|
|
 | | Re: Enough already
|
| (...) Hear, hear! IMHO, all of this backlash is ridiculous. The LEGO Company is being *extremely* generous in allowing scans of any their copyrighted materials up on websites *at all*[1]. Yet, all some people can do is complain that they aren't (...) (25 years ago, 19-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | | | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
| (...) No, they are not. One cannot give a URL to take a person directly, one has to quote navigation path. That's bogus. Followups to .publish, this is a pet peeve of mine that I have expounded on there before. (...) (25 years ago, 19-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.publish)
| | | | | Re: Fair Play (was Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs)
|
| <SNIP> (...) But if it *wasn´t* available through www.lego.com, then, linking to it would be a violation, right? So, if LEGO makes a new "fair play" document and keeps the old one, then would I be allowed to link to it? All this is somewhat (...) (25 years ago, 19-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | | | Re: Catalogs, Justus and Lego
|
| Doh! NLP means Non-Lego Parent. Will Visit the Lego Beach Fire and Rescue Service (URL) (25 years ago, 19-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | | | Re: Catalogs, Justus and Lego
|
| (...) of (...) I'll put my .02 in... (...) sets (...) sets (...) The economic sense is that if you can acquire parts in bulk (and I mean really obscene amounts here) you could undercut TLC's pricing and still make a decent profit. (...) This is (...) (25 years ago, 19-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
|
