I've been a contributor for magazines for a couple of years, so I'm very aware of the standards they use. Magazines want to be the 1st and have exclusives, but that is balenced out with as you said, copyright materials, if items were stolen, etc. I'd say EXACTLY the same standards I use... since I do write for them on occasion.


So in short, you don't want information, you want rumor, right? So where should this rumor originate? You already said it can't originate from sources unless they give their name, so that's out. You said it can't originate from any source not approved by the company, so that means spy pictures or available industry publications are out.

My conclusion is that you feel this should be nothing more than a wild rumor mill or a industry media link. There's plenty of sites for that.


Again, I get the feeling really don't understand the information business, or support trying to shut the portion of it down. Tell me, how exactly you think all Car magazines actually get their information? When I saw early information on the C6 at Car & Driver or Motor Trend, I didn't see "So & so from such and such supplier, who's making the body molds for the new Corvette said this is how it's going to look". Neither did I see such ownership on the recent Charger spread in Car & Driver.

As far as ethics, it seems you have a pretty exagerated view of this. Let me outline them for you:

1. Posting copyrighted items (ie: Brenda Priddy pictures) is poor ethics. Using them without her permission is illegal. However, even though it's not authorized by a car maker, it's free to be posted and linked.

2. Posting any document, photo, etc... that is owned, copyrighted, is confidential, taken or orignated inside the company's property, whether copyrighted or not, even if it's your own camera, without expressed written permission is also bad ethics and in most cases illegal. Blue Oval News had a run in with this.

3. Any document that is owned by someone and copyrighted by someone can not typically be used by others for profit or otherwise without written consent.

4. If you rely on sources, it is of the utmost ethical standards to protect your sources unless they expressedly ask or agree to them being used as a source.

5. 99% of the time, as long as you keep these ethical standards, you will end up with additional people giving you information. They will tell you if they don't want it in print or not.

I also don't write anything unless it comes from at least 2 independent sources, sometime 3. When I said that Chevy was getting rid of the chrome bar, I had already heard it mentioned by two insiders. When a 3rd mentioned it, I posted it.

I can't make it any clearer than I already have.

And now I know the REAL reason you're here.

You work for GM, don't you??



The deleted link that started all of this was from the Export Development Corperation of Canada, and unless I'm badly mistaken, anyone with the money & suscription can actually buy that very same report. Anyone with a big wad of cash and a membership could have bought the same information from J.D. Powers about a year or so ago.

HARDLY top secret information, bad ethics, or a threat to mankind.

If anything, Jason was right to delete it because the EDC of Canada owned the material. On the flip side, If they gave permission to link it or if a website bought the rights to post it, it would be free & clear.

Period!

 

I have nothing to say that hasn't already been said but I did want to susbscribe to this, also +1.

 

Good, we both understand what legit publisher's do. Editorial control was my point. This is not a magazine, but it we must find the analogy, I suppose Jason is the "editor". He sets the standard for what he will and will not allow. Jason's post and the reactions are what I'm posting about.



NO... Let's try this another way. Jason sets the rules here and leaping to conclusions is what most folks are doing. I didn't say a thing about a company's approval Guy...

People who have confidentiality agreement should not violate them. Web sites should follow good legal practices. Spy pics are legal as it gets if captured where a person has every right to be ready with their camera. Where has anyone tried to ban spy pics?

In short, most of what is posted about future vehicles here or elsewhere is rumor.

Guy, you are in law enforcement, correct? Depending on how "evidence" is acquired can have an effect on it's being admitted or rejected as such by a judge... I would doubt an attorney advising a Judge that all the courts should be closed because he deems some things out of order. I think it would really be seens as little than drama or , perhaps,a tantrum... either way -- baseless.

CLearly it isn't about what I think should or shouldn't be here.

I'm addressing the weeping a wailing over what isn't that big of an edict by my reading. Either I'm reading too little into it or some are reading too much into it. If I really had a question about it I'd e-mail Jason about it.

As for wanting this to be an industry media link? No... why would I want that?

I don't see this place as my kingdom or an arena to "hold court" whatsoever. Maybe some do.


Probably a good example to not always go with your feelings...

I couldn't care less what you "feel" I know or don't know. This is said without any animosity or anger... simply the cold fact.

Once again, I believe Jason is requesting not posting of things which are different than what you are talking about and far more narrow.

As for what magazines publish and don't regarding fututre products? Usually mags aren't consistantly accurate. Who knows if it's a problem with thier "inside" sources. If that's the cause, maybe they are dealing with a source that's "inside" but in a "janitorial" capacity rather than a dialled in source. Nonetheless, if you look for me to view Car Mags as pentagons of virtue, accuracy, and unvarnished truth... let's just say some car mags are good, some not so. I can suggest the media is not where I'd look first to formulate my ethical standards.

To reiterate, I have not come to the conclusion that this section should be closed down because you or anyone can't post whatever they want the way they want. Whatever the most recent deletion was I actually don't know.

I see...So Jason was right in your opinion... Did the EDC give permission or not? If they didn't do you agree it shouldn't have been posted?

