Pinterest are you stealing peoples property and violating copyright law?

I would just like to browse, but I can’t for every time I visit Pinterest this happens.

Pinterest

I don’t want to signup, I don’t want to login with facebook. The other reason why I refuse to signup to pinterest is simply the first part of their ToS.

a. Who can use Pinterest
 You may use our Products only if you can form a binding contract with Pinterest,
Why would I want a binding contract with you? Who are you to enforce this on me?
b. How Pinterest and other users can use your content
 You grant Pinterest and its users a non-exclusive, royalty-free, transferable, sublicensable, worldwide license to use, store, display, reproduce, re-pin, modify, create derivative works, perform, and distribute your User Content on Pinterest solely for the purposes of operating, developing, providing, and using the Pinterest Products. Nothing in these Terms shall restrict other legal rights Pinterest may have to User Content, for example under other licenses. We reserve the right to remove or modify User Content for any reason, including User Content that we believe violates these Terms or our policies.
So effectively you are using your site to steal peoples work, lovely, maybe I should boycott and blacklist the website! I hate the idea of this website now.
c. How long we keep your content
 Following termination or deactivation of your account, or if you remove any User Content from Pinterest, we may retain your User Content for a commercially reasonable period of time for backup, archival, or audit purposes. Furthermore, Pinterest and its users may retain and continue to use, store, display, reproduce, re-pin, modify, create derivative works, perform, and distribute any of your User Content that other users have stored or shared through Pinterest.
So effectively deleting your work wont stop them from stealing from you, they will do it anyway. Which brings me back to the first part. How do you browse the site if you don’t login or signup to their binding contract. There seems to be some contradiction and they could be doing this type of sign in feature as they know they are breaking copyright laws.

Assault on Wall Street, why did I watch this?

Currently on Netflix is another Uwe Boll film Assault on Wall Street. I didn’t realise it was a Uwe Boll film when I started watching it, as I generally stay away from his films as they are generally very poor and the guy is not a very good director. I understand why he makes films, because he is making money, a million here, a million there. Not the huge amounts like Hollywood, but he obviously gets by and makes more than enough to support his habit of producing these bad movies.

The film starts off in a sombre way as the main characters wife who works on Wall Street is not very well, the acting is not half bad, however she looks very well on the outside you would also think if she had a brain tumour, it would actually appear on the charts instead of what appears to be a very healthy scan! Then 15 minutes into the film the black guy tells his joke where you clearly see the burger complete on the left side of the plate, then when the camera returns in the same breath the burger is suddenly no longer looking like a burger but a clean cut sandwich on the right side of the plate.

Do you think anyone will notice my burger sandwich switch! Hey Uwe Boll did you see? Maybe he should of gone to spec-savers, wait a minute didn’t I have glasses?

Filmed in 2013, But set under the Bush Government which sets the film between 2001 to 2009 I kept wondering if the tech is right for the era. I couldn’t see any other faults with the film in tech terms, but I didn’t look hard enough. As it goes I thought this was one of Boll’s better films. Surprisingly the overture music was a nice accompaniment, however there is too much filler, lots of cut-scenes of New York, too much play on thinking.

Dominic Purcell who plays the main character Jim Baxford seems lost and doesn’t do anything until the last 20 minutes of the movie. You seem him go insane after his wife commits suicide, loosing all hope and then deciding to investigate the people who lost his money in his investments. I realised I failed to mention that a guy who is struggling to get by has investments on Wall Street.

Why he looks at his laptop and wonders where the fuck is his money? … Mr Boll, I am fucking bored with my investigation into Wall Street, can I go insane on your movie now?
I had this sniper rifle in my closet, is this a typical American thing or what!! Time for me to go insane!

When I thought we were going to get serious, he begins to do target practice, then he coldly murders a few people leading upto.

V for Vendetta inspired me! Or was that Mr Boll?

So he goes insane on Wall Street, wanting to take out the bad guys? But who are they, in fact he is mostly killing innocent people, making him the bad guy in the end. I really didn’t see any point about this film. I felt like I wasted my time watching it! And I leave you with one thought.

“Hey I am John Conner from Terminator 2, don’t you wish I could go back in time to terminate this shitty film before it even happens!”