 | | | | | |
I want to know how to do this in mlcad
http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/derek/miscellaneous/8wideclearance.gif
the curve tracks, I need to do them but I don't know how to.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad, Eduardo Vazquez Harte writes:
> I want to know how to do this in mlcad
>
> http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/derek/miscellaneous/8wideclearance.gif
>
> the curve tracks, I need to do them but I don't know how to.
That person is using the OLD 12 or 4.5V track pieces that in the Ldraw library.
If you have your library sort by description open up MLCad and look in the
Train category. Near the bottom there are the following pieces:
3229B.dat - Train Track Slotted Rail Curved Outside
3230A.dat - Train Track Tapered Rail Curved Inside
3229A.dat - Train Track Rail Curved Outside
If you look at the parts you will see that they are just the track part
where the train wheels touch and NOT the entire assmebly like in the 9V
version. The other 12V/4.5V version you had to construct the track yourself
(aka. TRUE LEGOS!)
Have fun and hopefully soon the PARTS GODS will make a curved 9V track piece
and the switches!
oh PARTS GODS please, please, please, please hear our prayers and be kind to
tho humbel worshipors.... =)
-AHui
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad, Ahui Herrera writes:
> In lugnet.cad, Eduardo Vazquez Harte writes:
> > I want to know how to do this in mlcad
> >
> > http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/derek/miscellaneous/8wideclearance.gif
> >
> > the curve tracks, I need to do them but I don't know how to.
>
> That person is using the OLD 12 or 4.5V track pieces that in the Ldraw library.
> If you have your library sort by description open up MLCad and look in the
> Train category. Near the bottom there are the following pieces:
>
> 3229B.dat - Train Track Slotted Rail Curved Outside
> 3230A.dat - Train Track Tapered Rail Curved Inside
> 3229A.dat - Train Track Rail Curved Outside
I know them but ...
>
> If you look at the parts you will see that they are just the track part
> where the train wheels touch and NOT the entire assmebly like in the 9V
> version. The other 12V/4.5V version you had to construct the track yourself
> (aka. TRUE LEGOS!)
I need someone to assemble them as I can't do it myself and please don't use
that word againg "LEGOS" use LEGO instead I can't stand that people call LEGO
with the wrong word.
>
> Have fun and hopefully soon the PARTS GODS will make a curved 9V track piece
> and the switches!
Hope so...
> oh PARTS GODS please, please, please, please hear our prayers and be kind to
> tho humbel worshipors.... =)
I'll pray and may be the PARTS GODS will make them I need them badly.
> -AHui
CU Ahui you are really funny dude CYA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> >
> > If you look at the parts you will see that they are just the track part
> > where the train wheels touch and NOT the entire assmebly like in the 9V
> > version. The other 12V/4.5V version you had to construct the track yourself
> > (aka. TRUE LEGOS!)
>
> I need someone to assemble them as I can't do it myself and please don't use
> that word againg "LEGOS" use LEGO instead I can't stand that people call LEGO
> with the wrong word.
What is the differnece between lego, Lego, LEGO, legos, Legos, and LEGOS?
When referring to the Lego Systems Inc company how to you spell it?
LEGO? Lego Systems, Inc.? Lego?
When referring to a SINGLE plastic brick/plate/unit...
LEGO?, lego?
When referring to a BOX full of bricks/plates/units...
legos? LEGOS? Legos?
Can someone please answer these?
Thanks
-AHui
btw requesting followup to lugnet.lego.direct and also x-posting that way.
-AHui
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
"Ahui Herrera" <jedi_agh@yahoo.com> writes:
> What is the differnece between lego, Lego, LEGO, legos, Legos, and LEGOS?
>
> When referring to the Lego Systems Inc company how to you spell it?
> LEGO? Lego Systems, Inc.? Lego?
I think it's The LEGO Company (TLC) these days. Or just "LEGO". Oh,
and the first time you say LEGO you're supposed to put (R) after it.
> When referring to a SINGLE plastic brick/plate/unit...
> LEGO?, lego?
Technically: A LEGO brick or element. Personally: I'd probably say "a
brick" or "a plate" or "a piece" or something like that.
> When referring to a BOX full of bricks/plates/units...
> legos? LEGOS? Legos?
Technically: LEGO bricks or elements. Personally: I'd probably say "a
box of LEGO". I use it as a mass noun, like "water" (e.g. "a cup of
water" or "some water")
> Can someone please answer these?
