Subject:
|
Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.terms
|
Date:
|
Thu, 10 Aug 2000 19:59:57 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
5632 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.terms, James Powell writes:
> OK, I am going to TRU this evening, with the list (or at least one set on
> it) as a private cit, and I will ask about that spicific set...and see if
> something comes up. This is no more than a humble guess on my part...I
> mean, I will ask if any new 71xx sets come up, then ask if there is a star
> wars escape pod set, and then give the number (I have it on a web page,
> which is one of the questions I have asked, can I post a link here or not?)
What you can and can't do is governed by physics, I think. :)
What you may and may not do is covered in the T&C of the discussion groups,
part of the LUGNET Terms of Use Agreement,
http://www.lugnet.com/admin/terms/agreement
which tries to be clear, but since life is gray (not black and white), there
are no absolutes.
I can't imagine that posting a link to something like what you're describing
could get you in trouble, but then again I haven't a 100% clear picture in my
mind of what you are contemplating, nor am I a lawyer, nor do I fully
understand 100% what LEGO considers sensitive information.
Your best chance of educating yourself about what is and isn't permissible is
to learn the answer from those who are most likely to object -- i.e., LEGO in
this case. I can answer questions about formatting and MIME content types and
all that because it is technical. This is a very very gray legal area and I
am not qualified to speak at length about it. In fact, there is probably no
one person on the planet who is qualified to speak in definitive terms about
it. But Brad of LD or LSI Legal are the closest to the "right" answer in this
case.
Thus, please direct questions like these to the lugnet.lego.direct newsgroup
and ask LEGO for clarification of what you may or may not post or talk about.
If they say they won't take you to court for posting info that you find out
at TRU, then it's probably a good bet that you are free to do it.
As Larry has pointed out, there isn't a nice neat tidy package with a bow
on it that defines everything in no uncertain terms. You'll find that many
things in life are this way, for better or for worse.
> I'm not asking when is it OK to steal something. I'm asking when is
> information to be considered 'public' vice it being propriatary. Does
> the fact that Jorge got the info in a ligitimate way (IMO)
I have to point out here that "fact" is in direct conflict with the "O" in
"IMO." You might just as well ask, "Does the fact that the Moon is made of
cheese (IMO) mean that we should go there to get cheese instead of making it
here on Earth?"
> that he is Ligitimately
> allowed to discuss (assuming that he was allowed to discuss this, and that
> it was not in his work contract that he could not discuss such things)...
> does this not then count as the information being in the public domain?
Those are legal questions. If you ask them to Brad at LD, he will run his
answers past LSI Legal prior to answering.
Common sense might tell you, If you have to ask, it's probably not OK, or
it's possibly something that no one knows the answer to. This doesn't mean
you shouldn't ask -- it means you should ask -- but you shouldn't expect a
magic-bullet answer.
--Todd
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
29 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
