RSPCA attempts to censor the internet and suppress criticism

[Dogs]

Im not sure if this is in the right place, but what do you make of this?

Another RSPCA Cruelty Case Kicked Out

[clackdish]

are they turning into PETA ?
this is outrageous, bully boy tactics wont win them many sympathisers

[PMG]

If its true its disgusting, but nothing surprises me anymore about any large corporation - its all money orientated - all niceties or genuine aims of societies do not seem to exist anymore. And of course little can be done about the staff they may attract and employ - if someone is a 'closet sadist' you won't get to know about it until they are employed - you are then relying on memebers of the public reporting these people or other employees not wishing to be seen in the same light, reporting their colleagues ....... its a can of worms like most things these days. I don't support them and prefer to call a vet out to road casualties - I've seen the RSPCA officers at work and some are good and some arn't........

[ChrisR]

I agree with the general sentiment about hating press censorship and I'd like to think that this wasn't the main motive behind the RSPCA's actions. But there are 2 sides to every story and I am guessing that this is a lot more complicated than the GSR activists have made it seem and the RSPCA are aware that it is very easy for an incorrect but highly damaging hate campaign to be stirred up against them. Preventing the use of the RSPCA name does rather smack of a clever but heavy-handed way of doing it but I can't imagine any judge agreeing to prevent the use of this acronym because it is in such wide use and the RSPCA have never sought to limit its use before by any other organization.

[stinkyminky]

RSPCA are about money not animal welfare .

[Jaeviatrix]

That's a fairly standard argument, stinkyminky, to use against any organisation of which one doesnt approve. All charities have to make money, otherwise they couldnt do their work!

If this is being investigated I imagine the RSPCA are keeping their mouths shut because it is legally sensible to do so, and, although I dont know much about their activities, it does seem likely that there is more to this than meet the eye. I cannot imagine anyone but the cleverest "closet sadist" joining the RSPCA, it would be a very tricky place for them to hide. I suppose I am commenting on things I don't know, but I would certainly wait for their "full story" to be published before condemning them out of hand!

They are not comparable to a hardline organisation like PETA, which apparantly subscribe to almost puritannical views on animal welfare. At least, that isnt my impression.

Jay

[Swallowtail]

I have to say that if the truth is as stated and that they are tring to use trademark law to prevent people commenting on them then this is wrong.
It is bullying surely?

[stripee]

The original link to the story above is from October 2009.

The lady spokeswoman Anne Kasica for the organisation that campaigns against the RSPCA has herself been prosecuted for cruelty to horses:

"A woman from Carmathenshire who allowed two horses to starve to death escaped a fine when a court ruled she had no means of paying. Anne Kasica (46) of Felindre, Llandysul was convicted of 12 cruelty charges on horses in her care by magistrates. But she immediately lodged an appeal against the convictions and fines of £17,200. This meant that the RSPCA, who had seized all 12 horses, was unable to find new homes for them until after the appeal. However, Kasica withdrew her appeal at Swansea Crown Court on 24/10/00. RSPCA officers found the 12 emaciated horses in boggy fields near Llandysul and took them into care but two later died. Magistrates in the original case at Carmarthen ordered Kasica to pay £600 for each offence and costs of £10,000 a total of £17,200. But after withdrawing from an appeal hearing Kasica was told she would have no fines to pay because she had no way of paying them. The 10 horses that have been in care are now fit and healthy. A 10-year ban on keeping horses, which was imposed on Kasica by the magistrates, still stands."

I don't know any more about her, but as she lives in my area I have to add that there is, and has always been, all kinds of animal abuse and neglect in West Wales, including large numbers of "puppy farms" dog breeding, farm animals and horses. I have come across, or known of quite a few over the years, without going out of my way to look for them. The numbers of unwanted dogs in the UK has rocketed in the last couple of years. Is the agenda of this organisation to protect dog breeders from inspection?

I'm sure the RSPCA is not perfect, but no charity is, and they will get it wrong some of the time and some inspectors will be less sensitive than others. If they overstep the mark or do something illegal then they should be investigated, but what is the alternative? No intervention, and cruelty will continue.

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by Swallowtail

I have to say that if the truth is as stated and that they are tring to use trademark law to prevent people commenting on them then this is wrong.
It is bullying surely?

if you read the actual story rather than the SHG spin on it they (the rspca) arent actually attempting to censor the internet at all - all they are doing is enforcing trademark law in that the other party was using the RSPCA logo on their website without permision and the rspca wished them to stop

which is entirely reasonable, they never intended to stop anyone from writing their name - just to stop unauthorised people from using the trademark. Which would be the same for any charity - If i set up a website and used the trademark wab brand without the permision of the trustees, stu would be perfectly within his rights to tell me to stop or face legal action.

In the light of what stripee has posted it is not suprising that the SHG want to spin the story to a anti rspca angle as at least one of the main players in SHG clearly has a greivance with the rspca for personal reasons, and more than a touch of hypocrisy.

[Cowgirl]

I tend to agree with Eeyore, I have no real love for the RSPCA but reading the excerpt without the surrounding spin it is saying that you cannot use the RSPCA trademark without permission. This is perfectly normal behaviour for companies. Our company would also write to anyone who is using our trademark without permission as well.

You can still use the word RSPCA as we are doing here, nobody is censoring that. Like everything else in the press you have to take it with a large pinch of salt & read very carefully the facts not what they are trying to insinuate.