Legally, trademarks are adjectives and must always be followed by a
noun like "Company" or "brick". If they get used as nouns or verbs
the trademark loses some of its enforcability. Look at what's
happened to "Kleenex" or "Xerox" or in some places "Coke" or "Hoover".
--Bill.
--
William R Ward bill@wards.net http://www.wards.net/~bill/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AMAZING BUT TRUE: There is so much sand in northern Africa that if it were
spread out it would completely cover the Sahara Desert!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> What is the differnece between lego, Lego, LEGO, legos, Legos, and LEGOS?
Easy, it's always upper case and never has an s on the end.
> When referring to the Lego Systems Inc company how to you spell it?
> LEGO? Lego Systems, Inc.? Lego?
The LEGO Group
> When referring to a SINGLE plastic brick/plate/unit...
> LEGO?, lego?
LEGO
> When referring to a BOX full of bricks/plates/units...
> legos? LEGOS? Legos?
LEGO
I'm sure there's something on lego.com about the plural of LEGO but I can't
find it right now.
Huw
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.lego.direct, Huw Millington writes:
> > What is the differnece between lego, Lego, LEGO, legos, Legos, and LEGOS?
>
> Easy, it's always upper case and never has an s on the end.
>
> > When referring to the Lego Systems Inc company how to you spell it?
> > LEGO? Lego Systems, Inc.? Lego?
>
> The LEGO Group
>
> > When referring to a SINGLE plastic brick/plate/unit...
> > LEGO?, lego?
>
> LEGO
>
> > When referring to a BOX full of bricks/plates/units...
> > legos? LEGOS? Legos?
>
> LEGO
>
> I'm sure there's something on lego.com about the plural of LEGO but I can't
> find it right now.
Since LEGO is a brand name, the proper way to describe the brick would be to
call them "a LEGO brick" or "many LEGO bricks"
Adrian
--
www.brickfrenzy.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> In lugnet.lego.direct, Adrian Drake writes:
> Since LEGO is a brand name, the proper way to describe the brick would be to
> call them "a LEGO brick" or "many LEGO bricks"
I think LEGO has become much like Kleenex and Coke in usage. While the
*correct* way to ask for a soft piece of paper to wipe my nose is "Hand me a
tissue" , some may say "Pass me a Kleenex." As such, the plural to LEGO
would be LEGOs (note the lower case 's'). So saying "Give me my LEGOs"
could be construed as correct.
-Orion
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.lego.direct, Orion Pobursky writes:
> > In lugnet.lego.direct, Adrian Drake writes:
> > Since LEGO is a brand name, the proper way to describe the brick would be to
> > call them "a LEGO brick" or "many LEGO bricks"
>
> I think LEGO has become much like Kleenex and Coke in usage. While the
> *correct* way to ask for a soft piece of paper to wipe my nose is "Hand me a
> tissue" , some may say "Pass me a Kleenex." As such, the plural to LEGO
> would be LEGOs (note the lower case 's'). So saying "Give me my LEGOs"
> could be construed as correct.
>
> -Orion
A personal story (it happened to a friend of a friend... well, no, it
happened to me...)
The LEGO Company sent me a letter many years ago in which they spelled out,
as plainly as can be, the proper usage of all their copyrights and trademarks.
As some people here have mentinoed, LEGO is the company name. As such, it
isn't a noun.
You can say, "That guy over there works for the LEGO company"
But who does that--we say 'That guy works for Xerox', or 'I work for Laidlaw.'
But more refined, and geting away from the proper usage vs the generic usage.
I try to type out "LEGO bricks" or write, "I would like that LEGO brick over
there", for it shows respect for the effort TLC puts into their product.
The icing on the cake, it's correct grammatically, and it's right with the
LEGO Company.
I go to a friends house and they say, 'look at my kids playing with legos',
when the poor kids are playing with (mostly) MegaBloks (and here's
something--I don't know if I spelled that company's name right--I never
examined them that closely, so my apologies if I didn't--is a slip out of
ignorance and not malicious intent).
See, this is the issue that TLC wishes to avoid (they stated as much in
their letter to me). As others have pointed out, Coke, Xerox, Kleenex, and
Asprin (and others) have lost the significance to their name. Now anyone
else can use these company names when describing something which that
company did not produce--Pass me a Coke! (when in fact, I get a Pepsi, but
people know what I mean anyway...) The worst case scenario, I think, in
everyday usage, is kleenex. I mean, that company totally lost any rights to
their name at all.
Do I want that same thing to be facing my favourite company? Nope.
So say legos--I don't think TLC is going to send their LEGO company police
after you. As for me, it will (hopefully) always be LEGO brick(s).
Dave K
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.lego.direct, Orion Pobursky writes:
> > In lugnet.lego.direct, Adrian Drake writes:
> > Since LEGO is a brand name, the proper way to describe the brick would be to
> > call them "a LEGO brick" or "many LEGO bricks"
>
> I think LEGO has become much like Kleenex and Coke in usage. While the
> *correct* way to ask for a soft piece of paper to wipe my nose is "Hand me a
> tissue" , some may say "Pass me a Kleenex." As such, the plural to LEGO
> would be LEGOs (note the lower case 's'). So saying "Give me my LEGOs"
> could be construed as correct.
>
> -Orion
I agree with you about tissues, but I sometimes say "Coke" and usually
"Hoover the floor". With LEGO though, it's always been "playing with Lego"
to me. I don't equate "Lego" to mean "a single LEGO brick", such that a
collection becomes "LEGOs". To me, "Lego" is anything and everything
produced by The LEGO Group of Companies. My entire collection IS Lego. You
have tubs of Lego, shops that sell Lego. In fact, one element on its own
would be "a Lego brick" to denote its singularity.
I think that's pretty much how it is for everyone in the UK too. But, you
still hear people refer to MegaBloks as "Lego" (although there, the actual
company name is the plural). Brand slippage is a worry, as it shows people
don't distinguish between your and your rivals' brands. Calling the bricks
"LEGOs" though is just an irritation.
And while we're at it, they're crisps, not chips. And they're chips, not
fries. And as for the French, mustard is YELLOW, alright? :)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
The only GOOD mustards are BROWN, OK? ;-)
Jason J Railton wrote:
> And while we're at it, they're crisps, not chips. And they're chips, not
> fries. And as for the French, mustard is YELLOW, alright? :)
--
| Tom Stangl, Sun ONE Internet Technical Support, Sun Microsystems
| iPlanet Support - http://www.sun.com/service/support/software/iplanet/index.html
| Please do not associate my personal views with my employer
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.lego.direct, Huw Millington writes:
> > What is the differnece between lego, Lego, LEGO, legos, Legos, and LEGOS?
>
> Easy, it's always upper case and never has an s on the end.
>
> > When referring to the Lego Systems Inc company how to you spell it?
> > LEGO? Lego Systems, Inc.? Lego?
>
> The LEGO Group
>
> > When referring to a SINGLE plastic brick/plate/unit...
> > LEGO?, lego?
>
> LEGO
>
> > When referring to a BOX full of bricks/plates/units...
> > legos? LEGOS? Legos?
>
> LEGO
>
> I'm sure there's something on lego.com about the plural of LEGO but I can't
> find it right now.
>
> Huw
Thanks yous alls fors helpings mes outs. Sos froms nows ons I'ms gonnas
calls thems...
...
...
...
...
...
LEGOS!!!! LEGOS!!!! LEGOS!!!!!
he,he,he....
-AHui =)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Try explaining the proper usage of the LEGO trademark to my 21 month old
daughter.
My daughter stands next to my train table, points up and chants "daydohs?
daydohs?" over and over. And running the train really gets her excited.
She now has her own shoebox sized tub of very carefully selected 2x4 and
larger bricks, doors, large wheel sets, various mini-figures, large trees,
horses and a bare tricycle. She loves taking the hair and hats on and off
the mini-figures.
As a parent, it is fascinating to watch her little fingers manipulate the
figures and bricks. She has no problems with basic bricks, hats and hair or
putting a figure in the horse. But getting the figure on the trike is a bit
tough.
And she is very good about not putting bricks in her mouth - she was a
no-pacifier infant - and her non-Duplo-sized Lego play time is always *very
closely supervised*.
Play with your kids.
Bryan
"Huw Millington" <hmillington@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:GzGLIA.K6D@lugnet.com...
> > What is the differnece between lego, Lego, LEGO, legos, Legos, and • LEGOS?
>
> Easy, it's always upper case and never has an s on the end.
>
> > When referring to the Lego Systems Inc company how to you spell it?
> > LEGO? Lego Systems, Inc.? Lego?
>
> The LEGO Group
>
> > When referring to a SINGLE plastic brick/plate/unit...
