To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 2646
2645  |  2647
Subject: 
Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Mon, 6 Dec 1999 04:03:52 GMT
Viewed: 
25 times
  
  Since I know a little bit about law I will give the legal prespective of
what Huw did. I personally have never seen one of these retailor catalogs but
as long as there was nothing on the catalogue that said "confidential" or for
store managers Etc there is no reason why Huw cannot post this catalog.
However if there is a warning on the catalog that specificly states
"for _ _ _ _ Only or "confidential" etc then Huw had no right posting that
because that is illegal. but if the person who this catalog was intended for
willingly let Huw have the information, which was the case, huw is not
responsible, his informant is.
  Sure Huw is not responsible legally, but is he responsibly morally? sure he
wanted to show us his catalog with all of the new 2000 sets in because he
thought we would enjoy it. If he could have looked into the future saw this 60
message thread about his rights to put his find on his website I'd bet that he
never would have done it. but he thought that he had a great find on his hands
and wanted to share it. If I would have found this at the local TRU I would
have put it on here without thinking twice.
  Now that Iam thinking about it,Huws informant is not responsable legally
responsibe either because once it recieved by him/her it is belongs to that
person and they can do freely what they want to do with it as long as it is
not confidential. Same applies to Huw he can do freely what he wants to do
with it. If he wants to put it on his site, thats fine. If he wanted to put it
on a billboard In Times Square thats fine too as long as it is not
confidential.
  This prespective is the legal prespective, the moral prespective, thats for
someone else to handle :)

   Just some food for thought,
         Rich



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
 
(...) Except possibly for reasons of copyright infringement...? (But TLC has never really had a problem with that yet as far as we know...only trademark and trade dress infringement.) (...) Waitasecond, waitasecond! This isn't and never was about (...) (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
 
(...) Personally, I find this entire scene completely repulsive.. I love this site, I love this community and I enjoy and appreciate every bit of effort that is put into it by everyone (my member dues are in the mail!), I also realize that we are (...) (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)

105 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

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR