Carlton Intellectual Property Stolen - now with friendly admin reminder in post #3

Remove this Banner Ad

So if you walked into the Department of Defence and in an unlocked room on a whiteboard was confidential information about the latest I don't know, tank design or whatever. Do you think that walking into an unlocked room in the Department of Defence would be considered fine? How about taking a photo?

What about a legal firm with a whiteboard and case details?
An engineering firm with a new design?
A movie studio with a movie plot?

Is using a whiteboard prohibited in confidential business practice?

They publicly disclosed private details which adversely affected the business, even if not for commercial advantage. Silly to think that isn't a crime.

Ok if you're going to compare Department of Defence to recruitment for Carlton's women's side then you need to GAFG.
 
So if you walked into the Department of Defence and in an unlocked room on a whiteboard was confidential information about the latest I don't know, tank design or whatever. Do you think that walking into an unlocked room in the Department of Defence would be considered fine? How about taking a photo?

What about a legal firm with a whiteboard and case details?
An engineering firm with a new design?
A movie studio with a movie plot?

Is using a whiteboard prohibited in confidential business practice?

They publicly disclosed private details which adversely affected the business, even if not for commercial advantage. Silly to think that isn't a crime.

Can you read? I said trespassing is the issue which you seem to agree with.

Taking a photo of something on a whiteboard isn't the problem here, unless they were specifically told no photography. If they weren't meant to be there then they can be charged with trespassing.

Also Department of Defence and CFC is chalk and cheese. There are actual laws relating to sharing military information, where you rate 100 girls football skills vs tank designs? lol.
 
There are laws against gaining access to trade secrets through illegal means as well.

And stop being so precious about the comparison. It served to underline how the security utilised to protect information isn't necessarily indicative of the value of the information. If a room isn't clearly available to the public in a private business then it is not reasonable to open it up, that is trespass as noted. Gaining information which is intentionally secret and dispersing it is also illegal.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

There are laws against gaining access to trade secrets through illegal means as well.

And stop being so precious about the comparison. It served to underline how the security utilised to protect information isn't necessarily indicative of the value of the information. If a room isn't clearly available to the public in a private business then it is not reasonable to open it up, that is trespass as noted. Gaining information which is intentionally secret and dispersing it is also illegal.

1) You compared this to stealing military secrets. I'm allowed to crack the shits at that.

2) The guy walked into your change rooms with the doors unlocked and found this stuff on a whiteboard. The Carlton brains trust must be a very exclusive club if this is such secret information.
 
Can you read? I said trespassing is the issue which you seem to agree with.

Taking a photo of something on a whiteboard isn't the problem here, unless they were specifically told no photography. If they weren't meant to be there then they can be charged with trespassing.

Also Department of Defence and CFC is chalk and cheese. There are actual laws relating to sharing military information, where you rate 100 girls football skills vs tank designs? lol.
Carlton already discussing tanking
 
1) You compared this to stealing military secrets. I'm allowed to crack the shits at that.

2) The guy walked into your change rooms with the doors unlocked and found this stuff on a whiteboard. The Carlton brains trust must be a very exclusive club if this is such secret information.

1) Why? It's an analogy, and a fairly tame one. "Stealing military secrets" not if you publicly release it, you aren't stealing so much as illegally dispersing the information. People get so caught up in the importance of "military" things.

2) So he walked into a private business without permission. It's still illegal. You don't just get to walk anywhere you like, and you don't get to take pictures of clearly private information and then share that online.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Is anyone else not surprised that a Collingwood supporter stole this?
Man you're actually so edgy. Did you come up with the theme of that joke all by yourself?
 
Well you did steal their jumper design
No we didn't. Collingwood has had the stripes since 1892. Port on the other hand first wore the jumper in 1902. Before that they had the magenta and blue jersey.
 
So did BF get asked to remove it?

I dont know how many saw it, I saw it yesterday and there was quite a number of photos and quite detailed info that other clubs would of been interested in for the upcoming draft. I know of one girls name that was listed as top 30 who hasnt played in any of the exhibition matches but had been an earlier state level womens footy rep. It was quite a few whiteboards of info and didnt appear to be the stuff that would be left in a public area of a VFL game behind an unlocked door.
 
So there was obviously signs everywhere saying "no entry" and "no photography"...

I assume such confidential information was being protected by bollards, security guards and locked doors...

No there wasn't... so how can a member of the public be held to account of trespassing and stealing of intellectual property if they were given no indication that they were doing either?

Who leaves stuff they don't want the public to see so easily available to the public, and then complains the public found it???
 
This wouldn't be like stealing a movie, it's like stealing a companies confidential business plans.

Presumably the room with the whiteboard was not available to the general public and somewhere within the clubs offices, the individual who took the photo would probably have had to either been invited or illegally gained access to the information.

Definitely a crime, I would expect the club to pursue it if only to discourage future perpetrators. I would expect the AFL to back them in this pursuit.

Given the location of the "office" all this has served to prove is the gross incompetence of staff members (or an individual) at the Carlton Football Club.

I feel for whoever it was that left the box unlocked and unguarded because if the powers that be think its even remotely worthy of bringing to the attention of Victoria Police they'll be cleaning out their desk as we speak.

I also feel for the individual Carlton are pointing the finger at because for mine an important part of information being intellectual property is for it to be protected. Otherwise it's just information...
 
Given the location of the "office" all this has served to prove is the gross incompetence of staff members (or an individual) at the Carlton Football Club.

I feel for whoever it was that left the box unlocked and unguarded because if the powers that be think its even remotely worthy of bringing to the attention of Victoria Police they'll be cleaning out their desk as we speak.

I also feel for the individual Carlton are pointing the finger at because for mine an important part of information being intellectual property is for it to be protected. Otherwise it's just information...

If they had just wandered in, I reckon I'd agree. It's the photo and sharing it which tips it over.

It's definitely a failure of security, but if you asked me, it being a private room (unlocked or not) on club premises means that the individual, intentionally or not had to trespass to find the information. That reflects a minimal level of security, the information not being kept in a public place where any member of the public could find it. Consequentially you could argue that a lapse in security does not reflect an absence of security, and given a crime had to be performed to access it, you could argue it reflects the unlawful access to trade secrets and then the distribution is clearly wrong.

Long story short, the club has to do something about this, and pursuing some legal repercussions is a forewarning to future "wanderers"
 
If they had just wandered in, I reckon I'd agree. It's the photo and sharing it which tips it over.

It's definitely a failure of security, but if you asked me, it being a private room (unlocked or not) on club premises means that the individual, intentionally or not had to trespass to find the information. That reflects a minimal level of security, the information not being kept in a public place where any member of the public could find it. Consequentially you could argue that a lapse in security does not reflect an absence of security, and given a crime had to be performed to access it, you could argue it reflects the unlawful access to trade secrets and then the distribution is clearly wrong.

Long story short, the club has to do something about this, and pursuing some legal repercussions is a forewarning to future "wanderers"

Look I'll be completely honest I've spoken to the "wanderer" and there won't be legal repercussions.

There are 4 parties involved the BF poster, BF admin, the womens footy blog and the Carlton Football Club. Three of the parties have handled themselves well in regards to the matter and the fourth is Carlton.

Out of respect to this being the main board I'll leave it at that, but if it were Collingwood I'd be going very ******* hard at this for them dropping the ball so badly.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top