> > LEGO?, lego?
>
> LEGO
>
> > When referring to a BOX full of bricks/plates/units...
> > legos? LEGOS? Legos?
>
> LEGO
>
> I'm sure there's something on lego.com about the plural of LEGO but I • can't
> find it right now.
>
> Huw
>
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.lego.direct, Huw Millington writes:
> > What is the differnece between lego, Lego, LEGO, legos, Legos, and LEGOS?
>
> Easy, it's always upper case and never has an s on the end.
<lil' snippage>
I have a few comments to add to this thread, but first let me make clear
that I am not a lawyer and will not be held responsible for any actions you
take based on what I say...
Back in the early 1980's (perhaps before that too), the brochures listing
sets available in the U.S. often ended with a note on this subject signed by
a Susan Williams (whom I think was a public relations director or such at
Lego Systems, but there has since been speculation whether there ever was
such a person or if it was just a name to make the note friendlier...but I
digress). The following is one such note from page 23 of the 1985 Brochure:
> Begin Quote<
Dear Parents and Children
LEGO® is a brand name that is very special to all of us in the LEGO Group
Companies. We would sincerely appreciate your help in keeping it special by
referring to our bricks as "LEGO Bricks or Toys" and not just "LEGOS". By
doing so, you will be helping to protect and preserve a brand name that
stands for quality the world over.
> End Quote>
First of all, if anyone is confused, what was then called the "LEGO Group
Companies" is now the world wide entity called The Lego Company, or here on
Lugnet just TLC. Lego Systems, Inc. (which I mentioned above) is the
company based in Enfield, Connecticut, U.S. that manufactures and
distributes most of the Lego in North America. Lego Systems is a part of
the greater Lego Company, but should not be confused with such.
But the question at hand is what is proper to use in written and oral
communication. Should it be lego, Lego, or LEGO? Should it have an ® ? If
discussing the plural, should it be legos, Legos, LEGOs, or LEGOS?
The first part is clear. TLC and its affiliates have legally registered the
trademark of their name and logos (that's logos, not legos). Here in the
U.S., and presumably in other countries who share trade treaties, a
trademark must always be shown with the TM (if it is unregistered with the
government) or with the ® symbol (if it is registered). Therefore, the ®
should follow the use of any Lego trademark to make clear that you as the
author are not claiming such as your own. Furthermore, in most situations,
TLC can legally require that you make clear who the true owner of the
trademarks is. (Thus, the disclaimers that appear on so many fan generated
websites.)
However, here on Lugnet, or in spoken word, it seems to me that it would get
rather cumbersome for us to add such disclaimers to each and every message
we ever shared. I think simply by finding ones way to the message boards
here, a reader most likely has already passed through virtual places were
such disclaimers have been publicly posted. Thus, most of us don't declare
who owns the trademark every time we post here. By this line of thinking,
it might seem reasonable to go further and omit the ® from such posts also.
I am unsure if that is legal, but clearly very few posts include the symbol.
Is posting in a forum such as this like the spoken word? When we speak, we
do not use the ®, for it is not in our vocabulary. Yet, perhaps that is why
we don't use the ® except for formal writing, since it does not easily
appear on the keyboard...
Back to the question, there is next the issue of which letters in the word
Lego should be CAPITOLIZED. The following is a link to a copy editor's
website I stumbled on several months ago. I believe this Bill Walsh guy
works for the Washington Post, or some such publication, so his experience
(perhaps authority?) should speak louder than mine.
http://www.theslot.com/webnames.html
I recommend reading his whole article, or even some of his others, but
here's a relevent bit for this topic:
> Begin Quote<
In the old days, battles on this front usually involved companies that
insisted on being identified in all caps. The uppercase treatment, after
all, makes something STAND OUT. But there weren't as many battles as there
are today, because copy editors and even writers knew that logos are logos
and English is English. "You want all caps?" an ink-stained wretch with a
green eyeshade might have asked. "Go buy an ad!"
> End Quote<
The point is that if Lego is a brand name (as indicated in Sue Williams
letter), that makes the *word* Lego a proper noun. Read any of a hundred
English manuals of style and they will tell you such a proper noun gets one
capitol letter, only one, and that one is the first. ALL CAPS are used for
acronyms where each letter stands for something (such as USA or NELUG) or if
you are yelling at someone by e-mail. Otherwise, avoid them unless you are
drawing a logo rather than writing.
