| |
ATTN Mr B.Justus
TLG,Billund,Denamrk
Lego(R) UK Ltd, Wrexham.
Lego Futra.
Dear Sirs,
(Apologies to any female persons reading this letter)
Please note that some of these ideas may be devloped further.
So regard these a work in progress.
If I do have any further thoughts I will post further details on this NG.
(NB Note to LUGNET Readers. If any of you wish to do any design work on this
ideas please feel free- but bear in mind where the idea came from. - I would
hate to have someone plagarise!
On a simmilar note if anyone working on one these ideas let me know ASAP!)
Product Suggestions.
--------------------
1. Aquatics for Mindstorms-
A nice individual in Hamleys told me that TLG had a patent for minature
aquatics. I would love to see this in a model.
2. Town.
Please introduce a beachfront range, but do not rerun Paradisa.
I did not like the colors!
Please also bear in mind that I do not want Juniorization!
(I am sure other lego fans agree with me.)
3. Technic Bucket
A black breifcase/bucket with over 300? technic elements.
Contaning a selection of elements from technic range.
or
4 Re-Introduce the expert builder packs ethier as supplementaries
or through the new Lego Direct (Hopefully in UK as well!)
5 For Legomedia.
The Advanced Technic designers handbook: Includes
- Model Ideas
- Technical descriptions on how mechanisms work.-(models?)
- An Element catalouge for refernce purposes(copuld serve as catalouge for
LegoDirect -Technic)
(NB I had in mind soemthing simmilar to that at Technica-)
(Of course It would have to be released, such that your IPR was not open to
abuse)
6 A simmilar book to the above for Mindstorms?
7 Offshore
I Can think of at least 3 Models for Town/City that could be offshore
- Oil Rig
- Lighthouse
- Exploration Platfrom
8 Lego - Phantoma (Concept suggestion)
Something that has been lacking from the Lego range for a while is a decent
Haunted House.
("Decent"- could be applied in many contexts here.)
Obviosuly it would need to keep within 'family' boundaries.
My justification for this is that many children tell ghost stories
By allowing them to build haunted houses you merley allowing to them to
extend their ideas.(Look at the success of GooseBumps.)-
However I feel that there needs to be a return to more tradiational
mysterious nature on shost stories-
I do not however want little children to be scared by anything.
(Concept Work in the area of Haunted houses has already been done by a few
AFOL's, Most of these however has been concentrated on minifigs.)
I also see a CD-Tie in.(The 7th Geust when it was released was very popular
for adults but in palces a little to graphic for children).
A childrens version of this would be avery nice idea indeed!
9 Trains (Concept Suggestion)
I would like it if those of us with 4.5V/12V trains could be supported.
Perhaps by releasing Track-Packs?-
Additonaly it might be worthwhile considering releasing a 9V set of
conductor rails, and rail motors.
so that we can use the old sets/track with the new 9v electrical system.
I am also hoping that the old chasis will be made available as I managed to
break one of mine :(
Personally I can see Lego Trains as a major competitor to graden railway
systems such as LGB. Therefore I propose the following.
- Individual vehicels for the 9V system would be a good idea.
- Fix the gemotry on the points to allow for the double tracked layouts
- 2nd radius curves?
- More Model stations.( Platform Baseplates?)
- Signals?
- A link to a special Mindstorms/Loco program to control the trains?
- Isolating Track
- Point Motor!-(This is LONG overdue!)
10 Computers (Concept Suggestion)
I feel personally that the level of complication in many computer programs
is apppaling!
I feel that an interface to a computer system- relying on a lego like look
and feel would be marketable to a large numer of people.
NO doubt your computing friends at MIT could help you with this?
Provisonal Concept Name: (KiDeE)
An Operating system based on a Plug and Play architecture designed for
children.
It would need the usual apps
- Wordprocessor.
- Painter- With Lego Bricks perhaps?
- Internet- Simple Internet facilites, Minifig ID's for mail?
- Photos for login rather than User Name?
For example the backdrop could be a lego baseplate to which you place
files.-
Minfigs could be used in the help system.
I am sugesting this to Lego as there is a desperate need to encourage kids
to be creative.- And not led into the Bang-Bang your dead world that sadly
exists in many computer games.
Also with such on OS developed, you would have a platform for devloping
further applications.(Like the Phantoma concept sugessted Earlier
11- Optrix-Concept suggestion.
From some web searching I note that one of your sister comapanise ISBEN make
optical elements.
Perhaps an experimental (Lego Science?) set of simple optical elements
Could be rleased within lego blocks.- You already have the fiber optics and
lighting bricks!)
Much work on these ideas has been done (albiet unofficaly) by many
who post to LUGNET.
If any of these ideas are useful to you I can be reached
via e-mail : ba124@city.ac.uk
via mail : Dept of Computing
Northampton Sq
London
EC1V 0HB
UNITED KINGDOM
I cannot unfortunatly give out my home address or telephone number on
internet at present.
Alex Farlie,
BEng Computing (Part III) Student
Dept of Computing
City University
LONDON
UNITED KINGDOM
|
|
| |
In lugnet.dear-lego, Farlie A wrote:
> 5 For Legomedia.
> The Advanced Technic designers handbook: Includes • ...
> - Technical descriptions on how mechanisms work.-(models?)
Hmm. A software package which shows how mechanisms work, based on LEGO Technic.
An electronic version of the DACTA Simple Machines sets! Oooo. Way cool idea.
:)
Steve
|
|
| |
On Tue, 18 Jan 2000 19:13:34 GMT, "Farlie A" <ba124@city.ac.uk> wrote:
> ATTN Mr B.Justus
> TLG,Billund,Denamrk
> Lego(R) UK Ltd, Wrexham.
> Lego Futra.
This will most likely get you nowhere, unless, of course, you're
trying to get a job. You'll find many discussions concerning the fact
that Lego seems to completely refuse to even look at or consider
outside designs.
'Course, nothing here really qualifies as a design, but still.
> Please note that some of these ideas may be devloped further.
> So regard these a work in progress.
>
> If I do have any further thoughts I will post further details on this NG.
>
> (NB Note to LUGNET Readers. If any of you wish to do any design work on this
> ideas please feel free- but bear in mind where the idea came from. - I would
> hate to have someone plagarise!
Plagiarize? Not sure how they could, since the majority of the ideas
you mentioned have been proposed/wished for/discussed before, some ad
nauseam.
I've wished aloud many times for a Roman or Greek theme. Not sure I
would accuse someone of "plagiarism" if they actually had the gumption
and creativity to come up with such a line.
--
The parts you want and nothing else?
http://jaba.dtrh.com/ - Just Another Brick Auction
Why pay eBay? Run your own LEGO auctions for free!
http://www.guarded-inn.com/bricks/
|
|
| |
Mike Stanley wrote:
>
> On Tue, 18 Jan 2000 19:13:34 GMT, "Farlie A" <ba124@city.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> > ATTN Mr B.Justus
> > TLG,Billund,Denamrk
> > Lego(R) UK Ltd, Wrexham.
> > Lego Futra.
>
>
> This will most likely get you nowhere, unless, of course, you're
> trying to get a job. You'll find many discussions concerning the fact
> that Lego seems to completely refuse to even look at or consider
> outside designs.
Be that as it may, Mr Justus did make his presence known here a few
weeks back, and let us know that he was reading this group. You can't
fault a guy just because he wants to be a little more formal than most.
> 'Course, nothing here really qualifies as a design, but still.
>
> > Please note that some of these ideas may be devloped further.
> > So regard these a work in progress.
> >
> > If I do have any further thoughts I will post further details on this NG.
> >
> > (NB Note to LUGNET Readers. If any of you wish to do any design work on this
> > ideas please feel free- but bear in mind where the idea came from. - I would
> > hate to have someone plagarise!
>
> Plagiarize? Not sure how they could, since the majority of the ideas
> you mentioned have been proposed/wished for/discussed before, some ad
> nauseam.
Well, by posting his ideas here where who knows how many people can read
them, there's actually very little chance that he, personally, could get
any credit for the concepts, even if they *DID* originate from him. Any
information that is publically distributed before being protected by
copyright or trademark law becomes public domain by default, afaik. If
the gentleman was that concerned about plagiarism, it would have been
more logical to have initiated a private correspondance with the
individual, instead of posting his comments here. The fact that he did
not, yet still expressed a concern about plagiarism indicates a
misunderstanding on his part of this newsgroup's charter as well as
copyright, trademark, and patent law, and the idea behind "prior art".
> > Mark
(You know, I've actually been wondering what's happened to Mr Justus...
He hasn't posted anything here for quite a while now...)
|
|
 |
Subject:
|
Re: Farlie A
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.dear-lego
|
Date:
|
Fri, 21 Jan 2000 03:06:42 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
cjc@newsguy.com#antispam#
|
Viewed:
|
1151 times
|
| |
|
|
On Thu, 20 Jan 2000 19:35:32 GMT, Mark Tarrabain <markt@lynx.bc.ca>
wrote:
> > This will most likely get you nowhere, unless, of course, you're
> > trying to get a job. You'll find many discussions concerning the fact
> > that Lego seems to completely refuse to even look at or consider
> > outside designs.
>
> Be that as it may, Mr Justus did make his presence known here a few
> weeks back, and let us know that he was reading this group. You can't
> fault a guy just because he wants to be a little more formal than most.
Didn't want what I wrote to be taken as "faulting" him - especially
for the formality. Pointing out the _futility_ perhaps, but I got no
problem with formality. I thought it was kinda nice.
> Well, by posting his ideas here where who knows how many people can read
> them, there's actually very little chance that he, personally, could get
> any credit for the concepts, even if they *DID* originate from him. Any
> information that is publically distributed before being protected by
> copyright or trademark law becomes public domain by default, afaik. If
I believe you're incorrect. IANAL (and I don't care to spend any time
looking it up) but, at least in the US (and I noticed the person who
posted this isn't) anything you create is automatically copyrighted
when you set it into its final form. Like this post, sorda. Or a
poem I posted a few years back in RTL. I seem to remember some change
a few/several years ago in the law ... just decided to change my mind
and look this up quickly. Took me about 10 seconds using AskJeeves.
From http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/bytopic/intprop/circ1.html
Who Can Claim Copyright
Copyright protection subsists from the time the work is created in
fixed form that is, it is an incident of the process of authorship.
The copyright in the work of authorship IMMEDIATELY becomes the
property of the author who created it.
How to Secure a Copyright
Copyright Secured Automatically Upon Creation
The way in which copyright protection is secured under the present law
is frequently misunderstood. No publication or registration or other
action in the Copyright Office is required to secure copyright (see
following NOTE). There are, however, certain definite advantages to
registration. (See page 7.)
Copyright is secured AUTOMATICALLY when the work is created, and a
work is "created" when it is fixed in a copy or phonorecord for the
first time. "Copies" are material objects from which a work can be
read or visually perceived either directly or with the aid of a
machine or device, such as books, manuscripts, sheet music, film,
videotape, or microfilm. "Phonorecords" are material objects embodying
fixations of sounds (excluding, by statutory definition, motion
picture soundtracks), such as audio tapes and phonograph disks. Thus,
for example, a song (the "work") can be fixed in sheet music
("copies") or in phonograph disks ("phonorecords"), or both.
If a work is prepared over a period of time, the part of the work that
is fixed on a particular date constitutes the created work as of that
date
****
There, no more blabbing on my part. Remember, IANAL, and I know
almost jack about copyright law, I just know enough to know some of
the time when someone says something that is wrong. And I know even
less about trademark law, other than the two are vastly different.
> (You know, I've actually been wondering what's happened to Mr Justus...
> He hasn't posted anything here for quite a while now...)
Me too, but I know I've been abnormally busy lately. No reason to
assume Mr. Justus has been twiddling his thumbs. I'm sure he has many
important things to deal with. I won't care if he ever posts here
again if Lego Direct ends up offering bulk piece ordering. Not
anything against him, but I need TLG to fulfill my needs as a
consumer, not be my pal. I have great guys like Todd and Larry to be
my pals. (I'm sure Brad is a great guy too.)
--
The parts you want and nothing else?
http://jaba.dtrh.com/ - Just Another Brick Auction
Why pay eBay? Run your own LEGO auctions for free!
http://www.guarded-inn.com/bricks/
|
|
| |
In lugnet.dear-lego, Mike Stanley writes:
> On Thu, 20 Jan 2000 19:35:32 GMT, Mark Tarrabain <markt@lynx.bc.ca>
> wrote:
>
> > > This will most likely get you nowhere, unless, of course, you're
> > > trying to get a job. You'll find many discussions concerning the fact
> > > that Lego seems to completely refuse to even look at or consider
> > > outside designs.
> >
> > Be that as it may, Mr Justus did make his presence known here a few
> > weeks back, and let us know that he was reading this group. You can't
> > fault a guy just because he wants to be a little more formal than most.
>
> Didn't want what I wrote to be taken as "faulting" him - especially
> for the formality. Pointing out the _futility_ perhaps, but I got no
> problem with formality. I thought it was kinda nice.
A note from the authour of the post..
The formality was essentialy a header note to anyone from lego who reades
this post.
FYI- Leters that are formal usally take longer to write and are somtimes
clearer than 'falme' postings written in a hurry.) The particular posting up
thier took a lot longer than my usual news psotings becuase I wanted to try
and be clear on what I meant.)
> > Well, by posting his ideas here where who knows how many people can read
> > them, there's actually very little chance that he, personally, could get
> > any credit for the concepts, even if they *DID* originate from him. Any
> > information that is publically distributed before being protected by
> > copyright or trademark law becomes public domain by default, afaik. If
>
> I believe you're incorrect. IANAL (and I don't care to spend any time
> looking it up) but, at least in the US (and I noticed the person who
> posted this isn't) anything you create is automatically copyrighted
> when you set it into its final form. Like this post, sorda. Or a
> poem I posted a few years back in RTL. I seem to remember some change
> a few/several years ago in the law ... just decided to change my mind
> and look this up quickly. Took me about 10 seconds using AskJeeves.
<SNIPPED LEGAL>
The note about plagrisim was not intended to be harmful to any discusiions
in the group or to genuine AFOL's. I am willing to shae ideas. It was there
because I didn't wan't to be ripped off!
What I was afraid off was a clone-brand ripping off the idea. I did'nt wan't
to upset the genuine AFOL's reading LUGNET.
I apologise if I have.
Given the above, I thefore make the following statment:
Ideas and postings on LUGNET ny me may be freely used for non-commerical
purposes by readers of LUGNET (in the development of design concepts and new
ways of building with LEGO(R)) & for accademic purposes with appropriate
citation.
They may also be used by The LEGO Group.
If a member of thier design tema wishs to contatct me I can be reached by
email at ba124@city.ac.uk or through the Dept of Computing, City University,
London, UK.
They may not be used for the development of clone brands in rival to
Lego(R) bricks.
(What this is essentially a protection against rivals ripping off LEGO(R).
This unfortunatly happened in one computer software market and the
copnsequences were not pleasent. It does not prevent genuine AFOL's from
using the ideas suggested for thier own purposes. I would however like to be
acknowlged as a source, as is common pracrtice amongst academics.
This is also WHY I Asked if anoyone else was working on them. This was so
that I could incoprate their thinking (with credit ) into my own. I don't
wan't to ripoff other peoples good ideas,)
If anyone speaks legal perhaps they could clarify the situation.
(I am in the UK)
> > (You know, I've actually been wondering what's happened to Mr Justus...
> > He hasn't posted anything here for quite a while now...)
>
> Me too, but I know I've been abnormally busy lately. No reason to
> assume Mr. Justus has been twiddling his thumbs. I'm sure he has many
> important things to deal with. I won't care if he ever posts here
> again if Lego Direct ends up offering bulk piece ordering. Not
> anything against him, but I need TLG to fulfill my needs as a
> consumer, not be my pal. I have great guys like Todd and Larry to be
> my pals. (I'm sure Brad is a great guy too.)
"The company thats your friend , make the most out of you!"
-Marketing rule.
That said- Where is Brad? I needed clarification about the use of minfigs
and LEGO(R) bricks in non TLG artwork. (I'd drawn some in relation to the
concept and was inteding to put them out for review, but won't until the
situation is clearer.) Also I'll have to hold back on relasing the page I
had planned to outline the ideas in the original posting on.
I found the Fair Play policy unclear on this point.
I DO NOT want to unwittingly infringe on TLG's IPR.
Alex
(Given the earlier thing ..)
The Information in this posting is (C) 2000 Alex Farlie
It may be used for academic & Non commerical purposes with appropriate
citation if used in a published work.
It may not be used for commerical purposes without prior approval
I can be reached at ba124@city.ac.uk or
through the Dept of Computing ,City University,London,UK.
PS. Sorry If this sound too hard on you.
|
|
| |
Farlie A wrote:
> Ideas and postings on LUGNET ny me may be freely used for non-commerical
> purposes by readers of LUGNET (in the development of design concepts and new
> ways of building with LEGO(R)) & for accademic purposes with appropriate
> citation.
>
> They may also be used by The LEGO Group.
> If a member of thier design tema wishs to contatct me I can be reached by
> email at ba124@city.ac.uk or through the Dept of Computing, City University,
> London, UK.
>
> They may not be used for the development of clone brands in rival to
> Lego(R) bricks.
Well... this is ideal, of course... but is it actually enforceable?
Even if the information has already been copyrighted, copyright does not
protect against independant discovery. Since the information presented
on lugnet is practically impossible to trace as to who did or did not
ever happen to see it, if an idea is mentioned here, and then a clone
manufacturer happens to do it, who can say for sure that they got the
idea from here in the first place? Nobody. Patents do a good job of
protecting a person against independant reinvention, but you cannot
patent an idea.
> > Mark
|
|
| |
On Fri, 21 Jan 2000 15:03:19 GMT, Mark Tarrabain <markt@lynx.bc.ca>
wrote:
> Farlie A wrote:
>
> > Ideas and postings on LUGNET ny me may be freely used for non-commerical
> > purposes by readers of LUGNET (in the development of design concepts and new
> > ways of building with LEGO(R)) & for accademic purposes with appropriate
> > citation.
> >
> > They may also be used by The LEGO Group.
> > If a member of thier design tema wishs to contatct me I can be reached by
> > email at ba124@city.ac.uk or through the Dept of Computing, City University,
> > London, UK.
> >
> > They may not be used for the development of clone brands in rival to
> > Lego(R) bricks.
>
> Well... this is ideal, of course... but is it actually enforceable?
No.
There's no way to prove that Joe Blow, who at some point in the future
comes up with say a custom model of a large "beachfront" house, got
the idea to produce it from this thread, and specifically from the
author in question.
But even if he did _see_ the post and it's many COOL IDEAS (don't want
to suggest that they aren't, because many of them are) so many of them
have been suggested BEFORE by _other people_, that to say "you can
only use the ideas in this post for non-commercial purposes" is kinda
silly. If Joe Blow came up with a cool beachfront house or a really
cool Roman Villa and wanted to produce copies of it for sale to others
there's really nothing that anyone who had simply thrown out the idea
"hey, this would be cool" would be able to do to collect on that or
stop it, even if they went to the trouble (albeit misguided) to
specify the ideas were only meant for such and such purposes, etc.
This whole issue probably is slanted more towards patent and copyright
stuff than I care for, especially since IANAL, but my basic point was
that very few, if any, of the ideas put forth in that message were
"original" (as in, hadn't ever been posted before by anyone else) that
claiming some sort of control over them is pointless.
Now if the author actually produced a beachfront cabana or something,
drew up instructions for it, something, and posted that, sure, those
would be copyrighted works worthy of protection. But suggesting
something like, "hey, a Wild West train would be a good idea - but
only TLG can produce it commercially not clone brands and members of
LUGNET can only produce it non-commercially" is, sorry to say,
foolish.
And yeah, I'm very familiar with citing other sources, etc, especially
in the academic world. I spent far too many years working on my
degree in the academic world to miss that, and I continue to work
_for_ the academic world. But posting something here isn't quite the
same as giving a paper at a conference of my academic peers. :)
--
The parts you want and nothing else?
http://jaba.dtrh.com/ - Just Another Brick Auction
Why pay eBay? Run your own LEGO auctions for free!
http://www.guarded-inn.com/bricks/
|
|
| |
Regarding my earlier messages.
Sorry!
I was wrong in a number of respects :- (
<SNIP>
> The note about plagrisim was not intended to be harmful to any discusiions
> in the group or to genuine AFOL's. I am willing to shae ideas. It was there
> because I didn't wan't to be ripped off!
In Additon LUGNET Terms of use (quoted in context here) clearly state:
'
7. By posting messages, uploading files, inputting data, or engaging
in any other form of communication through this service, you are
granting LUGNET and its owners a perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-
free, unrestricted, non-exclusive, worldwide license to:
i. Use, copy, publish, sublicense, adapt, transmit, archive,
restore, publicly perform, or display any such communication
in any medium, and to
ii. Sublicense to third parties the unrestricted right to
exercise any or all of the foregoing rights granted with
respect to the communication. '
...
DISSCUSION GROUPS TERMS OF USE
...
6. Post or transmit any information, software, or other material
which violates or infringes upon the rights of others, including
material which is an invasion of privacy or publicity rights or
which is protected by copyright, trademark, or other proprietary
right, or derivative works with respect thereto, without first
obtaining permission from the owner or right holder.
....'
Hence my asking if anyone else was working on it and my query reagrding
minfigs in non TLG artwork.
>
> What I was afraid off was a clone-brand ripping off the idea. I did'nt wan't
> to upset the genuine AFOL's reading LUGNET.
> They may also be used by The LEGO Group.
> If a member of thier design tema wishs to contatct me I can be reached by
> email at ba124@city.ac.uk or through the Dept of Computing, City University,
> London, UK.
This still stands.
> They may not be used for the development of clone brands in rival to
> Lego(R) bricks.
This was because I don't wan't to see a quality 'erosion'
> (What this is essentially a protection against rivals ripping off LEGO(R).
> This unfortunatly happened in one computer software market and the
> copnsequences were not pleasent. It does not prevent genuine AFOL's from
> using the ideas suggested for thier own purposes. I would however like to be
> acknowlged as a source, as is common pracrtice amongst academics.
> This is also WHY I Asked if anoyone else was working on them. This was so
> that I could incoprate their thinking (with credit ) into my own. I don't
> wan't to ripoff other peoples ideas,)
>
> If anyone speaks legal perhaps they could clarify the situation.
> (I am in the UK)
See Also LUGNET Terms of Use.
This is perhaps an important issue- Can you clarify Todd?
( I am quite certain I'm wrong on a number of points!)
>
> That said- Where is Brad? I needed clarification about the use of minfigs
> and LEGO(R) bricks in non TLG artwork. (I'd drawn some in relation to the
> concept and was inteding to put them out for review, but won't until the
> situation is clearer.) Also I'll have to hold back on relasing the page I
> had planned to outline the ideas in the original posting on.
>
> I found the Fair Play policy unclear on this point.
>
> I DO NOT want to unwittingly infringe on TLG's IPR.
Nor on other peoples Ideas.
I'll re-read the charter and terms of use before another post!
Alex
The Information in this posting is (C) 2000 Alex Farlie
(Is this OK Todd?)
It may be used for academic & Non commerical purposes with appropriate
citation if used in a published work.
(This is common practice in academia, and it gives people additonal sources?)
It may not be used for commerical purposes without prior approval
I can be reached at ba124@city.ac.uk or
through the Dept of Computing ,City University,London,UK.
