LUGNET Terms of Use : 192


Administrative / Terms of Use / 192	191 \| 193

Subject:	Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
Newsgroups:	lugnet.admin.terms
Date:	Sun, 13 Aug 2000 01:43:52 GMT
Viewed:	5818 times

In lugnet.admin.terms, Todd Lehman writes: > In lugnet.admin.terms, James Powell writes: > > 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. > > Give them time. Brad said they are doing an investigation into the incident > and will post about it when they have more facts. Yes, but they could have posted the "request" or "Order" (depending on view) to .Lego.direct. (the one that was sent to Todd that caused him to withdraw the posts from pubilc display) That is what I was meaning. I would hope LSI will put forward a policy _suggestion_ for both here and RTL. I'd like to know where I am going to stand before I get steamrollered! James

Message has 1 Reply:

		Re: Theft, Definitive statements vs shaping thoughts(was Re: 2001 Set info
(...) Give it up - probably won't happen. Why should they do it anyway? If they define a policy to be [---] then they might somehow be bound to that, if for no other reason than PR. If they choose to simply remain silent, which is certainly their (...) (24 years ago, 14-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)

Message is in Reply To:

		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)

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

Custom Search