*head desk*

[animadri.livejournal.com]

I ... dude, I need a minute.

http://community.livejournal.com/lj_biz/241182.html

strike that! do not read if you do not want to be spoiled for HP Book 7

Comments

[vom-marlowe.livejournal.com]

*Hands over a large whiskey and soda*

Man, 6A sure does start some wank.

[animadri.livejournal.com]

You are the best!

[p-zeitgeist.livejournal.com]

You know, my heart really goes out to burr86. It seems clear that they sent him out to make this post because people know him and trust him. And he's not a lawyer, and he's out of his depth in a way that's really not his fault and not fair.

If the new/old policy really does just track American law, all is well on the fanfic front. It doesn't really matter that they ban "obscene" texts, because under the test American courts have established it's virtually impossible for a text to ever be obscene as a matter of law. (Pictures and video are a different story.) And burr86 has said in the comments that this is what they mean. But the poor guy's also talking about how texts can too be illegal under American law, no doubt because that's what they told him to say, and because he isn't a specialist he's in no position to really explain -- he may not get it himself.

(And of course, that means that it's hard to rely on what he can say, because, what if he had it wrong?)

Anyway. I say all this because while it's perfectly maddening, and I've now spent much more of my afternoon than I should have arguing about it over there, I don't think it's really nearly as ghastly as it looks.

At least, if poor Abe is right when he says they're okay with anything that wouldn't be obscene under Miller. Nothing anyone's ever written for you would be obscene under Miller; indeed, it's hard to imagine what would be.

[animadri.livejournal.com]

Thank you! I really needed to hear that. My heart would go out to him too if I wasn't so annoyed right now. *le sigh*

[lady-ganesh.livejournal.com]

Their lawyers seem to SUCK.

[p-zeitgeist.livejournal.com]

Seriously, I'm astonished.

I assume they're not a big company, and that their in-house counsel isn't a specialist, and that they weren't able or willing to throw money to outside counsel to handle this for them. Because if their own lawyer isn't some poor person who's also responsible for their employment policy and pension plan compliance and corporate governance and all that stuff, I can't even begin to imagine how this kind of thing keeps happening.

And, good Lord, how can they not have seen what was going to happen the minute they sent that poor boy out to make that post? He had no way of knowing (or so I assume; one of the hazards of a professional education is that you forget what you did and didn't know back when you were a civilian). But any lawyer who'd done even the basic research on the point ought to have known that whoever made the announcement was going to need some familiarity with what "obscenity" actually means under U.S. law, or else all hell was going to break loose.

Or, hell, maybe I'm just cranky. I've never seen anything but professionalism and courtesy under fire from burr86, but that response from the legal department was just insulting.

[lady-ganesh.livejournal.com]

And I assume they have no PR staff at all. Or that person is an utter moron.

Your comments have been win.

[p-zeitgeist.livejournal.com]

Thanks. By the second request for cites I had a horrible feeling that I was being a pompous ass, and it's a real relief to hear otherwise.

At least I came to my senses and deleted the first draft of my response to their legal person before I could make a mistake and post it for all to see.

[lady-ganesh.livejournal.com]

Though I did love that later someone was all 'people are claiming to be lawyers or have legal knowledge.' Heh, it's better than the LJ staff then.

[dragovianknight.livejournal.com]

::hugs you::

[animadri.livejournal.com]

::hugs you right back::

[gamera.livejournal.com]

One of the stories I posted in the previous round definitly falls under the heading of what LJ has stated they do not want on the site. I friends locked it the last time this issue came up; is there anything more you would like those of us with works questionable under LJ's new policy to do do?