Subject:
|
Re: Cats and pigeons...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 10 Dec 1999 22:11:33 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
jsproat@io+SayNoToSpam+.com
|
Viewed:
|
919 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> Sproaticus wrote:
> > The first thing you can do, instead of bouncing the server, is to bump off the
> > folks who *flagrantly* flout your request to not post sensitive TLC info.
> > Specifically, *this* info. Personally, I'd yank Remy's posting privs
> > immediately.
> I'm missing something here. Retailer catalogs are one thing. They're
> pretty clearly not for general consumption. But why exactly are the
> images in question trade secrets? They are posted on a public server by
> TLG with no protection whatever.
> Read my post about IP law:
> http://www.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=3467
I can't help but feel that this logic is flawed. Basically, this argument
goes along the same lines as, "we are physically free to walk out the 7-11
door with an unpaid-for pack of gum, so we should be allowed to". But the
thing is, is that we as TLC's customers have an unwritten contract with TLC to
act responsibly.
> If it's on a server on the internet, and it's not protected in any way,
> it's fair game. I think we're getting spun up unnecessarily at this
> point.
Sure, it's Lego's goof for allowing the images to be accessed from their
public Web site. But it's *still* proprietary information until TLC
officially and conciously releases it to the public. And it's our
responsibility to respect their property.
So there's two parties at fault here. Let's not excuse one because of the
other.
> Using this line of logic, you could say that posting how to defeat the
> cookie that makes you log in every time you go to the webclub:
> http://www.lugnet.com/general/?n=11020
> is wrong. After all, TLG *intends* you to have to log in each time, no?
> C'mon people, let's not go off the deep end paranoia wise. Yank Remy's
> posting privileges? Please, way overreacting...
I agree, it wasn't the best thing for Todd to publish. Arguably, how that
cookie is *used* by the LEGO.COM servers is unpublished information.
Reverse-engineering something without permission, then publishing your results
while inviting others to try it, is not the best way to make friends.
Now, if LUGNET *were* a leak club, I wouldn't have any issues with it. But,
it seems to me, Todd is striving to make LUGNET a Web site to be respected by
both TLC and their customers.
ergo, the reason for my opinion that Remy's posting privs should be yanked for
such a flagrant disregard for LUGNET's position.
Cheers,
- jsproat
--
Jeremy H. Sproat <jsproat@io.com> ~~~ http://www.io.com/~jsproat/
"Hello. My name is Jeremy, and I'm a...a brick chewer."
(in unison) "Hi, Jeremy."
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Cats and pigeons...
|
| (...) off the (...) The analogy is flawed. It is illegal to walk out with unpaid-for gum. It is the internets intent to disseminate information. If you post it on your site, you are saying "Hey, look at this". That is how it works out practically (...) (25 years ago, 10-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | Re: Cats and pigeons...
|
| (...) It's not the same analogy at all. More like if outside the 7-11, on a public sidewalk, there was a big box with a sign over it that said "free for the taking" and it had gum in it. Are we supposed to read the minds of the 7-11 owners as to (...) (25 years ago, 10-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Cats and pigeons...
|
| (...) I'm missing something here. Retailer catalogs are one thing. They're pretty clearly not for general consumption. But why exactly are the images in question trade secrets? They are posted on a public server by TLG with no protection whatever. (...) (25 years ago, 10-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
86 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
|
|
|
|
