 | | Re: Legal Legal legal
|
|
Tim, you're perfectly right. But that's the way it is in USA. It's ridiculous - noone cares about the impressive collection of automatic guns you may have at home, but one wrong word in a public forum, and a dozen of lawyers are breathing down your (...) (24 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
How about we just call TLG's reaction BAD PUBLIC RELATIONS? I mean, the info has already leaked out, no matter how accurate it is, and having Todd cancel all posts containing a word about the sets is a really POOR idea. Either we're just a couple of (...) (24 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) I obtained clarification from LSI Legal today on the telephone and it was indeed also true legal request and represented LSI Legal's position. (...) No, it was a formal legal request. And the phone call confirmed this. --Todd (24 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Legal Legal legal
|
|
I read with amusement some of the posts on legal matters concerning leaked information. I treat this site as a discussion group. People just talking about Lego etc just as if they were face to face. What has this got to do with lawyers ??? If (...) (24 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Clarrification needed
|
|
(...) It's really for however Brad and the community (working together) thinks it best suits the both together. Personally, I would take a debate analzying LD's actions elsewhere and come back and summarize concisely after it concluded, so as not to (...) (24 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Why are you so afraid of nuking posts on your own system? Do you really have a legal obligation not to delete posts without a formal legal request? I would only call to confirm if you *disagree* with the request, and want to see if they (...) (24 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Possibly, but also consider that it is probably far worse to hurt their own legal reputation by letting something like this slide. I can certainly imagine that as part of their investigation and any actions they may take in the future, they (...) (24 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Censors / information
|
|
(...) That's correct. (...) You can say whatever you like -- but if you post something that infringes on someone's privacy rights and they make a legal request that it be removed, it has to be removed. (...) yes, indeed. I don't know about other (...) (24 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) No, LEGO asked Todd to remove certain messages on a thread containing confidential information, thus causing them to discontinue to be published, and he complied with that particular specific legal request. --Todd (24 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) My primary suggestion is to start with the person who posted the information, rather than talking to Todd first. Don't send a threatening legal letter, but nicely say that Lego prefers to keep that information secret, and and ask the poster to (...) (24 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
