Subject:
|
Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:44:34 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
526 times
|
| |
|
|
Mike Stanley wrote in message ...
> Frank Filz <ffilz@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > Thanks for the extremely clear (and reasonable) policy on catalog scans.
> > It is now clear that the retailer catalog is not to be shared (even old
> > ones, I guess those need to come down) in any form. I hope that everyone
> > who has continued to offer to e-mail scans will at least cease to use
> > Lugnet to make an offer (and even in one case bragging about how many
> > requests they have filled) which is clearly illegal, and by TLCs
> > communication to all of us, not what they consider "fair use".
>
> Fairly reasonable. I don't particularly agree with the "if it's
> there on the server for you to see if you mistype a number in a URL
> but isn't specifically hyperlinked you can't 'publish' a link to it"
> interpretation.
I have to agree with you Mike. If Lego has sensative data on its server
which the public has easy access to that is there problem... not mine.
However, I don't want Todd to end up in jail for hosting data, or links to
it.
Scott A
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
| (...) The chances of Todd ending up in jail for virtually anything you or I post here is practically nil, imo. Hosting the data (set pictures, maybe even set names in advance of their official release) could be a little iffy - I expect he'd axe (...) (25 years ago, 17-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
| (...) Perhaps there's already a well-established law to address the following analogy, but I'm still wondering: If a book is copyrighted, but the copyright doesn't expressly appear on each page and in each picture in the book, it's still (...) (25 years ago, 17-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
| (...) Fairly reasonable. I don't particularly agree with the "if it's there on the server for you to see if you mistype a number in a URL but isn't specifically hyperlinked you can't 'publish' a link to it" interpretation. I guess I might feel (...) (25 years ago, 17-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
93 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
|
|
|
|
