| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Todd Lehman writes:
> Let's be a little responsible as a community for once, for crying out loud.
> Are Suzanne and I the only ones who feel this way?
No.
> You seem to be implying that the inevitability of leaks justifies the leaks,
> and that our "rights" as rabid info-hungry fanatical fans are more important
> than the LEGO Company's rights to announce their products when and how they
> choose.
Just because something can be done, doesn't mean it has to be done.
Just because something will probably happen no matter what
doesn't always mean that it must be enthusiastically endorsed or
that it's not worth struggling against.
We help TLG by spreading our love of the brick, by generating
enthusiasm and sales. They help us by making the toys
in the first place. If they ask us as a collective community not
to disperse on our web pages their intellectual property which
employees in the US would be fired for revealing, why not abide
by those wishes [1]. Huw respected their request and I would, too.
--
jthompson@esker.com "Float on a river, forever and ever, Emily"
[1] At least for pete's sake, take it underground and trade the
scans by email. Don't be blatent about it and don't act like
there's a moral victory in thwarting the big bad LEGO company's
desire to introduce their products on their own timeline. They
are a struggling company, folks, whether you notice it from what
you see on the toy aisle or not.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
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
|
|
|
|