 

Can't help but notice "1fastdog" skipped over the 'work for GM' part. Sounds awfully PR and not much like an actual poster on the board. Whatever his motives, it's a flawed argument as Guy has pointed out several times over. "Magazines are better because they're magazines, and the internet has no control!"

Yeah, ok. Afraid to let your daughter talk on the internet cuz of rapists, but you'll let her go out clubbing in the bad part of town

 

this conversation is a pretty big one. how bout i settle it. we all know Guionm.
1fastdog, state your credential and what you know about a future Camaro

 

That file wasn't even theirs I don't believe. The author of the info (John Cleveland) works as a consultant for suppliers. The EDC has a bunch of other files by different people right there on there on their site. The funny thing is the "info" on our favorite car was just a little blip, but the rest of the info was really worth talking about.

So I would also assume anyone could have bought that info or bought tickets to the seminar.

 

THANK YOU. I agree 100%.

This is one of the silly-er statements I've seen recently. I don't "know" guionM from the man in the moon. Who cares, really? And what must 1fastdog due to establish "proper credibility" here? Post degrees earned, alma maters, employers? Brother.

 

I say he submits all knowlage and or pictures of any type of future Zeta cars, such as a Camaro, GTO, or any other verson....that will be enough to establish credibility for me.

 

What exactly qualifies anyone as an "actual poster" on this board?

What's the flawed argument in your opinion? Guy can speak his own piece and no doubt you can as well. Bow up and speak your own mind.

Read what I'm saying... What you want, hope, think, regarding your next car is important!

What I state is that a future vehicle site can be of value without leaked docs or ripped off copyrighted materials. I have tried to get folks to calmly read what the site adminstrator has asked... Any suggested expansions or suppositions of what Jason's post means, in a supposed detrimental sense. have not been mine.

Think about it...I'm already driving what works for me-- but I'd like to see the folks here get what they want in a car as well, and from GM. If that makes me suspect, I can live with it.

Tell you what...Please explain what difference it makes where someone works has any bearing, whatsoever, in this thread's context... and in a convincing way, and I'll fill in the blanks that it seems you feel are of importance by their omission. What it has to do with anything in respect to this thread escapes me.

As for your "daughter" anology...

What would possibly lead you to such a suggestion of duality on my part?

Let's be CLEAR. If I were concerned for the safety of a daughter or any family memebr, I would not allow them to be in harms way without doing my utmost to prevent it, regardless of the context. Would you come up with any other way to be in matters of such real import?

 

I doubt it is of any real comfort or importance... but you have made me smile in a large way. You have caused me to look at the picture of Louis Chevrolet on my wall. Yes...there he is! ...behind the wheel of a winning ride as he sports what seems to be this "So what you going to do?" look on his face...and I smile again.

Maybe we can all agree I don't know a thing and be happy in that notion. That works for me too.

 

However, in the event when I know someone e-mails me or a magazine with a bit of info they'd like posted (and I'm not talking about some low level vendor or manager either) as a "reliable source", it tends to get mentioned. This hapens on the internet & it happens in magazines. Like it or not, agree with it or not. "Give our car a good review, and we'll keep you fed with tidbits to keep your readers intrested".

It happens that way fastdaog.

OK, I'll give you a more realistic comparison. We get a tip from someone just who just saw someone doing an unnatural act with a rottweiler, but doesn't want to be quoted as a source. I get there, & I see the man. I don't see him doing anything illegal to to our 4 legged friend, but the man's pants are down to his ankles and the dog's licking his bottom like there's no tomorrow.

Even though I wouldn't have been at there without the "anonymous source", I arrest him for indecent exposure and probable cruelty to an annimal. Though a prosecuter or judge would probally downgrade both to a misdemenor & send the guy to mandatory "animal awareness" training, it would still be a perfectly legal arrest.


I've never had a janitor pass information. Believe me, the people who occasionally pass tidbits of information would stun you.



If EDC owned the copyright, and it was available on the internet through their site, and it was linked, then based on that, there's most likely no wrongdoing. If someone copied that link, and posted it here uncredited, then that's probally not ethical at the least.

Either way, it has nothing to do with why Jason was right to delete it. It involves something entirely different. I suspect Jason knows the situation & now so do I, and I'm ready to drop the whole thing.

It HAS to be big if I'm going to say something like that.

 

Mmmm...gotta ask. With all due respect...

Why would something you say be characterized as "HAS to be big" ?

Do you feel something is conversely "small" if you say nothing?

Is there a scale of relevance I am unaware of ?

 

Whoa! It's not so much the story that makes me go it's that you said "realistic" comparison

 

Guy is a very well respected poster and if he, or Red , or Jason (eventhough he has already said it) say to drop it then I am going to let things die. There are probably a few emails going out to insiders from within many different manufactures and definately some going on between the insiders and I don't think the tone of things is very nice.

1fastdog lets just let this die, ok?

 

Sure... No problem.

C'mon everybody...

Kumbayah my ... C'mon, louder! Kumbayah....