| |
In lugnet.lego.direct, Todd Lehman writes:
> [...]
> In light of the size of this discussion (wow) I can't actually imagine Brad
> not making a post explaining things as soon as he gets time. When he does
> that, he'll want to clear it with LEGO attorneys, which will also add to the
> time. I probably shouldn't post a copy of it unless I have no other choice.
> I can certainly paraphrase, though...give me a bit of time to put something
> together.
I just received an email reply from Brad to my earlier message to him today.
He reiterated that the original request was a formal legal request and noted
that he could not give permission for me to post the contents of the message.
He said they are conducting an investigation of why the information was not
safeguarded properly (at the retailer, I assume) and he doesn't feel it is
appropriate to post an explanation publicly until they've had time to learn
more. He said he'll post an explanation when he has the full facts.
Brad reassured that the information contained in the original post that began
the thread is indeed considered "sensitive" and privileged information between
TLC and its trade partners.
Brad said he appreciates the swift action and feels it is indicative of good
relations between LEGO and the community and welcomes suggestions as to how
LEGO can handle such situations in the future.
In a way, it's a tough position they're in -- from a legal and competitive
standpoint, they have to be protective of their business, yet in doing so
they potentially risk looking like the eight hundred pound gorilla throwing
their weight around.
I can completely understand the alarm they must be feeling over this. I
don't know if calling for the removal of already leaked information is in
their long-term best interests, but it's certainly their legal right and
it's not my place to judge their legal decisions. Anyway, I love the hobby
too much to worry about something this small; I know I'll be able to see
the stuff in a couple or three months and in the meantime I'd rather spend
time building and playing.
--Todd
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: 2001 Set info
|
| (...) My primary suggestion is to start with the person who posted the information, rather than talking to Todd first. Don't send a threatening legal letter, but nicely say that Lego prefers to keep that information secret, and and ask the poster to (...) (24 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
| (...) Actually, probably a few days. Just spoke with the LSI attorney who Brad consulted with before sending the request, and I got the distinct sense that this is a issue which LEGO wishes to address quickly and devote whatever time and resources (...) (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
|
|
|
|
