Subject:
|
Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.terms
|
Date:
|
Fri, 11 Aug 2000 03:07:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
6662 times
|
| |
|
|
> This was marketing info that TLC has said they considered proprietary. Are you
> doubting their word on that? We're not talking about the integers here, or 4
> digit numbers, there's a lot more business meaning than that in this data and
> you know it. Hence, in this particular case, it's cut and dried, this info was
> TLC property improperly disclosed.
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.
> On Napster: While Napster itself may not be doing anything more than creating
> an easy channel, people who use Napster to get copies of music that they
> otherwise would have purchased are stealing.
_big_ paintbrush here Lar.
What about:hmm, my organ albums? (Irvine's 91 key...fairground organs) They
are out of copywrite, and I _know_ I have been offered outragous amounts of
money for them. Would it be wrong if I posted them on Napster and someone used
them? No, because they are public domain now. Same for say Bach, or any of a
large volume of work. Not everywere has a 125+ year copywrite.
(in fact, from what I understand, Napster would be perfectly legal if based in
Canada.)
James P
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
29 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
|
|
|
|
