 | | Re: Farlie A —Mike Stanley
|
| | | (...) This will most likely get you nowhere, unless, of course, you're trying to get a job. You'll find many discussions concerning the fact that Lego seems to completely refuse to even look at or consider outside designs. 'Course, nothing here (...) (24 years ago, 20-Jan-00, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Farlie A —Mark Tarrabain
|
| | | | (...) Be that as it may, Mr Justus did make his presence known here a few weeks back, and let us know that he was reading this group. You can't fault a guy just because he wants to be a little more formal than most. (...) Well, by posting his ideas (...) (24 years ago, 20-Jan-00, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Farlie A —Mike Stanley
|
| | | | (...) Didn't want what I wrote to be taken as "faulting" him - especially for the formality. Pointing out the _futility_ perhaps, but I got no problem with formality. I thought it was kinda nice. (...) I believe you're incorrect. IANAL (and I don't (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Farlie A —Alex Farlie
|
| | | | (...) A note from the authour of the post.. The formality was essentialy a header note to anyone from lego who reades this post. FYI- Leters that are formal usally take longer to write and are somtimes clearer than 'falme' postings written in a (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Farlie A —Mark Tarrabain
|
| | | | | (...) Well... this is ideal, of course... but is it actually enforceable? Even if the information has already been copyrighted, copyright does not protect against independant discovery. Since the information presented on lugnet is practically (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Farlie A —Mike Stanley
|
| | | | | | | (...) No. There's no way to prove that Joe Blow, who at some point in the future comes up with say a custom model of a large "beachfront" house, got the idea to produce it from this thread, and specifically from the author in question. But even if (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Farlie A —Alex Farlie
|
| | | | | | | | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Stanley writes: Sorry If I offended you! I was wrong (Hangs head in shame). <SNIP> (...) Accepted. (...) Accepted. But some fan websites do state that thier are not for commerical use. (...) Accepted. - I had intened (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Farlie A —Mike Stanley
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) You didn't. Takes a LOT to offend me. :) (...) No need for shame either. (...) Right, and if they've truly come up with something original - like the pics of his awesome Castle Ed Boxer shows on his site, that makes sense. (...) Yup, any (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Farlie A —Mark Tarrabain
|
| | | | | | | | (...) That was my point... but even if he *HAD* been the original person to suggest those things (at least one of his ideas struck me as being one I had never seen mentioned before), it wouldn't have made any difference, would it? (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Farlie A —Mike Stanley
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Probably not, no. (24 years ago, 22-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Farlie A —Alex Farlie
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Which Idea? I'd like to know so that I can develop that one and not one that will create more disturbances. It seems ubnlikley that TLG will listen to me as in thier eyes I've propbably 'stolen' someone else idea. It's a shame I always put my (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Farlie A —Kevin Wilson
|
| | | | | | (...) My understanding is that you can't copyright an idea either: copyright protects an *expression*, ie a poem, a computer program, a piece of music. Writing a program to print a calendar means you have copyright in the program, but not the idea (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Farlie A —Alex Farlie
|
| | | | | | It seems I went too far in claiming certian things! (...) Agreed. (...) systems such as LGB. Therefore I propose the following. (...) Accepted. (...) Again Accepted as not new. (...) Again Accepted as not new. (...) But not an offical Lego(R) one (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | A Clarification on My earlier posting. —Alex Farlie
|
| | | | Regarding my earlier messages. Sorry! I was wrong in a number of respects :- ( <SNIP> (...) In Additon LUGNET Terms of use (quoted in context here) clearly state: ' 7. By posting messages, uploading files, inputting data, or engaging in any other (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: A Clarification on My earlier posting. —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | (...) If you're asking whether or not it's OK to include a copyright notice in the articles you post...yes, that's OK (assuming you've created an original work, of course. :) That is, it's not against the discussion group T&C to include a copyright (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | |
