported to authorities, along with any details held regarding the member(s) involved. Please note that all content on this site is © Copyright of its respective owners, permission should be sought from the content owner before reproducing any aspect of this site."

 

My take on that would be that if you 'cut & paste' and stick it on another website you are infringing copyright.

If you become aware of a story (because of a thread here) but rewrite it into your own words, add background, comments from others etc. then it is not an infringement of copyright.

 

Edited October 31, 2015 by Alan de Enfield

[mango]

Ignoring the CRT-bashing for the moment, the question of who is in charge at a lock is interesting. When on a commercial or other navigation with a lock keeper based at a single lock, the lock keeper is clearly in charge and they may be the only one permitted to press the relevant buttons to operate the paddles. On a manned staircase, a lock keeper will control operating hours, decide how many boats go up and down and instruct boaters how to prepare the locks, but obviously cannot keep an eye on what is happening at every lock simultaneously.

 

Some seem to think they are in charge because they are at the tiller of a boat, but they are not in charge of the situation if their boat is hanging up in a lock. I met an experience boater who learned that the hard way when their boat sank while the three novice crew had deserted the paddles. Those on the paddles are the ones in control, whether part of the crew of the stricken boat, another boater, or a volunteer lock keeper. My view is that there isn't anyone in charge. Those who insist I'm wrong might like to think about who is in charge when two boats are sharing a broad lock.

 

Narrowboats passing through canal locks are different from ships with captains.

 

If we push CRT on safety issues, the relative freedom we enjoy as boaters could be compromised by rules.

[Tecka]

the question of who is in charge at a lock is interesting.

 

 

It is indeed, one of the main reasons for my posting is I'm new to full time boating and am genuinely interested in the outcome of this.

 

I met an experience boater who learned that the hard way when their boat sank while the three novice crew had deserted the paddles. Those on the paddles are the ones in control, whether part of the crew of the stricken boat, another boater, or a volunteer lock keeper. My view is that there isn't anyone in charge. Those who insist I'm wrong might like to think about who is in charge when two boats are sharing a broad lock.

 

 

Point well made, should the rule therefore be 'if anyone shouts drop the paddles then the paddles are dropped' if they were dropped in error a few seconds lost - better that than left up in error and boat being sunk?

[Alan de Enfield]

Ignoring the CRT-bashing for the moment, the question of who is in charge at a lock is interesting. When on a commercial or other navigation with a lock keeper based at a single lock, the lock keeper is clearly in charge and they may be the only one permitted to press the relevant buttons to operate the paddles. ....................

 

Interesting suggestion and at odds with experiences on Rivers with 'commercial sized locks' which are manned by C&RT full time staff.

As an example ;

 

A NB was sold from our marina and set off 'up' river - a lot of 'chat' on the VHF ensued which when investigated turned out to be :-

 

The NB skipper / driver / steerer got into the lock ( these are not canal sized locks) and insisted in motoring up to the front of the lock and resting his button against the top gate(s), when told it would be a good idea to go to the rear of the lock, the reply was "I always go up to the top gate" after some argument the lock keeper said "you are in charge of the boat, I have given you my advice which you have ignored, if you want to proceed I will fill the lock"

 

The paddle(s) were opened and the boat 'caroomed' around the lock like a Ping-Pong ball, smashing into the bottom gates, both sides, the top gates and the sides again before the paddles could be dropped.

 

The radio message went all along the river to each lock keeper warning them of the arrival of a 'know-all' NB driver.

[alan_fincher]

Going back to your point though, I agree that CRT need to make sure that lockies understand that they should only act on the instructions of the person in control of the boat. Whether I, as the person at the controls is actually in control, is another story!

 

 

 

Volunteer Lock Keeper do some sterling good work.

 

However, I think CRT has to decide if its volunteers lockies are there to assist as requested or are in charge of the lock and responsible for its safe operation.

 

Also maybe it has to be part of their instructions that if anyone of the boat crew says drop the paddles there is a problem, they drop the paddles first and then check, not check and argue before dropping the paddles.

 

 

I think the following is pretty clear, if it was always followed.........

 

The boater has the overall responsibility/control. The lock keepers are there to advise, guide and assist.

 

 

 

 

Playing devils advocate..if lockie obeys instructions of him on boat and incident occurs due to following instructions whose liable?

The one who did the act or the one who gave the instructions?

I thought we were all responsible for our actions..that we have to evaluate what we do and form opinion as to rightness of action..

Would the boater giving instructions have to prefix his instructions with "I take full responsibility...."

 

No the volunteers are supposed to know that the crew is in charge of the boat so this should not be required.

 

Thirdly, reading through it seems to me that what is needed is for the VLK to listen to any crew member. As Tony (or MtB) noted if the term skipper was taken to mean the person at the helm only then a crew member anywhere else wouldn't be listened to. A point I hadn't considered before tbh.

 

 

All my crew are boaters, and the concept of a steerer, "skipper" or captain is irrelevant here.

 

In this case Cath was immediately across the other side of the lock, and the one who would have been winding the paddles if nobody else had assumed that role. She was best placed to see what was occurring, and 10 feet from the VLK, not 75 feet as I was stood on the back of the boat. She was by far the best person to instruct the VLK.

 

The comment that suggested that the steerer can take action if a boat is hung on the gate is nonsense of course. Other than shout and sound the horn they are are totally dependent upon prompt action by others.

 

EDIT:

 

All this of course assumes at least 2 crew! If it were a single hander then there would be nobody at the tiller anyway so fairly clearly making "being at the tiller" a requirement of being in charge doesn't work!

Edited October 31, 2015 by alan_fincher

[Tecka]

My take on that would be that if you 'cut & paste' and stick it on another website you are infringing copyright.

If you become aware of a story (because of a thread here) but rewrite it into your own words, add background, comments from others etc. then it is not an infringement of copyright.

 

 

I would agree with your statement other than adding that personal and boat names be removed from the story without relevant permissions. (From a moral viewpoint not necessarily a copyright one)

[Tecka]

All my crew are boaters, and the concept of a steerer, "skipper" or captain is irrelevant here.

 

 

I agree, all crew are boaters and should be listened to. My heads starting to hurt here as I think we are all basically agreeing but using differing terms (ambiguity that needs resolution maybe) This may be partly down to my relative newness to this, if so please accept my apology and also my heartfelt wish that no one discussing this ever needs to find out the hard way.

[billS]

Does anyone have any examples of a situation where they have specifically asked a volunteer not to operate the paddles, but have had that request refused or ignored?

 

After an incident involving a volunteer at Braunston a couple of years ago, that is my default position and to date that instruction has always been respected, although not always with good grace. This approach avoids any questions about training, responsibility etc.

[mango]

 

It is indeed, one of the main reasons for my posting is I'm new to full time boating and am genuinely interested in the outcome of this.

 

 

Point well made, should the rule therefore be 'if anyone shouts drop the paddles then the paddles are dropped' if they were dropped in error a few seconds lost - better that than left up in error and boat being sunk?

I would like to see this in the Boater's Handbook and regarded as standard practice if anything appears to be going wrong in a lock. I learned about this on my first canal holiday.

[alan_fincher]

 

I would agree with your statement other than adding that personal and boat names be removed from the story without relevant permissions. (From a moral viewpoint not necessarily a copyright one)

 

It goes further than that as my boat name has been used as the main heading for one section ("The Flamingo Incident"), and my son's name highlighted above the next.

 

However whilst this is i no way required to strengthen the story, my issue is not that we are named, but that the incident has formed (despite some using terms like "mentioned in passing") perhaps nearly half of the article, whilst we are still in discussions with CRT.

 

The author did not know where we are with CRT on the matter at the time the article was posted, and it is my personal judgement that he has now reduced rather than increased the chances of a satisfactory outcome. Of course I can't prove that, but I feel I was justified in starting this thread to make it very clear we had no part in the article.

[NilesMI]

All this of course assumes at least 2 crew! If it were a single hander then there would be nobody at the tiller anyway so fairly clearly making "being at the tiller" a requirement of being in charge doesn't work!

 

And that is a BIG assumption!

 

Being single handed most of the time, I will normally be on the lockside, operating the paddles and controlling the boat with rope(s). From the lockside I can keep a watch that the boat is floating freely, not creeping too far forwards or back, and so on....

 

When I work through a lock with a VLK, they invariably suggest I stay on the boat while they operate paddles and close/open the gates.

 

Thus when I first heard of Alan's incident, I imagined myself in his position, but with no crew of my own on the lockside and myself at the tiller, there would not have even been a warning shout from the crew member. I would have been entirely in the hands of the VLK to decide whether the boat was actually getting hung up or it was going to "sort itself out".

 

It is inconsideration of this that I feel in a quandry about how to treat the VLK. If he/she is only there to advise, guide and assist, can I rely on their eyes, ears and boating knowledge to realise a problem is developing? Because if not, I would want to make sure that my eyes and ears are on the lockside, not at the tiller, unable to see a problem and shout an instruction to the VLK, let alone even reach a paddle if I wanted to.

 

If/when CRT do respond to Alan's incident report, I will be looking closely to see if the instructions they give to VLKs cover the specific situation of a single handed boat.

 

 

Edit: To add: This is of course the situation a single hander has to deal with when crew of another boat suggest they will help at a lock and "It's ok. You stay on your boat". As the recipient of the offer of help, you have to make an instant assessment of whether you are putting yourself and your boat into competent hands. I am afraid I now tend to err on the safe side and while accepting the kind offer, nevertheless I get myself onto the lockside and control the boat with ropes rather than chancing it by staying at the tiller.

Edited October 31, 2015 by NilesMI

[Martin Megson]

I think this thread is getting somewhat sidetracked by the "who's in charge" debate.

The bottom line is not who is in change but simply that if anyone involved, crew or lockeeper, calls out that there is a problem any sensible person would and should close the paddles while the situation is assessed. The worst that could happen is that a few minutes are lost while the best is that a boat could be saved. Not a difficult equation.

 

Edit to add - That is what CRT should be teaching their staff and volunteers.

Edited October 31, 2015 by Martin Megson