"Exclusive" photos of DIC "suits" in Director's Box

by Rupert Insider

These are photos from the Directors Box at Anfield during the match against Fulham on Saturday 9th December 2006.

The first four show Rabih I. Khoury, Senior Vice President and Head of MENA Investments of Dubai International Capital

1

dicvp3.jpg

2

dicvp2.jpg

3

ducvp4.jpg

4

dic4.jpg

The fifth shows Sameer Al Ansari, Chief Executive Officer of Dubai International Capital

5

dic-ceo1.jpg

The sixth shows one of the first buyers of Duncan Oldham’s phantom, never-to-be-written-let-alone-published book “Anfield Exposed” – at least according to Oldham’s teaser.

6

dalglishinbox.jpg

The seventh shows the only ex-player Oldham does not claim to be a supporter of Koptalk and buyer of his phantom book. I wonder why not?

7

grobbledarinbox.jpg

And the blonde lady with blue eyes?

That’s Kelly Dalglish according to friend-of-the-stars Oldham!

As you can see, the “KOPTALK.COM” is branded on these photos with red hot irons. Created by Koptalk, eh? Exclusive right? Very impressive! Well done Koptalk!

But why were they not included in the Koptalk story “Dubai V.I.P’s watch Reds batter Fulham” that shot up the Top Stories on News Now in a matter of minutes on Saturday and earned Oldham thousands of revenue-generating hits on the Saturday and Sunday. It’s not like him to be coy about a “scoop”.

This is what that article said :

“Liverpool duo Rick Parry and David Moores will have felt more happier at full-time than they did at half-time.

Sat only a few seats away from them in the director’s box today was D.I.C. chief executive Sameer Al Ansari along with others from the Dubia-based investment group. At half-time it was a miserable 0-0 but by the time 90 minutes had been clocked up, it was an impressive 4-0.

It was certainly an ideal result to have played out before Al Ansari who has the Liverpool FC crest on his mobile phone. He’s a cool character but he showed at full time his appreciation to the Reds who had given him and his colleagues a fine display.”

This is vintage Oldham. Written to suggest without actually saying that he was there rubbing shoulders with the great and the good – close enough socially to tell you that Al Ansari is a cool character and close enough physically to see the crest on his phone.

What Oldham forgot to mention was: Sameer al-Anwari, chief executive of Dubai International Capital, was joined by two colleagues including Rabih Khoury, who briefly held up his mobile phone so a friend could hear a rendition of You’ll Never Walk Alone.” According to the Liverpool Daily Post.

They had a photo, too, and no, Dunk, that’s not Britney Spears.

dicoldwoman.jpg

The odd thing was that there were no photos in the Oldham News Now story – only blank spaces.

Yet the photos above are shown behind the closed doors of Koptalk – even today (not that you have to visit now we have shown them all here. In fact we publish anything of interest on Koptalk, even if it is not of interest!).

A cynic might suggest that photos linked by News Now to a Koptalk page open to the public would draw the attention of the true owners of the copyright. Perhaps that’s why they’ve been hidden?

But are we being too harsh – did Oldham pay for the right to brand them and show them to members only? Nah!

If you know who the copyright of these photos belong to let us know and we will check with them.

(Edit: Since I posted this, a blog contributor who wishes to remain anonymous has traced the copyright.

They were all taken by professional photographer Peter Byrne who works for the Press Association (PA). They were not taken by anyone from Koptalk.com nor do they belong to them. Nor do they have exclusive rights to them. Anyone can use them for the payment of a relatively small fee to the PA. But this does not include the right to present them as anything but a PA image.

The PA links to these specific photos can be found here:

http://search.empics.co.uk/urn/4216717.html
http://search.empics.co.uk/urn/4216711.html
http://search.empics.co.uk/urn/4216709.html
http://search.empics.co.uk/urn/4216707.html
http://search.empics.co.uk/urn/4216693.html
http://search.empics.co.uk/urn/4216581.html
http://search.empics.co.uk/urn/4216574.html

There were several more photos from the Fulham match not used by Koptalk and they can be found HERE:

Another contributor, “Kopwank”, had earlier traced the copyright of two of the images to Getty Images. See his post in Comments below. On closer examination it seems that those two images were taken from a fractionally different angle by someone working for Getty. All the images used by Koptalk were from PA.)