(That last point of course is something TLC might not want me to share,
because it means writting Lego is more correct than writing LEGO. I hope me
posting that doesn't impact their review of my latest resume...)
Enough on that.
Back to the second part of the question: How is the plural written?
Well, if Lego is the brand, then is there a plural? Think about other
products. If you have more than one Lincoln Log, do you call them
"Lincolns"? If you have more than one Tinker Toy, do you call them
"Tinkers? Actually in those cases, the manufacturer is probably a different
name all together (I forget now). But lets say they are made by Mattel or
Hasbro, do you call numerous of their toys "Mattels" or "Hasbros"?
No you don't. But these examples can be countered: What about Budweiser.
That's a brand name. But if you order one at a bar, do you ask for a
"Budweiser Beer"? If you have a buddy with you do you order two "Budweiser
Beers or Drinks"? Nope. So why would you ever say the full phrase "Lego
Bricks or Toys"?
Okay Okay. Maybe I opened a can of worms here. Now that I've pointed out
some facts, and perhaps referred you to some related articles, let me share
how I use the terms...
In formal writing, my own website, etc., I include the ®. In the past I
inconsistanly wrote LEGO in all caps. Since reading that article (which did
convince me and my English Major background), I always use the one cap Lego.
In informal forums where most (if not all) readers are a part of this hobby
(i.e. Lugnet), I assume the ® is implied and usually just write Lego. More
often though, since even the word Lego is also assumed in this forum, I will
refer to themes, sub-themes, bricks, pieces, elements, or even the specific
elements at hand. Here, I don't need to write, "Lego 2X2 Plate." Because
you all know I'm talking about Lego, I just say, "2X2 Plate." The use of
more specific terms eliminates the use of the word Lego, and thus there is
no need to worry about how to write the plural either way.
In spoken language things get different. Since I was an impressionable
child back when Susan Williams was asking for help in preserving the brand
name, I did in fact pick up the habit of saying "I collect Lego Toys", or "I
built a castle out of Lego Bricks." Just the other day I called to request
a song on a local radio station and had to explain I was "having a beer and
playing with Lego Toys." Though, I didn't name the beer brand.
But, still, when discussing my collection in more detail but with non-Lego
fans, it is inevitable that they will use the term Legos. I do not take
offense to this and in fact occasionally slip and use the term myself when
in their company. I guess it is like picking up a slang word if you spend
time with those who use it. So, in speech, that is how I see the plural
"Legos." It is a slang term used more so by non-AFOLs.
Meanwhile, I will end where I began this (now lengthy) rambling: Remember
those notes from Susan Williams about preserving the brand name and all?
Why have they not appeared in the brochures and catalogues of the 1990's and
beyond? A whole generation of children have grown up with these toys having
never read or been influenced by those notes. If a brand or trademark is
something that the owner must work to protect (lest it lose value or
significance), then one might argue the decision to no longer advertise such
notes is a willing choice by TLC to not enforce the old rule of not calling
them "Legos"...
A few thoughts from...
-Hendo-Man
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.lego.direct, John P. Henderson writes:
(something I spotlighted)
This oughta be a FAQ! I would fix the Susan Williams multiple name versions
and emphasise that it's pretty clear she was a made up person (her
"signature" varies more than a real person's would) but other than that it's
good to go as is.
Great background! (but I am still going to use (tm) in my writing more than
other people do because I have my own brands to protect... grin)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.lego.direct, Huw Millington writes:
> > What is the differnece between lego, Lego, LEGO, legos, Legos, and LEGOS?
>
> Easy, it's always upper case and never has an s on the end.
>
> > When referring to the Lego Systems Inc company how to you spell it?
> > LEGO? Lego Systems, Inc.? Lego?
>
> The LEGO Group
>
> > When referring to a SINGLE plastic brick/plate/unit...
> > LEGO?, lego?
>
> LEGO
>
> > When referring to a BOX full of bricks/plates/units...
> > legos? LEGOS? Legos?
>
> LEGO
>
> I'm sure there's something on lego.com about the plural of LEGO but I can't
> find it right now.
There might be another one, but this is a page I know of that addresses this
and other legal issues:
http://www.lego.com/eng/info/printpage.asp?page=fairplay
Hope that helps,
Allan B*
* Who thinks the word 'LEGOs' sounds icky. It's like saying, "look at all
the lovely sheeps." Just doesn't work. :)
| | | | | | |
