 | | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Give them time. Brad said they are doing an investigation into the incident and will post about it when they have more facts. --Todd (24 years ago, 11-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
James Powell <wx732@freenet.victoria.bc.ca> wrote: [stuff i've snipped] [then from larry:] (...) [james' comments on napster snipped] Copyright law is very different from that for trade secrets. This discussion should go to .off-topic.debate -- it's (...) (24 years ago, 11-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Was it? LSI has _NOT_ opted to publicly post what they privately E-mailed to Todd on this issue. So, we are into the land of speculation as to if LSI considered it proprietary. (...) _big_ paintbrush here Lar. What about:hmm, my organ albums? (...) (24 years ago, 11-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Thanks for digging harder than I did, and... you sir, are a gentleman, I appreciate the retraction. Look on the bright side, the base fine appears to be capped at 5e6. Now if we're talking Lira I can cover that. :-) (...) Ya, it is a detriment (...) (24 years ago, 11-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) I apologize. My statement is true for copyright law (with which I am much more familiar), but apparently not so for trade secrets. (This is where all of those I Am Not A Lawyer disclaimers come in.) (URL) However, I also find it interesting (...) (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Feel free to provide a cite. I don't have a Lexis ID but the 10 minutes I spent on altavista looking mostly bolstered the opposite view. That's not a definitive proof, mind you, as people are sloppy with words all the time. Till then, and (...) (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) For that matter, so are the borders of most any subset of Intellectual Property Law today... --Todd (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) That I do understand. I now await the letter/E-mail asking me to cease and decease. James (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) hehehe! (good one Todd!) (...) OK, then here goes. (URL)I have to point out here that "fact" is in direct conflict with the "O" in (...) point taken. (...) No. In my line of work (Military), anything that is _NOT_ classified is free for (...) (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Of course, the issue of posting a link to something is very different from the issue of hosting/publishing that something. (...) Actually, I don't mean to misquote Lar...he said something about a package and a bowtie, but it wasn't about (...) (24 years ago, 10-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