Koptalk continues to insinuate that it has information from “Inside Anfield” and that it rubs shoulders with the directors and with investors. Why does it lie? Because it doesn’t have any access to LFC.  Its the only unofficial site that charges for publicly available information about LFC. And, as Oldham said himself: “No info = no point!”

(If you’re new to this blog and wonder why we are so cynical, read “Blog v Koptalk” in the tool bar at the top of this page).

_________________________________________________________

Advertisements

42 Responses to “"Exclusive" photos of DIC "suits" in Director's Box”

  1. john007 Says:

    shes the best photo of the lot id brain it

  2. Ian Vandepool Says:

    Some of these pictures look very similar to what Getty Images have put on their site.

    My guess is a freelance photographer took these pictures and supplied Getty and other companies with his collection.

    I’m pretty sure Oldham stole them from somewhere and i’m currently searching to find out where they come from.

  3. ROCK Says:

    shes a cutie but it def aint kelly

  4. Kopwank Says:

    7 – Grobelaar stolen from Getty images
    http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=72785820&cdi=0

    Image 72785820
    Liverpool v Fulham
    People: Bruce Grobbelaar
    9 Dec 2006
    Getty Images Sport
    By: Clive Brunskill

    http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=72785819&cdi=0
    Same shots as the Daglish one

    All taken from Getty images, email / ring Getty & dataco to see if they have a licence? Koptalk spent £10k on a licence remember….

  5. scratch Says:

    Stolen from Getty? Or got before they reached Getty? Or is it easy to remove the Getty Images that is superimposed over the top?

    I’d say Dunk is getting them from somewhere else, and it might be all above board.

  6. rupertinsider Says:

    Well spotted.

    In the summer he said he was paying 12 k for image rights this season – but that was when he was talking about a well-known Liverpool photographer/agency having official access to all LFC events including Press Conferences as the “Koptalk photographer”.

    We reported his claim to the Head of Press at LFC. Nothing came of the supposed hook-up with that photographer/agency and Koptalk continued to be excluded from all LFC events.

    However, I do remember that he paid a small subscription to another agency, PA. You can contact them at: simon.edwards@pa-sport.com

    I wrote asking them if they authorized him to brand their images as “Koptalk.com” – but I received no reply.

    I also wrote to Getty Images some time ago and got this reply:

    Hi Rupert

    Unfortunately in your email below it is rather unclear as to what URL we should investigate

    So you know, we actively pursue cases of copyright infringement but tend to focus on commercial websites using our creative imagery and not on editorial/sports imagery.

    As you may know, we have hundreds of thousands of sports imagery, so it would be useful if you could send us screen prints of the webpage in question including the corresponding image numbers so we can easily identify them.

    Thank you

    Audrey Maslard

    Legal Department

    Getty Images (UK) Ltd

    101 Bayham Street

    London NW1 0AG

    ____________________

    The problem is that Oldham runs the Getty Images through bucketshop to doctor them to make them look like Koptalk.com originals. I think this destroys the Getty Image number.

    I’ll write again today, but anyone more familiar with this is also asked to write.

  7. rupertinsider Says:

    scratch

    Well, you would say that wouldn’t you. I notice that whenever you post on Koptalk you are always so deferential to Dunk and close your posts by saying “what do I know”? Why not ask him more piercing questions. You started your posting on here with the statement that you’ve been posting on KT three years and never noticed anything amiss. And then you proceed to demand that we prove Oldham claims are false to a very high standard of criminal law – but you never ask him to prove his claims are true…as in this case

    I know that KOPTALK.COM did not take those photos, or have exclusive rights to them. A decent outfit would mention the agency and photographer. Why doesn’t Koptalk state where it got them? Why try to create the impression that it created them or got them from an Insider or?

    What’s your story on the forged signatures?