(Again Is this Ok? If not then I'll remove it- and not post for a while.)
Alex
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Stanley writes:
Sorry If I offended you!
I was wrong (Hangs head in shame).
<SNIP>
> There's no way to prove that Joe Blow, who at some point in the future
> comes up with say a custom model of a large "beachfront" house, got
> the idea to produce it from this thread, and specifically from the
> author in question.
Accepted.
>
> But even if he did _see_ the post and it's many COOL IDEAS (don't want
> to suggest that they aren't, because many of them are) so many of them
> have been suggested BEFORE by _other people_, that to say "you can
> only use the ideas in this post for non-commercial purposes" is kinda
> silly. If Joe Blow came up with a cool beachfront house or a really
> cool Roman Villa and wanted to produce copies of it for sale to others
> there's really nothing that anyone who had simply thrown out the idea
> "hey, this would be cool" would be able to do to collect on that or
> stop it, even if they went to the trouble (albeit misguided) to
> specify the ideas were only meant for such and such purposes, etc.
Accepted. But some fan websites do state that thier are not for commerical use.
> This whole issue probably is slanted more towards patent and copyright
> stuff than I care for, especially since IANAL, but my basic point was
> that very few, if any, of the ideas put forth in that message were
> "original" (as in, hadn't ever been posted before by anyone else) that
> claiming some sort of control over them is pointless.
Accepted. - I had intened to set up a website for unoffical concepts and
themes. That'll have to wait until the air clears.
> Now if the author actually produced a beachfront cabana or something,
> drew up instructions for it, something, and posted that, sure, those
> would be copyrighted works worthy of protection. But suggesting
> something like, "hey, a Wild West train would be a good idea - but
> only TLG can produce it commercially not clone brands and members of
> LUGNET can only produce it non-commercially" is, sorry to say,
> foolish.
Why I stated non-commerical use was because I didn't wont some mad legal
idiot in the states breathing down my neck. The clone-brands issue had
serious consequences.
What I was actually working on was some concept drawings. IANAL ethier so I
might be wrong but I think these can be copyright, as for LUGNET Postings I
re-read the Terms of Use, Items posted here HAVE to be freely distributable.
I accept you point whole-heartdly!
It therfore be fair to say that entire section, is invalid
> And yeah, I'm very familiar with citing other sources, etc, especially
> in the academic world. I spent far too many years working on my
> degree in the academic world to miss that, and I continue to work
> _for_ the academic world. But posting something here isn't quite the
> same as giving a paper at a conference of my academic peers. :)
Accepted, but at least it give some other fans somewhere else to look?
Again I apolgise , ( I went too far!)
Alex
|
|
| |
In response to my earlier posting.
5 For Legomedia.
The Advanced Technic designers handbook: Includes
- Model Ideas
- Technical descriptions on how mechanisms work.-(models?)
> - An Element catalouge for refernce purposes(could serve as catalouge for
> LegoDirect -Technic)
> (NB I had in mind soemthing simmilar to that at Technica-)
> (Of course It would have to be released, such that your IPR was not open to
> abuse)
>
> 6 A simmilar book to the above for Mindstorms?
>
> 7 Offshore
> I Can think of at least 3 Models for Town/City that could be offshore
> - Oil Rig
> - Lighthouse
> - Exploration Platfrom
Link it with Octan that already has a tanker and forecourt perhaps?
> 11- Optrix-Concept suggestion.
> From some web searching I note that one of your sister comapanise ISBEN > makeoptical elements.
> Perhaps an experimental (Lego Science?) set of simple optical elements
> Could be rleased within lego blocks.- You already have the fiber optics > and lighting bricks!)
I belive this one is original, If not PLEASE let me know before I put my
foot in it again !
>
> Much work on these ideas has been done (albiet unofficaly) by many
> who post to LUGNET.
Alex Farlie,
BEng Computing (Part III) Student
Dept of Computing
City University
LONDON
UNITED KINGDOM
|
|
| |
In lugnet.dear-lego, Alex Farlie writes:
> [...]
> The Information in this posting is (C) 2000 Alex Farlie
> ( Is this OK Todd?)
If you're asking whether or not it's OK to include a copyright notice in the
articles you post...yes, that's OK (assuming you've created an original work,
of course. :) That is, it's not against the discussion group T&C to include
a copyright notice. Further, the LUGNET Terms of Use[1] don't provide for a
transfer per se of your copyrights on the articles you post, they only
provide for an unrestricted _license_ to republish/etc. your articles. You
still retain the original copyright, which allows you to republish copies as
you see fit, but does not allow you to restrict LUGNET's use of the articles
you post, once you've posted it. For example, your articles could
theoretically be included on a CD-ROM archive, even if you later decided you
didn't want that, because you have already given consent (the consent is
irrevokable). Or, for example, if you've uploaded DAT files, those DAT files
could theoretically be converted to GIF images and included on a CD-ROM,
because that falls under adapting your posts. DAT files posted to
lugnet.cad.dat.models.sets can (and in many cases will) even be sublicensed
to ldraw.org for use there.
Hope that answered the question...?
> It may be used for academic & Non commerical purposes with appropriate
> citation if used in a published work.
> (This is common practice in academia, and it gives people additonal
> sources?)
> It may not be used for commerical purposes without prior approval
> I can be reached at ba124@city.ac.uk or
> through the Dept of Computing ,City University,London,UK.
>
> (Again Is this Ok? If not then I'll remove it- and not post for a while.)
AFAIK, it's OK inasmuch as you're limiting how other readers can directly
use your information, subject to local applicable laws, which may or may
not apply. In other words, it's not against the LUGNET Terms of Use to
include such statements, but such statements may or may not hold water.
--Todd
[1] http://www.lugnet.com/admin/terms/
|
|
| |
On Fri, 21 Jan 2000 15:59:19 GMT, "Farlie A" <ba124@city.ac.uk> wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Stanley writes:
>
> Sorry If I offended you!
You didn't. Takes a LOT to offend me. :)
> I was wrong (Hangs head in shame).
No need for shame either.
> Accepted. But some fan websites do state that thier are not for commerical use.
Right, and if they've truly come up with something original - like the
pics of his awesome Castle Ed Boxer shows on his site, that makes
sense.
> What I was actually working on was some concept drawings. IANAL ethier so I
> might be wrong but I think these can be copyright, as for LUGNET Postings I
> re-read the Terms of Use, Items posted here HAVE to be freely distributable.
> I accept you point whole-heartdly!
Yup, any original work you produce is certainly copyrighted when you
set it in its final form.
> Again I apolgise , ( I went too far!)
No apology necessary, really. We're just discussing things.
--
The parts you want and nothing else?
http://jaba.dtrh.com/ - Just Another Brick Auction
Why pay eBay? Run your own LEGO auctions for free!
http://www.guarded-inn.com/bricks/
|
|
| |
Mike Stanley wrote:
> Now if the author actually produced a beachfront cabana or something,
> drew up instructions for it, something, and posted that, sure, those
> would be copyrighted works worthy of protection. But suggesting
> something like, "hey, a Wild West train would be a good idea - but
> only TLG can produce it commercially not clone brands and members of
> LUGNET can only produce it non-commercially" is, sorry to say,
> foolish.
That was my point... but even if he *HAD* been the original person to
suggest those things (at least one of his ideas struck me as being one I
had never seen mentioned before), it wouldn't have made any difference,
would it?
> > Mark
|
|
| |
On Fri, 21 Jan 2000 18:10:14 GMT, Mark Tarrabain <markt@lynx.bc.ca>
wrote:
> Mike Stanley wrote:
> > Now if the author actually produced a beachfront cabana or something,
> > drew up instructions for it, something, and posted that, sure, those
> > would be copyrighted works worthy of protection. But suggesting
> > something like, "hey, a Wild West train would be a good idea - but
> > only TLG can produce it commercially not clone brands and members of
> > LUGNET can only produce it non-commercially" is, sorry to say,
> > foolish.
>
> That was my point... but even if he *HAD* been the original person to
> suggest those things (at least one of his ideas struck me as being one I
> had never seen mentioned before), it wouldn't have made any difference,
> would it?
Probably not, no.
--
The parts you want and nothing else?
http://jaba.dtrh.com/ - Just Another Brick Auction
Why pay eBay? Run your own LEGO auctions for free!
http://www.guarded-inn.com/bricks/
|
|
| |
Mark Tarrabain wrote:
> Patents do a good job of
> protecting a person against independant reinvention, but you cannot
> patent an idea.
My understanding is that you can't copyright an idea either: copyright
protects an *expression*, ie a poem, a computer program, a piece of
music. Writing a program to print a calendar means you have copyright in
the program, but not the idea of printing calendars.
Going back to Alex's original post:
> 3. Technic Bucket
> A black breifcase/bucket with over 300? technic elements.
> Contaning a selection of elements from technic range.
Sounds like 8062, "Universal set with storage case", 403 pcs with a
yellow and black case.
> Personally I can see Lego Trains as a major competitor to graden >railway systems such as LGB. Therefore I propose the following.
> - Individual vehicels for the 9V system would be a good idea.
This is hardly a new idea since Lego has done it many times in the past
even though there are no separate single vehicles currently available.
> - Fix the gemotry on the points to allow for the double tracked layouts
I'm sure this has already been mentioned many times in .Trains
> - 2nd radius curves?
Ditto
> - More Model stations.( Platform Baseplates?)
Platform baseplates? Like the current 16x16 raised platforms, or
something different?
> - Signals?
Would be great... but again lego has produced these in the past so it's
not a new idea.
> - A link to a special Mindstorms/Loco program to control the trains?
Discussed repeatedly on LUGNET and some people are either doing it or
working on it.
> - Isolating Track
> - Point Motor!-(This is LONG overdue!)
Both very useful ideas, but already mooted many times (and again there
are several designs floating around or being worked on for motorising or
pneumatically controllling points).
Alex, not that I don't think your ideas are good, they are, but if you
want to claim them as original then you need to do more reasearch on
what has already been suggested and discussed.
If you're writing a formal letter, you might also consider using a spell
checker :-)
Kevin
--
Email: kwilson_tccs@compuserve.com
Web page:
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/kwilson_tccs/default.html
eBay Page: http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/kevinw1/
|
|
| |
It seems I went too far in claiming certian things!
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Kevin Wilson writes:
> My understanding is that you can't copyright an idea either: copyright
> protects an *expression*, ie a poem, a computer program, a piece of
> music. Writing a program to print a calendar means you have copyright in
> the program, but not the idea of printing calendars.
Agreed.
>
> Going back to Alex's original post:
>
> > 3. Technic Bucket
> > A black breifcase/bucket with over 300? technic elements.
> > Contaning a selection of elements from technic range.
>
> Sounds like 8062, "Universal set with storage case", 403 pcs with a
> yellow and black case.
>
> > Personally I can see Lego Trains as a major competitor to graden >railway • systems such as LGB. Therefore I propose the following.
> > - Individual vehicels for the 9V system would be a good idea.
>
> This is hardly a new idea since Lego has done it many times in the past
> even though there are no separate single vehicles currently available.
Accepted.
>
> > - Fix the gemotry on the points to allow for the double tracked layouts
>
> I'm sure this has already been mentioned many times in .Trains
>
> > - 2nd radius curves?
>
> Ditto
Again Accepted as not new.
>
> > - More Model stations.( Platform Baseplates?)
>
> Platform baseplates? Like the current 16x16 raised platforms, or
> something different?
>
> > - Signals?
>
> Would be great... but again lego has produced these in the past so it's
> not a new idea.
Again Accepted as not new.
>
> > - A link to a special Mindstorms/Loco program to control the trains?
>
> Discussed repeatedly on LUGNET and some people are either doing it or
> working on it.
>
> > - Isolating Track
> > - Point Motor!-(This is LONG overdue!)
