TfL warns cycle campaign group about poster copyright

Since TFL is a gov't organisation paid for by the public, they should STFU, copyright is for artists trying to make a living, not piss-artists trying to waste public money on frivolous threats and prosecutions that don't benefit anybody.

/Excellent posters, as a tax-payer, they get my full support.

'Fair use' needs to be part of British copyright law and anything written by public servants, paid for by gov't needs to be excluded from copyright, no exceptions.

My concern is the message some of these posters will send to would be cyclists, deterring them from getting on the bike.

Second poster - Turning max length trunk haul tractor & semi trailer. Well for a start you'll hardly ever see one of those rigs crawling around London. At around £300K a shot with operating costs to match, that sort of truck will be doing 80Kph for as much of the driver's working time possible and running in to large warehouse stores and distribution depots, close to the motorway network - of and they, and almost all other HGV's disappear from M1 M2 etc between 07.30 and 09.30 (as the drivers arrange to drop their loads and take statutory breaks when the road becomes clogged with private cars - just check it out on any motorway in the mornings especially.

Second poster, if the truck driver has to do 2 deliberate acts* of dangerous driving in order to turn a corner then there is something wrong with the way the road is being used. As has been pointed out very clearly earlier most of the cyclists crushed by left turning trucks have been overtaken and cut up. In two of the fatal crashes in November it is clear from the position of the large vehicles (skip truck and a coach) that the drivers have approached the junction in a right hand lane, not in the nearside lane and pulling out slightly but fully in the lane marked for traffic travelling straight ahead, and to turn left they have deliberately chosen to use the bulk of their vehicle to threaten traffic travelling with legitimate priority in the nearside lane - basically saying "I'm coming through here and will smash into you if you don't stop" sadly the failure to account for a cyclist in the way when they deliberately drove in a dangerous way has resulted in many of the deaths we see, and as pointed out the driver of the articulated rig in the picture also has to force a priority on traffic passing on in the lane he has to swing in to to get round the corner.

The answer is simple - no need to ban HGV's just stop them making turns as dangerously as that illustrated in the poster, by either banning the turn or making it possible to turn safely without cutting across the nearside lane(s).

As for poster 3 that just about sums up the dangerous way cycle lanes are delivered, and simply taking a direct quote from the coroner's hearing for the death of Brian Dorling at Bow "it's just a strip of blue paint it does nothing to prevent the fatal collisions (3 in 2 years) from taking place - and the subsequent action - not to remedy but to slide out of liability - when TfL burned off the blue paint where it went across the slip roads on and off the A12 effectively implying that the cycle route no longer existed for that 4-7 metres, where the hazard of being hit is greatest. Thanks a bunch. It's great to know that those responsible for delivery of safer routes recognise the points of greatest hazard in this scheme and make sure the cycle routes don't go there, but if a safe route cannot be delivered there is no alternative delivered either.

If it get's the message out about the dangers of HGV's, positioning and our crappy infrastructure then it is a good thing.
For all those who know just how dangerous manoeuvring around lorries are good for you but you are completely missing the point. Just contemplate the Katherine Giles inquest for a moment. Here is a highly educated intelligent woman killed because she went up the inside of a left turning lorry. Do you seriously think for a moment that she was fully aware of the risks of her actions and had fully taken it into account in that fateful moment ? Of course she didn't as there is no way she would have done it. So we have a pretty serious issue here which desperately needs addressing. TfL's response says it all really for me and they should hang their heads in shame having encouraged people to cycle and not fully informed of the risks

I like the campaign. Original, to the point and with balls, instead of the usual overly polite BS.

There have been many deaths where HGV drivers have overtaken a cyclist then turned left - the picture above shows how dangerous this is.

I read recently that a redesign of drivers cabs to reduce blind spots is being held up by red tape.

London has some segregated cycle paths - around Tavistock Square for instance and they seem to work reasonably well (although at one end the planners have evidentially lost the plot by having riders switch lanes).

ASLs should encourage riders to get to the front via the outside of a vehicle not the inside. Time to paint them differently?

Incidentally on Euston Road tonight there was a PCSO telling drivers and other road users off for stopping in ASLs - she got a thumbs up from me.

Can we have an "unlike" button please?

Fair use. TFL doesn't have a leg to stand on. (They left them under that lorry up there).

I'd imagine once you have survived cycling in London for a few weeks, the potential action from TFL over alleged copyright law infringement just does not seem scary by comparison.

Well intentioned or not I do feel that stopthekilling keep their brains where their prostates should be. A picture of a left turning HGV at a junction and a string of untrained or mentally deficient cyclists positioned on its nearside will I am sure do wonders to dispel the myth that victims of cycling accidents are more often than not cycling like twats.

Wrong. 9/10 people seeing that poster will get the message:

"most of these #bloodycyclists are asking for it, positioning themselves in such a dumbass position, when everyone knows that all large vehicles have blindspots. Look! It even says so in the poster. Idiots. Can't they read?"

It is such an own goal, it beggars belief. My bottom jaw clanged on the desk when I saw the poster. This site badly needs a facepalm icon.

Now for some more home truths:

This HGV is lethal. Why is it allowed on London's roads?

Because it is carrying lots of useful stuff that people want or need to buy, like for example food, furniture, clothes, building materials, brand new shiny bicycles and spares .... you get the picture. It is also doing it's job very efficiently.

Why is it lethal?

Humans don't yet know how to build HGVs that are big and heavy enough to do the required job but completely incapable of killing someone in the event of a collision. But we are working on it.

So unless you have never ever bought anything from a London shop in your life and have no intention of doing so in future, don't be a hypocrite! You rely on HGVs just like the rest of us.

Other examples of large lethal but essential vehicles on London roads include, buses, coaches, ambulances, prison transportation, fire engines, tipper trucks, refuse collection vehicles ... etc. They all have blind spots. Should they be banned too?

Or maybe, we cyclists should be banned from busy roads if we are so certain that we cannot coexist with those making essential journeys in large vehicles?

I am sick of the politicised bullshit that has engulfed cycling in recent years. If organisations like stopthekilling are determined to turn this into a war between us and them ..... there can only possibly be one winner. Them.

Brilliant campaigning! We, (cyclists) get it, but will the major media, tv, radio personalities? I rage at their ignorance and thinly veiled comments that we are responsible for cycling incidents.

Brilliant posters, it's good to see TFL's posters ridiculed. Lots of comments from 'I'm a cyclist and a HGV driver' types saying people are idiots for cycling into blind spots, but the question should be why are vehicles allowed on the road with such massive blind spots?
Compulsory low level cabs for all lorries entering urban areas, nothing more nothing less.

As important as the Cafe Roubaix thing last month, but unlikely to get the same response via social media?

Is it just me or would you have to be an idiot to undertake the lorry on a corner like that while riding? Even if it was a normal car the riders up front would still be in the blind spot.

Perhaps TfL ought to put more energy into making cycling safer than they do into threats of legal action against people campaigning for safety.

Just a thought!

TfL says: "they must be aware they can be breaking copyright law ".

But as this report says: "In December 2012 the government announced that it would be modernising UK copyright law by providing a parody exception to give people 'greater freedom to use others' works for parody purposes'."

Sorry TfL, you're a bit late on this one.