|
Post by father of two on Dec 15, 2013 23:09:43 GMT -6
I also wonder why it is not offered to all businesses seeking help improving their buildings.
It is if they are in one of the 3 TIF's.
|
|
|
Post by father of two on Dec 15, 2013 23:15:34 GMT -6
So why didn't your friends use it, instead of citing high repair costs as a reason not to buy buildings here?
From what they told me between the cost of the building and the improvements it would have needed they didn't feel it was a wise investment for what they wanted. A building over $100,000 and inside remodeling plus equipment over $100,000 to start up a business was a gamble they didn't want to take. TIF money would not have been available to them if they made no improvements to the outside.
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Dec 16, 2013 7:15:20 GMT -6
From The Times website: Question: Do you hold the copyrights to your images? Answer: All copyrights are owned and controlled by myCapture's partners. Question: Can I download the images? Answer: If a digital download is offered on the pricing sheet than it is available for purchase. If it is not listed than this affiliate does not sell digital copies of their photos. Question: Can the photos be used commercially? (advertising, promotional materials, etc.) Answer: Any commercial usage must be approved by the individual publications first. For information on obtaining commercial/publication permission of a photograph please contact the publication. This website is owned and operated by myCapture. All elements of this website, including, but not limited to, the general design and the myCapture content, are protected by trade dress, copyright, moral rights, trademark and other proprietary rights. In addition, you should assume that all of the content or other works featured, displayed or made available to you through this website or the myCapture service, including, but not limited to, text, graphics, photographs, images, moving images, sound, illustrations and software (together, the "Content"), is protected by copyright or other proprietary rights. The use of the Content in any manner by you, or anyone else authorized by you, is prohibited unless specifically permitted by these Terms of Use or where specific permission is provided elsewhere on this website. You are not entitled to duplicate, retransmit, create derivative works of, distribute, display or perform any portion or element of this website or the Content without the express permission of, in the case of the website, myCapture, and in the case of Content, the owner of that Content. This website, its Content and all related rights shall remain the exclusive property of myCapture or the respective owner thereof unless otherwise expressly agreed. Content (including photographic images) purchased or otherwise acquired by you via this website may only be used by you for personal, non-commercial purposes (i.e., not for re-sale or re-distribution) and may not be duplicated or otherwise reproduced or altered by you. Any unauthorized use of the images may violate copyright laws, trademark laws, the laws of privacy and publicity, and communications regulations and statutes. I am probably guilty of infringement by posting the above. I notice that they offer links on their site to share their content on 295 different social media sites. Obviously despite the legal language, they encourage the sharing of their material. Couldn't making the material available without protection be considered expressed permission, along with the links?
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Dec 16, 2013 10:25:27 GMT -6
I also wonder why it is not offered to all businesses seeking help improving their buildings. It is if they are in one of the 3 TIF's. When did the downtown TIF start? I wonder how they been used downtown. The reason I am curious about TIFs, is because I had asked what assistance was available for building upgrades when I was at the Majestic. I was told about the sales and property tax which were relatively small amounts but wasn't provided any information on TIF money. The insurance company was all over me to get tuck pointing done on the North and East walls(you can see it is also needed on the south wall now too). That was one of the things the huge deposit from the big money people from Pennsylvania was supposed to take care of, when the owner asked me to leave.
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Dec 16, 2013 10:45:46 GMT -6
From what they told me between the cost of the building and the improvements it would have needed they didn't feel it was a wise investment for what they wanted. A building over $100,000 and inside remodeling plus equipment over $100,000 to start up a business was a gamble they didn't want to take. TIF money would not have been available to them if they made no improvements to the outside. $200,000 is a lot of money, however I have seen a couple of buildings in Ottawa listed for about that amount, they seem to have been sold, work was done and now they are occupied. People see spending that kind of money as a wise investment other places and take the gamble. Perhaps it has more to do with it being in Streator that creates the gamble not making it a wise investment than with the owner's asking price? I like the article Derek wrote about window shopping for opportunity in downtown Streator(I would post it, but I'm waiting to see if I get a cease and desist letter from them for my presumption of expressed permission for what I've already posted. ). I still see opportunity downtown, but think we need some changes to make it less of a gamble. I've said before that it would be great to see someone turn the Murray building into a hotel. If there were less fights and public urination on the streets by it, I think it would be less of a gamble for someone.
|
|
|
Post by 1NAMillion on Dec 16, 2013 11:13:09 GMT -6
i don't really think it is funny that these peoples faces were put on youtube. Are you sure you didn't even crack a smile at the end when the Mayor did the splits? wether it may have been funny or not is irrelevant. putting that on a LOCAL forumn where few people may see it is different then posting it on youtube. It is not anyones place to intentionaly post another persons face Anywhere without permission.
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Dec 16, 2013 11:35:39 GMT -6
People post pictures of others all the time without getting permission. In this digital age there is no expectation of privacy when you go out in public. When you run for public office, you should expect that your image will be posted.
|
|
|
Post by dog on Dec 16, 2013 12:33:40 GMT -6
People post pictures of others all the time without getting permission. In this digital age there is no expectation of privacy when you go out in public. When you run for public office, you should expect that your image will be posted. That is correct,as long as you are posting pics that you took yourself.
|
|
|
Post by dog on Dec 16, 2013 12:39:22 GMT -6
I am probably guilty of infringement by posting the above. I notice that they offer links on their site to share their content on 295 different social media sites. Obviously despite the legal language, they encourage the sharing of their material. Couldn't making the material available without protection be considered expressed permission, along with the links? [/quote] I don't know, if it would be considered express permission. I am not a copyright or trademark attorney. All I am telling you is what I researched in regards to our personal experience with the topic. Also, Getty pursues more than a cease and desist , they want compensation for the photo as to what its value would be over a 10 year period, even if you immediately removed it from your site. Take it for what it was worth Kyle, post how you want, I was just trying to give you and others ,a little insight.
|
|