Two questions for Hornby...

Look you total halfwit, if Hornby told Rail Express that they could publish that is what they can do, they own the information and just because they tell magazine 'A' that they can't publish there is nothing to stop them telling 'B' that they can.

FFS find a clue ,oron.

And ?...

"We don't" what ?

But you are...

How do you know that, condition of entry into the press conference might have been non disclosure. That means just entering the building is accepting a formal non disclosure agreement.

No, how can Hornby break there own confidence, what Hornby do with THEIR information is THEIR business and no one else's, no one's, if Hornby want to release the information to a single magazine that is THEIR business and if the other magazines don't like it then it's tough s**te.

You could keep quite about things you so plainly don't understand and stop showing yourself up ?!...

No doubt these will

Only is ignorant people like you stoke the fire...

"kim" wrote

That's not a voluntary embargo. The information was given conditionally.

I was never party to the information and gleaned it elsewhere.

Rubbish. It was Hornby's information they could do with it what they liked.

If you're right then we're in for interesting times. Nothing like a bit of spice to brighten things up.

John.

Embargos are very common in news publishing and Hornby would be quite correct in expecting any publication to stand by them. As for the web site that brief glisp of the pages was no doubt due to an error by the web site publishers who IIRC are not Hornby.

Mike Parkes snipped-for-privacy@mphgate.removetoreply demon.co.uk

Yes, Embargos are very common in news publishing, but so are exclusives, perhaps the Embargos was placed to allow Rail Express to get the agreed exclusive ?...

No trains.

Socks.

-- Merry Christmas Roger T.

Home of the Great Eastern Railway

At least you'll have warm feet. ;-)

Life socks sometimes.

"MartinS" <

Feet? You're supposed to wear them on your feet?

-- Merry Christmas Roger T.

Home of the Great Eastern Railway

"...Jerry.." wrote:-

because no editor or publisher would accept such conditions unless he thought there was benefit to be gained later.

You assume the model railway press have no sources of their own other than the drip feed from the giant manufacturers. You assume wrongly.

What you mean such as the difference between the words 'slander' and 'libel' which you clearly don't understand.

Nothing I have posted here will make any difference to the reaction of the model railway press if they consider they have ben treated unfairly.

(kim)

John Turner wrote:-

There was an understanding that no editor would publish the information before any other. In that sense it was voluntary. It is also highly likely they had acquired much of the information already from different sources.

...and you assume people who have spent a lifetime in model journalism hadn't also gleaned it elsewhere?

Not if they wish to retain the co-operation and goodwill of the British model press. An incident like this could sour relations considerably. If you check their website you will see that Hornby's claim that the information will remain secret until 1st January was not posted until after the story had already broken in Rail Express. That suggests somebody at Hornby was not aware the information had already been published.

(kim)

Ah, but according to the articles in newspapers put out by Blunkett's supporters in the days before the verdict came out, he has a photographic memory and can recall the exact detail of conversations he had 20 years ago with people. It would seem that this wonderful memory is subject to certain critical lapses. How convenient, especially when the official report said that a minimum of 6 communications went from his private office to the civil servants concerned, but he cannot remember the contents of any of them.

ROFLO, presumably like a non-exposed photograph....

and can recall the exact detail of conversations he

Quite possible, as the same report said that the enquires were made on behalf of the minister and not by the minister - indeed the visa request wasn't personally handed over, but sent via the ministerial 'overnight' box.

-- Reply to group please.

begin .......nothing!

So where, exactly, do you wear them?

I would hesitate to use any information in the British press to back an argument :-)

Jim.

"...Jerry..." wrote:-

And the model press is free to do what they please with their own information whatever they like, but you seem unable to understand such a simple FACT of life. Hornby needs a sympathetic model press. The model press does not need Hornby.

(kim)

"Jim Guthrie" wrote

I saw him once with a copy of the Daily Sport sticking out of his pocket. ;-)

John.

No they are not, if that information is owned and / or copyright to someone else.

You seem to be totally clueless as to the **law** in this respect.

If a magazine wanted to publish such information they would obtain it from an un attributable source and not from an official press release / conference, otherwise they would find legal papers on the editors desk PDQ !

Oh yes they do !....

Being one third of the mass RTR sector the press need Hornby to fill their review pages if people are not going to buy one of their competitor magazines - Joe Public don't care much were they get their information, they just want it.

-- Reply to group please.

begin .......nothing!

Oh Lord, it'll be Lancaster bombers on the moon, soon :-)

Jim.