 | | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) The second alterenative seems pretty reasonable although the "Lego HTML maintenance crew" should have noticed this problem by now. Also, the rock raiders page is not working, I get a pop-up box with a runtime error followed by a blank page (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) Under the the revised comments, doing so would probably be fine -- it doesn't violate the intended spirit of the site, of course. But, the first resort should be to politely contact the lego web designers, of course. (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) There is a supercar web page at (URL) with a password box. By typing in either "LT8448" or "lt8448", it should take you to the following pages. The problem is that even if you type in the correct password, you are not able to continue due to (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) Hey Brad, I am another party guilty in TLCs eyes of posting a message to the effect that I would provide my own scans of 2000 products to any who asked. I decided to pursue this until an answer came from yourself or Todd, and now that it has I (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.adventurers)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) Thank you, Brad. This is exactly what I wanted to hear. I will do so. (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
Please allow me to provide some further clarification. I agree that perhaps our position regarding the viewing of images on LEGO.com was somewhat hard- line and legalistic. It was not intended to be so. (I'll take the heat here, as it was my (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.announce, lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) Ah. Okay, I should have paid more attention, I guess. The US judicial system is about as clear to me as #1200 SiO grit mud, though. (...) Indeed. (...) Jesus. The linked to the imdb, and another random page on imdb linked to a (c) photo? "No (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) If it would help, I'll post a list of all possible URLs (of a given length and/or fitting current patterns) under <URL:(URL). (...) I'm not a legal expert, despite my strong opinions, but thanks to the power of online dictionaries, I'm able to (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) Todd's not stupid, so while I think he may be more inclined to make LUGNET an extremely TLC-friendly place policy-wise, I seriously doubt he'd implement policies that basically go against the entire grain of the WWW. This one part of Lego's (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) Not so -- there was no ruling, just a preliminary injunction. Furthermore, they aren't accused of publishing the copyrighted information illicitly, but of being engaged in "contributory copyright infringement". I'm not a lawyer, so I can't (...) (25 years ago, 17-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) <snip> Thanks for the clarification of policy. (...) I guess I'll join the chorus of voices asking that you reconsider this. It's not a legally defensible policy, and it's not a practically defensible policy, and further, it sends a bad (...) (25 years ago, 17-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
Brad Justus <legodirect@lego.com> wrote in message news:FMwGur.E6n@lugnet.com... (...) ... (...) matter. (...) by (...) for, (...) of (...) company (...) the (...) patent (...) in (...) steps (...) Thanks for the clarification. I was the guilty (...) (25 years ago, 17-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) And so a rather uninformed US judge has recently ruled. I don't suppose anyone wants to relocate the lugnet server to anywhere else but Australia or Hongkong? I think it's a _very_ sad day to see Lego take this stance. To get my position clear (...) (25 years ago, 17-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) Possibly true. But: 1) I don't want to see people kicked off of LUGnet over it. 2) More importantly, by tacitly allowing claims like this, we lose our freedoms. I know, that sounds melodramatic. But: the "you have to go through our front (...) (25 years ago, 17-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) <snipped bulk of well-thought out post> I agree with you in principle, but I think you're making too much out of this. LEGO is not the first company to claim more copyright protection than they may be entitled to, or can enforce, and they also (...) (25 years ago, 17-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
Thank you for your response -- we appreciate it. (...) I can agree with and respect your other points, especially regarding the retailer's catalog. That makes sense. However, this one doesn't. There is no legal precedent for this, but this sort of (...) (25 years ago, 17-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) I would like to Lego itself put ALL of the instructions and at least one photo for every set ever made on their website as a historical reference. I know some of this has been done elsewhere, but the most suitable place for it would be Lego's (...) (25 years ago, 17-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
Thanks for the extremely clear (and reasonable) policy on catalog scans. It is now clear that the retailer catalog is not to be shared (even old ones, I guess those need to come down) in any form. I hope that everyone who has continued to offer to (...) (25 years ago, 17-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
Questions have been raised recently regarding our stance toward the publication (scanned and posted) of our catalogs, both those intended for consumers and those for retailers. During my visit earlier this week in Billund, and also following (...) (25 years ago, 17-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.announce, lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.publish) !
|
| |
| | Re: Number one request for LEGO
|
|
(...) Not necessarily. I suspect they make the basic brick molds to last much longer than special piece molds. Simply a matter of cost-effectiveness of titanium-alloy diamond-coated molds ;) Jasper (25 years ago, 17-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