  8. rupertinsider Says:

    Getty Images

    Could someone else write to them, including the url to koptalk.com and a screen shot.

    The url is http://www.koptalk.com/members/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=49346&page=1&nt=2&fpart=1

  9. Kopdan Says:

    There are a couple of members of Koptalk who are capable of getting high res photos like the above. Perhaps he is getting them from those two?

  10. rupertinsider Says:

    KopDan

    The photographs are taken by a professional(s).

    If he was getting them from members why not give them credit – even if anonymously to protect their identity? He has been trying for years (with your help, it must be said) to claim that he has friends of friends at LFC. These are false claims designed to defraud the public into buying memberships for “inside information”.

    If he is getting them legally, by paying for them, why does he not display them on his public page where they would earn him a lot of hits? Why only behind closed doors? Why does he not display the agency to which he subscribes, if any. Why does he doctor the photos with “koptalk.com” as though to imply they are his original creation?

    The appropriate person in the legal department at Getty Images is:

    Audrey Maslard

    Legal Department

    Getty Images (UK) Ltd

    101 Bayham Street

    London NW1 0AG

    Her email is:

    Audrey.Maslard AT gettyimages DOT com

    My last reports to her was 8th November 2006 and today.

  11. Kopdan Says:

    Yes Rupert

    One of the members is an editor at a newspaper

    The other is an actual photographer who sells his photos to the likes of Getty.

    I can get in touch with the two members to see if they are helping without payment. I used to get photos off them when making wallpapers for my own site.

  12. Kopdan Says:

    and wait a minute

    “He has been trying for years (with your help, it must be said) to claim that he has friends of friends at LFC.”

    I havent helped spin any yarns about contacts or any shite mate. I was a member who helped moderate and make images. Thats as far as my involvement went.

  13. rupertinsider Says:

    And as moderator, what did you do if anyone suggested that his claims to have insider information were not true? What did you do when he or other moderators banned critical comments that would have uncoverd his scams a lot earlier? What did you get up to the in “Boardroom” with other moderators when this or that poster started to ask awkward questions?

    Its a genuine question. I was not a member of his Insider or Gold Club. I have been using passwords donated by existing members only this year and even now limit my time scanning for the more obvious scams.

  14. rupertinsider Says:

    Kopwank

    You’ll have to excuse me – I find it passing strange – actually incredible – that an Editor of a newspaper would have anything to do with Oldham, let alone have taken photos for him. As for a professional photographer giving him free photos – why?

  15. Kopdan Says:

    If I’m honest, I think I moderated fairly. I tried to let people speak and often agreed with their comments hence why I stopped moderating.

    I was no JD or Richt thats fo’sure

  16. Kopdan Says:

    Check your email

    I have explained better on there

  17. est-er Says:

    Kopdan never propagated any BS on Koptalk. He used call everyone a bullshitter whether they were or not.

    He was a hard nosed cynic all the freakin time 😦

    🙂

  18. rupertinsider Says:

    KopDan

    Thanks for your emails, which remain private. But so that the blog reader’s should not get the wrong impression, I want to repeat that I find it incredible that an Editor of a newspaper would be acquainted with Oldham. I also find it incredible that a professional photographer would provide him with photos free of charge.

    I also reiterate that Oldham has no access to executives at LFC – that on the word of Rick Parry, Executive Director and Ian Cotton, Head of Press.

    Oldham is a pariah at LFC.

    He has no contacts whatosever at LFC not even with a gateman at Melwood, or the wife of the gateman’s brother, and not among any member of the public who might have access to the Directors Box.

    In so far as he published those pictures to give the impression that he had, then it was a lie.

  19. Insider Insider Says:

    Kopdan’s ok. He gets a bit of stick sometimes but he was one of the few who would say what he thought about Dunk on Dunk’s forums, and that’s before this blog came along.

    His views of Dunk have, like most of us, changed over time. Once you spot the first signs that Oldham is not what he makes himself out to be you soon start to see all the others.

    Some of the photoshop stuff on this site early on caused some to think that Dan was actually behind the blog! My photoshop skills aren’t a patch on Dan’s though.

    He did help Dunk out a lot with various graphics and images, but was thanked by Dunk a couple of weeks ago with a ban. Or a lock-out. Whatever you want to call it. Part of the latest attempts to get money, make the honorary members pay. No advance warning, because Oldham’s too thick to realise that some of those he’s locked out might have considered paying if they’d been asked first instead of being banned.

    Dan – I’d be grateful for any help you can give us, especially in contacting members like you mentioned above.

  20. Matt Says:

    Getty are pretty strong on their images being used on the net without permission, they can bring him down on this I hope.

  21. rupertinsider Says:

    Matt

    I hope you or someone else writes to them. I could not get my screen shot to work on the KT page.

  22. rupertinsider Says:

    Insider

    I agree with all you said. But Dan has already written to me about the members he mentioned.

    I am left convinced that Oldham does not have an editor friend at all, let alone one who would send him photos from in or around the Directors Box. I am also convinced that he does not have a photographer friend who would do the same.

    The fact is that two of the images were from Getty Images. We are still searching for the origins of the others.

  23. Kopdan Says:

    I’m not naming names but I dont believe the two people I know would give away images with such an audience. They helped me out as an individual for no monitory gain but thats different so YES Rupert I will agree with what you say.

    What started out as me just saying perhaps the images came from them has grown into something completely different.

    I’ll say no more now.

    Back to lurking

  24. Kopdan Says:

    Insider

    hey fella

    Yeah I’ll contact those two lads for you if it helps in anyway.

  25. rupertinsider Says:

    A blog contributor who wishes to remain anonymous has traced the copyright. He would have posted earlier himself but the WordPress software was refusing his bloc of urls. Apparently it won’t take multiple urls.

    All the images used by Koptalk were all taken by professional photographer Peter Byrne who works for the Press Association (PA). They were not taken by anyone from Koptalk.com nor do they belong to them. Nor do they have exclusive rights to them. Anyone can use them for the payment of a relatively small fee to the PA. But this does not include the right to present them as anything but a PA image. The words KOPTALK.COM superimposed on the photos were misleading.

    All the photos from the Fulham match (and there are many more than Koptalk showed) can be found at the link given below. The links to the individual photos used by Koptalk can be found in the main body of the article above.

    http://www.empics.com/latest.php?cat=S&page=1&query=Soccer+-+FA+Barclays+Premiership+-+Liverpool+v+Fulham+-+Anfield&date_created=2006-12-09

  26. rupertinsider Says:

    Another contributor, “Kopwank”, had earlier traced the copyright of two of the images to Getty Images. See his post in Comments above. On closer examination it seems that those two images were taken from a fractionally different angle by someone working for Getty. All the images used by Koptalk were from PA. The Word Press software won’t let me post all the links together as a comment. But they are all in the article near the bottom.

  27. Kopdan Says:

    I owe you and apology Rupert. You know when you replied to Kopwank, I though you were calling me that hence my second email.

    hahaha

    sorry mate

  28. rupertinsider Says:

    No problem. Actually I read it after I read the others and was mildly surprised, since I didn’t know what you were talking about.

    In any case my reply to Kopwank was very appreciative of his efforts. Oh you mean you thought I was referring to you as Kop wank 🙂

  29. Kopdan Says:

    aye

    How can I get access to these photos? I want to do more wallpapers lol

  30. rupertinsider Says:

    We had a lot of visitors from this site today. As you see one of their posters was very early in spotting the photos as coming from Getty and Propaganda

    http://forums.liverpoolfc.tv/Forum15/HTML/132511.html

    Another poster could not understand why we were advertising the S*n. When someone corrected him he wanted to know why we had hyper links to the S*n.

    If someone posts on there could you correct the impression. The hyper links lead back to this site.

  31. thekidfromargentina Says:

    I actually know the girl in the photo (the beautiful blonde). She’s a good friend of mine, and someone I’ve known for at least 10 years or more now.

    Could she ask fatty to remove the picture from his site because she’s on it? email me, and let me know if this is possible guys, and if so – I’ll ask her to do it right away.

