LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  June 2007

ARSCLIST June 2007

Subject:

Re: Media mail

From:

George Brock-Nannestad <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 8 Jun 2007 23:36:29 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (126 lines)

From: Patent Tactics, George Brock-Nannestad

on a matter related to "media mail", where the maximum care was taken in 
packing.

I sent the following to the address given in regard of the activity of the  
Agency that carried out rules revised by the relevant Department. Needless to 
say, I received no reply, but I wanted my complaint on file. Now I am 
spreading the message.

Kind regards,

George


------- Forwarded message follows -------
From:           	George Brock-Nannestad <[log in to unmask]>
To:             	[log in to unmask]
Subject:        	reinforcing material
Copies to:      	[log in to unmask]
Send reply to:  	[log in to unmask]
Date sent:      	Thu, 26 Jun 2003 01:06:07 +0200

Re: inspection of baggage destined for Denmark on CO66 out of Cleveland, OH 
on Sunday 22 June 2003.

I respond to the leaflet I found in my baggage upon unpacking and to the 
quality of the goods inside subsequent to inspection and travel. First of all
I would like to express that I am aware of the massive amount of work you 
have in order to inspect baggage, some of which may well have been checked in
as late as two hours before departure. You seem to be equipped to be able to
cause minimum disturbance while ensuring the safety of all passengers. In the
present case my baggage was checked in at the counter 3 hours prior to 
departure.

Some of my baggage was in the form of 3 corrugated board two part boxes (used
apple crates), the contents suitably protected against in partcular bumping 
and falling, but not against rain or pools of water, except by tape sealing.
The corrugated boxes were sealed by means of duct tape, in order that the lid
part would not separate from the container part. As a service to the airline
ground personell I provided carrying handles in the form of cord (actually 
braided polypropylene clothesline) folded back upon itself several times to 
create thickness and secured in a harness fashion so that it would not twist
on the boxes. 

Inside the boxes was provided an extra layer of corrugated board in order to
make them withstand some abuse and to support polystyrene foam in contact 
with the most fragile part of the contents. These boxes contained fragile 
78rpm records (shellac) standing on edge on styrofoam in the center, 
surrounded by styrofoam, books, and other printed articles. Shellac records 
may be fragile when handled individually, but when stacked without their 
sleeves to a thickness of 2" interleaved with one sheet of newsprint and held
together by wide tape, such a stack is quite sturdy. Two stacks were placed 
face to face. A direct blow may still shatter the records, and for this 
reason the records are surrounded by styrofoam and that is again supported so
that forces from the outside of the box are evenly distributed.

Upon arrival all of the boxes had had their harness and handle removed, which
may or may not have been detrimental to subsequent handling by airline ground
personel. 

I will report my observations regarding one box in particular: 

 - when it was packed, styrofoam was put on top of the stack of records, and
Long Play vinyl records in covers were put on top of that, books were 
distributed all over the top, and a strong corrugated board cut to size was 
placed over the books, lightly secured in place with adhesive tape, and the 
lid part was placed over the container part of the apple crate. The lid part
itself had previously been given some increased stiffness and some protection
against rain by sealing all joints with duct tape.

 - upon arrival, the Long Play vinyl records were in direct contact with the
shellac records with the styrofoam on top, and the books were uppermost, 
while the stiffening strong corrugated board was entirely missing. The box 
had been opened (and resealed here) by cutting through the duct tape joints 
on the lid part. The strong corrugated board would have been the first part 
of the contents the inspector would meet and the last to replace. Now, the 
corrugated board was put there for a purpose, as described above, and forms 
an integral part of the strengthening of the box. 

Hence the box was weakened during the course of the inspection in a situation
where there was an increased risk that it might be dropped due to the missing
handle harness. 

The payment of airline ticket and excess baggage ticket ensures that the 
airline undertakes responsibility for the baggage and will pay compensation 
based on the weight of the baggage, according to international standard 
procedures, if the baggage is damaged in transit. However, when boxes are 
used, I have to sign a release form, which effectively means that I will get
no compensation if the contents are damaged. For this reason I pack very 
carefully, as detailled above, and the leaving out of packing material at the
end of inspection puts me in a very difficult situation. I consider myself 
fortunate that the contents arrived safely this time, but I feel frustrated 
that I did not have any influence on the actual usefulness of the load 
supporting arrangements I had provided for.

I would hence ask for an explanation as to why packing and reinforcing 
material was removed from my box.

I feel reasonably confident that each individual inspection is reported 
summarily and that you would potentially be able to trace my particular box 
in your system if you needed to. If you require precise information in order
to respond to my query, I still have the baggage number assigned by 
Continental Airlines and will provide it for you.

Radiative scanning of the baggage containing perhaps 4" of shellac records 
will show a solid and heavy cylinder and may appear suspicious, and I am 
pleased that the contents was verified as inoccuous - this is the protection
we need. However, the inspection should not put the contents as such at risk
by discarding strengthening material - this is not a fair compromise.

I have read the information you provide on your website before writing this 
letter, but I do not see any explicit reference to why it should be justified
to interfere with my legitimate business in providing reinforcing material 
for my baggage. With the detail I have provided above I expect a considered,
individualized reply, not merely a reference to Frequently Asked Questions.

Yours sincerely,



George Brock-Nannestad
European Patent Attorney

------- End of forwarded message -------

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager