It's the people who do that Salford Faithful twitter account. Wasn't happy seeing my name in there when I went to check the MEN on my dinner today.

Barker's emergence on twitter has definitley helped his PR.

Is it legal to take things off here and use someones name or Pseudonym without permission?

You'll have to check the small print of the forum rules.
I would think its quite legit.

If it is it only increases my utter contempt for the rag.

Lazy reporting to do something like that rather than approach people and ask if A they mind and if not B they would contribute more.

Hi guys I'm one of the admins for the twitter page Salford faithful I just want to clear up that last week we did not write all of that column I was surprised by some of the comments that were on it we didn't know anything about this as Neil says he had the column sorted sorry again for any confusion

Feel free to use my comments from my first post on this thread.

Would it not have been prudent for whoever decided to use our comments to ask on here? I for one (and at least one other person quoted) am not happy this has been done, personally to be associated with a publication like the MEN is rather distasteful.

Me and my fellow admin only use people who tweet our page so Neil must of got the rest of the comments like I said we didn't know anything about your comments being used till I got the paper Friday I just email him what I write but last week he used just a little bit from what I sent him the rest he did

Just out of interest sullied myself and looked at the Comics online page and note that the article isn't on there.

Pity it would have been nice to pass comment on them using peoples quotes without permission.

Shockingly terrible publication and journalist.

It's a grey area. When you post on a public forum you ceed some copyright to the moderators, such as editing or deleting posts altogether. However, you still have copyright of the words that remain, as do, I assume, RLFANS.

The thing that makes it muddy is posting with a handle or a pseudonym. If such a dispute ever went to court, which would be extreme and probably ludicrous, you would have to prove that a) you were the person posting with that account at that time, and b) you are the owner of that account and this is an alias you go by online. In the process, the shroud of anonymity would fall – you would be outed, so to speak.

As you and others have said on here, you would hope that a certain amount of etiquette would prevail and that people would ask you first before republishing your posts elsewhere.

On a related note, if any of you are on Twitter, these rules don’t apply to text tweets. It is thought unlikely that intellectual property rights would apply to such a short range of words. Photos, however, are a different story, unless the rl‘Instagram Act’rl comes to fruition.

I’m not sure what’s more embarrassing that twitter account or Louise…

?

Bit unfair that.

For one, you didn't need to post anything about what you find embarrassing. That's your business and little to do with this thread. The second point is why complain about fellow fans enthusiasm?

Your 'point' just comes across as a dig for no reason at all.

Very poor.

I think it relates to the fact that the "fans article" in the Evening News that was written by Salford Faithful is now going to be written by Louise.

Mr scholes what's this personal vendetta you have towards Louise,give it a rest let the girl do some thing she is passionate about I'm fed up of people putting her down on social media sites,. Go and talk things out face to face and sort your differences..I for one will look forward to her columns..