General Discussion : 11484


General / 11484	11483 \| 11485

Subject:	Re: 2000 Dealer catalogue Removal Request Backfire?
Newsgroups:	lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general
Date:	Wed, 8 Dec 1999 16:44:12 GMT
Viewed:	87 times

Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote: > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, James Brown writes: > > [...] > > Bottom line: Those retailer catalogues are the intellectual property of Lego. > > If we don't respect them, why the heck should they respect us? > > YES! YES! Exactly! By and large, what gives you the impression that they DO respect US? Maybe respect certain individuals who show up at functions and show them how amazing a resource we can be to them, but even then only respect from a random employee or two? Sure, maybe. Respect you (perhaps) in your individual correspendece with them? Presumably. Respect KL's site by allowing it to continue to exist? Or are they, really? Have we all simply assumed that their silence on this issue is acceptance? Have we _rationalized_ that Kevin's self-imposed limits ARE, in fact, "good enough" when, in reality, there could be people at TLC just as steamed over an instruction scan site as this? Individuals at TLC may very well have been respectful of other individuals within our community from time to time, but I can't really think of anything that points to TLC giving a flying rat's behind about the AFOL community in general. I think you guys are blowing this WAY out of proportion, and based on the number of regular LUGNET posters and former RTL stalwarts who have e-mailed me asking for the scans and took the time to include a comment or two, lots of other people do too. -- The parts you want and nothing else? http://jaba.dtrh.com/ - Just Another Brick Auction Why pay eBay? Run your own LEGO auctions for free! http://www.guarded-inn.com/bricks/

Message has 3 Replies:

		Re: 2000 Dealer catalogue Removal Request Backfire?
(...) Lego. (...) Not much, but who cares? Using "they don't respect me, so I won't respect them" is circular and self-defeating. (...) I think it's been blown way out of proportion too, but that doesn't change the inherent arguement. If it's (...) (25 years ago, 8-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)

		Re: 2000 Dealer catalogue Removal Request Backfire?
Here's my quick opinion: TLG has the right to do as they wish with their information, and that includes putting restrictions on how and when (and if) it is made available. TLG doesn't respect us much, if at all, as a corporation now. This whole (...) (25 years ago, 8-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)

		Re: 2000 Dealer catalogue Removal Request Backfire?
(...) Well, that's not quite the point -- at least not what I was keying in on in what James wrote. James's point was that our not respecting their intellectual property gives them less reason to respect us, rather than more reason, regardless of (...) (25 years ago, 8-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)

Message is in Reply To:

		Re: 2000 Dealer catalogue Removal Request Backfire?
(...) YES! YES! Exactly! --Todd (25 years ago, 8-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)

116 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)

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