>
> Both very useful ideas, but already mooted many times (and again there
> are several designs floating around or being worked on for motorising or
> pneumatically controllling points).
But not an offical Lego(R) one as yet?
>
> Alex, not that I don't think your ideas are good, they are, but if you
> want to claim them as original then you need to do more reasearch on
> what has already been suggested and discussed.
Yes this is accepted whole heratdly, and I therefore again ask if anyone has
done work on theses ideas to get in touch ASAP!
What I was attempting to do ( and this may be wrong) was to devlope the
haunted house idea further based on the general ideas mooted. I'm sorry if
this created such a disturbance.
> If you're writing a formal letter, you might also consider using a spell
> checker :-)
Thanks for the tip- It's just that I use the web interface and a spell checker
isn't avaialable. - apart from the poor one in my head that is.
Alex
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mark Tarrabain writes:
> Mike Stanley wrote:
> > Now if the author actually produced a beachfront cabana or something,
> > drew up instructions for it, something, and posted that, sure, those
> > would be copyrighted works worthy of protection. But suggesting
> > something like, "hey, a Wild West train would be a good idea - but
> > only TLG can produce it commercially not clone brands and members of
> > LUGNET can only produce it non-commercially" is, sorry to say,
> > foolish.
>
> That was my point... but even if he *HAD* been the original person to
> suggest those things (at least one of his ideas struck me as being one I
> had never seen mentioned before),
Which Idea?
I'd like to know so that I can develop that one and not one that will create
more disturbances.
It seems ubnlikley that TLG will listen to me as in thier eyes I've
propbably 'stolen' someone else idea. It's a shame I always put my foot in it.
As for the haunted house concept. I had some design drawings based on some
ideas mooted on LUGNET. I am not relasing these yet because I am unsure of
what the postion on non TLG concept designs is at present.
Alex
|
|
| |
ATTN Mr B.Justus
TLG,Billund,Denamrk
Lego(R) UK Ltd, Wrexham.
Lego Futra.
LUGNET Readers.
Dear Sirs,
(With apologies to any Female Readers.)
In a followup to my existing post( which has caused contetion over
what ideas WERE original.)
NB Note to Lugnet Readers. Let me know if ANY of these ideas are under
devlopment.
A proportion of the ideas in my orignal posting are based on suggestions on
LUGNET and by AFOL's in general and the credit is given for those should be
given to the AFOL community as a whole, I made an unfortunate mistake in
caliming some of them :( .
However I do feel that there are some ideas in the original post that are novel
and would welcome the oppurtunity to disscus these further.
The ideas in this letter should therfore be considered as under disscusion.
I can be reached via e-mail : ba124@city.ac.uk
or through the Dept of Computing at City University,
Norhtampton Sq
London, UK
The Ideas:
> 1. Aquatics for Mindstorms-
> A nice individual in Hamleys told me that TLG had a patent for minature
> aquatics. I would love to see this in a model.
> 2. Town.
>
> Please introduce a beachfront range, but do not rerun Paradisa.
> I did'nt not like the colors!- However the BasePlate could be reused.
> Please also bear in mind that I do not want Juniorization!
> (I am sure other lego fans agree with me.)
> 3. Technic Bucket
> A black breifcase/bucket with over 300? technic elements.
> Contaning a selection of elements from technic range.
This appears to be already available?
> or
> 4 Re-Introduce the expert builder packs ethier as supplementaries
> or through the new Lego Direct (Hopefully in UK as well!)
Defeintly. Also I am hearing concerns that the Recent Technic sets don't use
Lego(R) System(TM) Plates or beams anymore. I don't know anything futher on
this but would hate to see this happen.
> 5 For Legomedia.
> The Advanced Technic designers handbook: Includes
> - Model Ideas
> - Technical descriptions on how mechanisms work.-(models?)
> - An Element catalouge for refernce purposes(copuld serve as catalouge • for LegoDirect -Technic)
> (NB I had in mind soemthing simmilar to that at Technica-) • Technica is a fan based website and VERY well designed.
> (Of course It would have to be released, such that your IPR was not • open to
> abuse)
> 6 A simmilar book to the above for Mindstorms?
I am aware that one book is currently on sale and that others are in
preperation?
> 7 Offshore
> I Can think of at least 3 Models for Town/City that could be offshore
> - Oil Rig
> - Lighthouse
> - Exploration Platfrom
Perhaps this could be themed for Ocatn?
> 8 Lego - Phantoma (Concept suggestion)
> Something that has been lacking from the Lego range for a while is a • decent Haunted House.
> ("Decent"- could be applied in many contexts here.)
> Obviosuly it would need to keep within 'family' boundaries.
> My justification for this is that many children tell ghost stories
Look at the success of GooseBumps.
> By allowing them to build haunted houses you merley allowing to them to
> extend their ideas.
> However I feel that there needs to be a return to more tradiational
> mysterious nature in ghost stories-
> I do not however want little children to be scared by anything.
> (Concept Work in the area of Haunted houses has already been done by a
> few AFOL's, Most of these however has been concentrated on minifigs.)
Notably Cragio Legos Transy-lego-vania and others.
(It would appear that this sugestion caused a lot of concern over originality
claims.). I do have some idea drawings that I did but will not relase these
until the air clears a little.
> I also see a CD-Tie in.(The 7th Geust when it was released was very • popular for adults but in palces a little to graphic for children).
> A childrens version of this would be avery nice idea indeed!)
This concept suggestion stands. However they are potential problems in the 7th
Guest angle.
Further to this. The 'Haunted House' I had in mind was closer to Charles Addams
and New England Architecural styles than European Statley Homes, I also belive
that this is also the association many people make when describing a gneric
'Haunted House',(I could be wrong though, and would welcome disscusion on this
matter in a more appropraite forum.).
Additonally on this I decided early on that the Ghosts should not be evil.
Spooky and mysterious but not scary or frightning to younger children.
> 9 Trains (Concept Suggestion)
(The ideas here seemed to have caused the most contention...)
> I would like it if those of us with 4.5V/12V trains could be supported.
