| |
In lugnet.lego.direct, Eric Joslin writes:
> In lugnet.lego.direct, Todd Lehman writes:
>
> > I have a copy of Brad's email and I will post it for documentation if he
> > doesn't happen to come forward to explain more.
>
> Not to put you on the spot, but how long do you envision waiting for Brad J.
> (or somone at Lego) to post explaining their position before you post his
> email? I'm very interested in insight into (wow, three "in" words in a row)
> TLC's reasoning behind this request.
>
> eric
I'm also voting for this. If you (Todd) are going to cancel a post by someone
at the behest of Lego (who neither sponsor nor endorse LUGNET), release the
legal document asking you to remove it. I suspect that it was in the form of a
'please remove this, we are displeased' notice, but not a true legal warning.
In which case, you are CENSORING someone by removing info which they have
posted.
From the LUGNET Plan:
2.
To help people share information about LEGO products
and LEGO-related resources on the World Wide Web by
setting in motion a community-driven knowledge-base.
Where in there does it say that something that a non-TLC employee cannot
distrbute info which he picked up by using a computer at work, instead of by
going for a walk down the isle with the lego in it?
This is what Jorge did, in his digital eq. It is the same thing as TLC putting
up photos, and then getting angry at us for finding them on the web page.
LS James Powell
|
|
Message has 4 Replies:
 | | Re: 2001 Set info
|
| (...) Todd, as the big kahuna, has the right to censor messages at his discretion since LUGNET IS afterall, his site. He's done it before, he's done it in this case and I'm sure he'll have to do it again. It's in the best interest of the LUGNET/TLC (...) (24 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
| | | Re: 2001 Set info
|
| (...) I obtained clarification from LSI Legal today on the telephone and it was indeed also true legal request and represented LSI Legal's position. (...) No, it was a formal legal request. And the phone call confirmed this. --Todd (24 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
| | | Re: 2001 Set info
|
| (...) I will counter with the info from this post that I made that applies to me, Jorge or anyone else who has "accepted the conditions for posting" here at Lugnet.. see (URL) post referenced is about some Castle set info I had, not anything else (...) (24 years ago, 9-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
| (...) Not to put you on the spot, but how long do you envision waiting for Brad J. (or somone at Lego) to post explaining their position before you post his email? I'm very interested in insight into (wow, three "in" words in a row) TLC's reasoning (...) (24 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
176 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- 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
|
|
|
|
