Subject:
|
Re: 2000 Catalog scans - TLC stance
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 9 Dec 1999 17:50:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
176 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> Mark Lindsey wrote:
>
> > Todd and Suz, please tell me based on this statement what Huw did wrong.
>
> I ain't them. And I ain't an IP lawyer but I do know a bit about IP.
>
> But... based on that quote from the fair play policy (which, thanks for
> posting it!!!, is worth reviewing by us all on a regular basis), the
> material in question (a publication targeted at retailers, which is not
> a catalog, or a set package) is not covered by fair play. Therefore it
> should theoretically not be published.
Clearly, I'm not Todd or Suz. Not as clearly, I'm not a lawyer.
But I have to respectfully disagree with you here, Larry.
The Fair Play policy, as quoted above, includes catalogues, which this was one
of. It also specifically states that scanning images from catalogues for the
purposes of sharing information is OK by them. That is/was Huw's intent, as
far as I can tell- after all, he makes no money from his site, and is/was
hosting the images purely for the sake of informing the rest of the Lego Fan
community- adult and otherwise- about the upcoming sets.
You mention that if somethign is part of a non-disclosure agreement, it's off
limits. I would agree with that. I doubt VERY seriously, however, that the
retailer catalogue is part of such an agreement. How many NDAs do you think
Lego has on file? One for every retailer? That seems unlikely. Add to that
the frequency with which those catalogues are displayed by stores- stores that
we KNOW Lego representatives visit, like Toys R Us- and I find it a little
difficult to beleive that TLC is going to be bothered too much by the
information hitting the internet.
Which is NOT to say that I think anyone overreacted. It's best to err on the
side of caution, after all. But after thinking about it for a couple of days,
and reading a LOT of posts on it, this is how I feel about it.
Not that my opinion matters too much, mind you, but since everyone else is
throwing their 2 cents in, those are mine.
eric
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: 2000 Catalog scans - TLC stance
|
| (...) No, it wasn't. At least not in the context meant, the way that I interpret it. A catalog is something made available to consumers by Lego. The retail guide is not such a thing. Larry Pieniazek larryp@novera.com (URL) - - Web Application (...) (25 years ago, 10-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: 2000 Catalog scans - TLC stance
|
| (...) I ain't them. And I ain't an IP lawyer but I do know a bit about IP. But... based on that quote from the fair play policy (which, thanks for posting it!!!, is worth reviewing by us all on a regular basis), the material in question (a (...) (25 years ago, 9-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
8 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
|
|
|
|
