Re-used tornado video from 6/12/04

[Martin North]

The whole thing seems wrong...

That apparently anti-cyclonically (clockwise) rotating tornado (which would be a fairly rare event anyway) steers you into thinking the bird's going backwards.

It's a very strange effect. If the bird is indeed going forwards...my apologies.

 

[Jim Saueressig]

If the bird is indeed going forwards...my apologies.

Actually its too low quality to tell more than the fact its a bird (two actually but you barely see the second passing by behind it due to the missing frames) but either way its missing a multitude of frames and if you edited the speed to hide which tornado it was then you could have easily altered anything else because by that point you already turned to the dark side .....

 

[Joey Ketcham]

I don't condone copyright infringement or misrepresent a video claiming it to be something that it's not, in this case claiming it to be from Valentine, NE this year when it was a tornado from 2004.

What has happened is a legal matter between whoever bought the video and Andrew and it should be treated as such, I don't think that this is something that justifies a ban when it's completely unrelated to the StormTrack forum. The question I ask is what ST policy was violated that would justify the ban?

Looking at Andrew's profile it doesn't appear he is very active on the forum, the damage has been done already so I don't think that banning him is going to change anything or as some would say, give storm chasers more credibility. Banning him would only be done out of revenge and wouldn't solve anything, let the legal system do it's job and people like Andrew will receive the proper punishment.

On another note, I'm still amazed by the lack of response from Andrew.

 

[Jim Saueressig]

On another note, I'm still amazed by the lack of response from Andrew.

What do you expect him to say Joey?

He obviously knows its a fake and he knows we all know it, he knows we know that he blamed his editing being called out nationally on simply being "chaser jealousy" and he is not going to come here and admit he stole money from that company by selling fake video to them and open up a new can of legal worms.

He would either have to:
1 - Lie again
or
2 - Admit that he ripped someone off for a few bucks because he obviously thought he needed the money badly for something and end up even poorer than he was when he ripped them off after the legal expenses he would end up paying for such an admission.

He will have either learned from it or will have learned how to do it better in the future and not get caught.

 

[Joey Ketcham]

What do you expect him to say Joey?
.

His side of the story would be a good start. Regardless of the scenario, there is always 2 sides of the story and even if he's in the wrong, I would still like to his his side of the story. I'm not going to sit here and assume what he would say or not say, but it would be nice to hear from him and get his side of the story..

 

[Jim Saueressig]

His side of the story would be a good start. Regardless of the scenario, there is always 2 sides of the story and even if he's in the wrong, I would still like to his his side of the story. I'm not going to sit here and assume what he would say or not say, but it would be nice to hear from him and get his side of the story..

I understand your point but I just don't see that there is anything he can say that we don't already know or that he can "literally" afford to say. I am not really assuming what he could say but stating that his options are very few.

 

[Scott Weberpal]

I'm with Tim. If someone rips off video or photos, it's not our place to play judge and jury and decide whether or not that person should be banned from a forum. In my opinion, if that person wants to stay on this forum, so be it, just don't expect as much respect from other members (however, I will not personally bash anyone for wrongdoing).

One particular thread earlier this year tuned into a bash-fest against an individual which was let survive for some days when much less threatening threads have been locked immediately. I have no problem with how ST is run and thank Tim and the moderators for taking time to do what they do. I just don't think its our place to play judge and jury.

 

[Michael Towers]

the damage has been done already so I don't think that banning him is going to change anything or as some would say, give storm chasers more credibility.

Ironically, this in a way does give storm chasers credibility. Not the alleged misrepresentation of course, but the self-policing that was done within the community to expose the alleged misrepresentation. If it weren’t for the discerning eye of a fellow hobbyist and the subsequent notification of his suspicions, the media probably still wouldn’t have a clue that they were allegedly defrauded. Consequently, I think the suits in the media should realize they have a built-in safeguard in the community itself. While its no guarantee the fear of “peer reviewâ€￾ exposing a fraud will prevent some chaser in the future from trying to pull a fast one, I think it greatly diminishes the chances of that happening.

Regarding the effect this incident has on sales to the media, I think great footage will always sell; it just might be a little more difficult in the short run.

 

[Chris Nuttall]

His side of the story would be a good start. Regardless of the scenario, there is always 2 sides of the story and even if he's in the wrong, I would still like to his his side of the story. I'm not going to sit here and assume what he would say or not say, but it would be nice to hear from him and get his side of the story..

Keep in mind that if legal actions are being pursued/possible, he's actually doing the right thing in not coming on here and speaking about it. I mean, any attorney worth their salt would probably be advising him to keep quiet about it.

 

[Doug_Kiesling]

As for still photography, it seems that a partial solution is stock video agencies who warrant and manage the copyright, and that provide a timely, efficient point of contact for both media and video suppliers. I don't see that niche being filled yet as much as it could be by a few enterprising, well-connected chase videographers.

That is pretty much what Dan and I do with BNVN but we limit the number of people we work with so that were not having stringers trying to compete with each other in the same markets.

This whole thing has now FUBAR the market with having to prove the videos are real.