    Create more aggro for fatty.

  32. rupertinsider Says:

    I’ve no idea. There are other contributors who know about that sort of thing.

    I’ve often wondered about that. You know those TV news pieces which talk about obese people or schizophrenics or people with lazy sphincters and they show you a cross-section of people in a shopping precinct milling around. I wonder if any of them ever write in and demand to have their image removed.

    What about if you are shown on the giant TV screen at the match or on SKY. Maybe you agree to this kind of exposure when you buy your ticket?

  33. thekidfromargentina Says:

    Ah right. Maybe I’ve mis-read what was said then, because I thought the comment about “The sixth shows one of the first buyers of Duncan Oldham’s phantom, never-to-be-written-let-alone-published book “Anfield Exposed” – at least according to Oldham’s teaser. ”

    I thought he was referring to my friend?

  34. rupertinsider Says:

    She is not in No. 6 so it could not refer to her.

    No. 6 is Kenny Dalglish. Oldham claims that he and Fowler and others are the fist in line to buy his book.

  35. latestinsider Says:

    Rupert, I too emailed Getty Images about three weeks ago to warn them that they pics might be stolen by fatty. Got the same email back. At least they will be monitoring his site more closely now that a few of us have informed them?

    This could quite possibly be one single act that could close him down permanently, and destroy koptalk forever. They are very stringent on copyright laws and they could sue him quite easily over theft of previous pics.

    Fingers crossed!

  36. rupertinsider Says:

    But in this case they were not from Getty Images!

    The two Getty pictures – of Dalgish and Grobbelaar – were almost identical to the two PA pictures – but they were taken from a fractionally different angle by another photographer for Getty Images. So, in this case, all the photos used were from PA.

    But you’re right – in the past Oldham has used Getty Images many times. But the legal department at GI needs a screenshot and url before they will do anything. They can’t see what’s going on behind closed doors at KT unless they pay 30 quid entrance fee. If people keep reporting they will eventually take action. I think they would not sue at first – but demand payment. They might also demand and accounting of all past stolen copyright based on reports they have on file . If KT refused to cooperate then GI would sue.

  37. john007 Says:

    Gents im getting confused now!!!
    Will somebody please explain how this all started?
    I joined koptalk about 15 months ago as a gold member.

    I have got to say before i joined it seemed from the outset
    somebody new their stuff.But after about a week it was obvious it was a big merrygo round of none information,thats why i once posted about RAFAS LAPTOP look it up you may remember it.

    I got some stick from the above thread but there was that much shite floating around on the site i found it hard to believe that anyone would even bother to reply.

    But i must say to insider insider,rupert,kopdan why are you so pissed off i need to know whats behind your anger to understand the blogs.You all know each other very well i know no one and i guess theres a few others aswell,i feel like theres certain hidden messages in the blogs having a go at each other why not talk in laymens terms and get it off your chest.

    PS Please help simple man from leicester

  38. Kopdan Says:

    Me Angry?

    No

    Just crossed wires.

  39. rupertinsider Says:

    John 007

    I don’t know others on here very well, at all.

    I see the blog as a short-term project that has already exceeded the goals I, personally, had for it when I decided to contribute a little.

    Oldham is well and truly exposed. He cannot regain his ability to lie about his relations with LFC. His largest site has been closed down. His fraudulent charity site has been closed down. He is being being monitored by governmental agencies. The blog has earned a listing on News Now and all over the net in search engines and gives as much, if not more exposure,to his scams as he does. Possibly 85% of his long-standing members have left.

    I’m not angry at all.

    if you want to know what’s behind it all I suggest you read Blog v Koptalk in the Tool Bar at the top of page. It gives a brief introduction.

  40. Kopdan Says:

    Plus I must add that I am not involved with the blog apart from that I read it John.

  41. SERVO2 Says:

    Small world – I actually know Peter Byrne!!! I wonder what he will make of all this when I tell him!!!!

  42. LouDeKross Says:

    well has the fat-one got it right this time??? Hee Hee


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: