Subject:
|
Re: Enough already
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sun, 19 Dec 1999 18:22:02 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
194 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Matthew Miller writes:
> [...] I feel the issue of linking is an extremely serious one, and I
> would really resent being called names for bringing it up.
I think it's excellent to seek clarification on issues like that, when
the wording implies a possible confusion or ambiguity about the legal
ramifications.
> I'm glad that Brad has responded in such a positive way; it should allow us
> to get on with things. But this kind of attack on people with legitimate
> concerns doesn't help anything!
No, I wasn't trying to attack anyone with legitimate concerns. I wasn't
trying to attack anyone, actually. Rebuke or reprove, maybe, but not attack.
--Todd
p.s. BTW, on the larger subject of legalities vs. wishes, just so you don't
think I'm some kind of prude or pushover, I fully agree that there are certain
lines a company just should not ever step over when making wishes known.
Links are one place where, if it's acknowledged that there is little or no
legal basis is trying to prevent something, then that acknowledgement counts
for a lot, as you've stated, and as I feel as well. It was great hearing
Brad's clarification (we have to note his disclaimers, however, that he was
speaking on his own behalf somewhat, and not on the LEGO legal team's behalf).
Beyond that, there are many things like that which, IMHO, also fully deserve
to be respected. But one which wouldn't, IMHO, would be if LEGO suddenly
decided that, say, posting or sharing of piece-by-piece inventories of LEGO
sets were verboten. Not that LEGO would ever conceive of trying to curtail
that, but if they did, that would be crossing a sacred line in my book, and
no matter how politely they asked, I'd personally fight that one to the death
in court if necessary. Another one might be small scans of individual sets
in a sets database for good-faith commentary purposes. To call for the
removal of something like that would be ludicrous. (Again, I don't think TLC
would ever think of trying to curtail either of those, but the premise is
the point.)
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Enough already
|
| (...) I certainly hope I'm not being included in this category. Your remarks in the quoted message deal mostly with scanned images, which was not my concern. I feel the issue of linking is an extremely serious one, and I would really resent being (...) (25 years ago, 19-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
7 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
