 | | Re: Disclaimer
|
|
Steven lane wrote in message ... <snip disclaimer details> That all seems overly draconian to me (and I've been selling instructions for some years). The way I look at it, as long as someone is not making money off my instructions (copying and (...) (21 years ago, 9-Jan-04, to lugnet.inst)
|
| |
| | Re: Disclaimer
|
|
(...) If the instructions are sold containing an error, then I agree that the author isn't accountable for buyers who purchase additional bricks from a separate source, but if the author is also selling the bricks to make the set, then the author is (...) (21 years ago, 9-Jan-04, to lugnet.inst, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Disclaimer
|
|
(...) > (...) If you are selling instructions you should make _certain_ that they are correct. If you are giving instructions away for fun, then do you really need this kind of protection? (...) Wow, what a great, litigious world that we live in, (...) (21 years ago, 9-Jan-04, to lugnet.inst, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Disclaimer
|
|
(...) . . . (...) That's never going to work in the real world. It doesn't work for books, music, or videos, and it won't work for building instructions either. You need to come up with a way to make your product more desirable than a borrowed copy. (...) (21 years ago, 9-Jan-04, to lugnet.inst)
|
| |
| | Disclaimer
|
|
I will soon be adding some instructions to the Brick Instruction Portal that I will be offering for sale. It occurred to me that I'd need a suitable disclaimer. I checked on Bip and found their wasn't one so I thought if I post on Lugnet I can get a (...) (21 years ago, 9-Jan-04, to lugnet.inst, lugnet.publish, lugnet.cad, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) I second Lar, this is a great idea, Kevin. I'm excited that the topic of Building Instructions has gained popularity over the last year or so, with the release of LPub, launch of BIPortal, etc. This contest could serve to further promote the (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.inst)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) I got the point, but I'm not completely convinced. Anyhow, I really only suggested the LDRotM contest because I'm afraid the model sellers might be influential enough to eliminate even the *option* of publishing the LDR files in the MotM (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.inst, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) I agree. I also percieve this as a great catalyst for invention of new techniques and styles. (...) Raising the bar is a good thing. (...) Kevin (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.inst)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) irrelevent. (...) Kevin (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.inst, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) Actually Don, I agree with all those points and am in favor of authors having the option to post their DAT/LDR/MPD files along with the images. My point is that within the scope of a completed model, having a contest on how the model is (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.inst, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