> Perhaps by releasing Track-Packs?-
> Additonaly it might be worthwhile considering releasing a 9V set of
> conductor rails, and rail motors.
> so that we can use the old sets/track with the new 9v electrical
> system.
> I am also hoping that the old chasis will be made available as I
> managed to break one of mine :(
>
> Personally I can see Lego Trains as a major competitor to graden
> railway systems such as LGB. Therefore I propose the following.
I stand by this viewpoint.
> - Individual vehicels for the 9V system would be a good idea. • This is one idea I mistakenly claimed as original.
> - Fix the gemotry on the points to allow for the double tracked layouts
> - 2nd radius curves?
Both suggested before by others.
> - More Model stations.( Platform Baseplates?)
> - Signals?
Again this has probably been suggested before. My idea in this was to use the
lighting bricks to have color aspects and then link it to a more specialised
verison of the RCX brick. An adapted version of Loco could then be used to
control trains on the layout as well.
Incidentally, A virtual Lego Railroad on the Internet might be another
side-line that would come of this?
> - A link to a special Mindstorms/Loco program to control the trains?
> - Isolating Track
> - Point Motor!-(This is LONG overdue!)
Not new ideas. Suggested at regular intervals in lugnet.trains.
> 10 Computers (Concept Suggestion)
> I feel personally that the level of complication in many computer
> programs is apppaling!
This includes supposed KID's Programs.
> I feel that an interface to a computer system- relying on a lego like
look and feel would be marketable to a large numer of people.
Amend to parents and educators.
> NO doubt your computing friends at MIT could help you with this?
> Provisonal Concept Name: (KiDeE)
> An Operating system based on a Plug and Play architecture designed for
> children.
> It would need the usual apps
> - Wordprocessor.
> - Painter- With Lego Bricks perhaps?
> - Internet- Simple Internet facilites, Minifig ID's for mail?
> - Photos for login rather than User Name?
These last two have already been used in research systems. ( For symbolic based
communications systems)
> I am sugesting this to Lego as there is a desperate need to encourage
kids to be creative and not led into the Bang-Bang your dead world
that sadly exists in many computer games.
(NB Grammer ammended in above)
Also I feel annoyed that some kid's programs have dumbed down. Compare a
current edutainbment package on the PC to older education programs on a
platform such as venerable Beeb (BBC Microcomputer) which were despite the
limitations often better designed and taught more.
> Also with such on OS developed, you would have a platform for devloping
> further applications.(Like the Phantoma concept sugessted Earlier
Rather than a full blown OS- Perhaps an API for devleopment based on top of an
existing platform?
(I wouldn't recomend using Windows(TM) though. I would rather see something
based on KDE (hence the name),Be('A media os..') or the single click MacOS)
> 11- Optrix-Concept suggestion.
> From some web searching I note that one of your sister comapanise ISBEN
> make optical elements.
> Perhaps an experimental (Lego Science?) set of simple optical elements
> Could be rleased within lego blocks.- You already have the fiber optics
> and lighting bricks!)
As stated a proportion of these ideas are already being looked into by others
and I apologise to them if I mistakenly claimed something I shouldn't. (I also
ask again if anoyne is working on them let me know. Partly so that I can
incoprate your opnions, also so I don't rip you off!)
As stated I would welcome further discussion and suggestions on the
issues/concepts raised. Preferably on LUGNET, but I can be reached
via e-mail : ba124@city.ac.uk
via mail (Until June) : Mr A. Farlie
BEng Computing Part(III) Student
Dept of Computing
Northampton Sq
London
EC1V 0HB
UNITED KINGDOM
Alex Farlie,
BEng Computing (Part III) Student
Dept of Computing, City University
22nd January 2000
This posting is (C)2000 Alex Farlie
May be used freely for academic and non commerical puposes with appropriate
citation. It may not be used for commerical purposes without prior approval by
myself.
LUGNET and it's owners a granted a perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-
free, unrestricted, non-exclusive, worldwide license to use of the material
compliant with LUGNET's Terms of Use.
(I read your post Todd and belive the above is fairly clear.)
|
|
| |
Please read the orignal postings as well!
In followup
In lugnet.dear-lego, Alex Farlie writes:
> > 8 Lego - Phantoma (Concept suggestion)
> > A Haunted House for Lego.
Something is happening inside TLG.....
I went to Hamleys on Saturday and spoke to thier Lego rep and floated the
haunted house idea. He said that he would able to pass on any drawings/Ideas I
had to the relevant people inside Lego (It's apparently a case of WHO to send
them to). I explained about the standrad in-house letters and he explained
that this was an IPR protection on concepts that are already under
development. He seemed to know what he was on about and was quite willing to
talk to me! He advised me to a send myself a copy of any drawings I made
though? ( Not sure why though?-Is this to do with (C)?) which make thing this
is not one under current development!
It would seem TLG is listening to the fans! I am quite willing to consider
disscusion with TLG over Phantoma but I would love to hear the community views
first. ( A lot of development work is neeeded but has been started by me.)
This is because I don't want to step on anyones toes and It would save time if
someone was already working on it. This said however I would like top be
deeply involved in the development of any concept and would want to protect my
efforts in this area.
If you wish to contact the rep yourself his name is Mike and can be found in
the Lego(R) area on the Second Floor.
I would welcome further discussion and suggestions on the
issues/concepts in my original posting . Preferably on LUGNET, but I can be
reached
via e-mail : ba124@city.ac.uk
via mail (Until June) : Mr A. Farlie
BEng Computing Part(III) Student
Dept of Computing
Northampton Sq
London
EC1V 0HB
UNITED KINGDOM
Alex Farlie,
BEng Computing (Part III) Student
Dept of Computing, City University
24th January 2000
This posting is (C)2000 Alex Farlie
May be used freely for academic and non commerical puposes with appropriate
citation. It may not be used for commerical purposes without prior approval by
myself.
LUGNET and it's owners are granted a perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-
free, unrestricted, non-exclusive, worldwide license to use of the material
compliant with LUGNET's Terms of Use.
|
|
|
