 | | | | | |
Now that we are seing more "custom" parts being made (for example the
Starwars weapons, the Castle accessories and the Train wheels), it raises
an important question...
are these "Lego"?
For example, if I use them, am I no-longer a purist?
Does using them constitute use of a "clone brand"?
What about LDRAW, what if someone wants to create a LDRAW part file for
these parts (the train driver in particular), will the LDRAW people accept
it? (I can forsee people using the train driver in MOCs then wanting to CAD
and render and make instructions of and etc the MOC)
And what about someone wanting to use the parts in a kit and then selling
the kit? Does the use of the part mean that its no longer LEGO?
And what about someone wanting to sell these parts on Bricklink or
whatever? (perhaps they have bought some wheels in one color and then
realized that they need a different color)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Jonathan Wilson wrote:
> Now that we are seing more "custom" parts being made (for example the
> Starwars weapons, the Castle accessories and the Train wheels), it raises
> an important question...
> are these "Lego"?
Hello Jonathan,
If I may be so bold as to attempt to answer some of your questions...
>
> For example, if I use them, am I no-longer a purist?
> Does using them constitute use of a "clone brand"?
Technically, the custom parts are not Lego so far as they are not made by The
Lego Group
A purist uses 100% Lego in their MOC's...with no exceptions
However, use of custom parts, in combination with standard Lego, should not
constitute use of a clone brand. Reason being that makers of these various parts
do not seek to usurp or replace the Lego brand as a building toy manufacturer
(unlike the hated megabloks, best-lock, etc.)
Builders of custom parts have the utmost repect for Lego, and are merely seeking
to fill a niche that TLG is unwilling or unable to
> What about LDRAW, what if someone wants to create a LDRAW part file for
> these parts (the train driver in particular), will the LDRAW people accept
> it? (I can forsee people using the train driver in MOCs then wanting to CAD
> and render and make instructions of and etc the MOC)
> And what about someone wanting to use the parts in a kit and then selling
> the kit? Does the use of the part mean that its no longer LEGO?
> And what about someone wanting to sell these parts on Bricklink or
> whatever? (perhaps they have bought some wheels in one color and then
> realized that they need a different color)
I had posted to BrickLink earlier to the effect that one should be able to sell
custom parts, if only to get TLG's attention and show them that yes, there is
indeed a market for parts such as these, and they be missing out on a potential
gold mine
-HRH
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Hello!
> Now that we are seing more "custom" parts being made (for example the
> Starwars weapons, the Castle accessories and the Train wheels), it raises
> an important question...
> are these "Lego"?
No, they are not. Anything that's not coming under the licence of TLC - not
produced by TLC, not packed by TLC (if made anywhere else like motors) and not
"monogrammed" with the LEGO logo - is not LEGO. Why should it be considered a
LEGO piece? If I carve a piece that fits in some way with LEGO it still is just
a piece that _I_ carved, not LEGO. Even if I mass-produce it and sell it for the
purpose of being used with LEGO.
> For example, if I use them, am I no-longer a purist?
You are not :-)
However, I see the point in these wheels. There simply ain't fitting wheels
produced by TLC. So if you want to build a working steam engine you need
something for those wheels. Big wheels can't be done easily by using any SNOT or
SNIR or whatever technique, so non-LEGO parts have there place here.
> Does using them constitute use of a "clone brand"?
Depends on the meaning of "brand". Those wheels ain't produced by MegaBloks or
any other possibly existing clone brand. Is BBB a "brand"?
In any case those wheels are not LEGO.
Bye
Jojo
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Jonathan Wilson wrote:
> Now that we are seing more "custom" parts being made (for example the
> Starwars weapons, the Castle accessories and the Train wheels), it raises
> an important question...
> are these "Lego"?
Quick answer, no.
> For example, if I use them, am I no-longer a purist?
By definition, you're not using 'pure ' parts. (this sounds like an argument
about origami - a purist uses one square of paper to make what he wants.
Anything else is 'unpure.' How do I know? I do origami, and I am pretty spoiled
on the square of paper!)
> Does using them constitute use of a "clone brand"?
Here's where it gets interesting. I wouldn't call the parts clone parts, more
like cousin parts, especially the train wheels.
Someone has already mentioned that the train wheels fit a need in the parts
library, and I agree with that line of thought. The Star Wars weapons and castle
weapons I tend to see as a compatible product that is an accessory, but not a
clone.
> What about LDRAW, what if someone wants to create a LDRAW part file for
> these parts (the train driver in particular), will the LDRAW people accept
> it? (I can forsee people using the train driver in MOCs then wanting to CAD
> and render and make instructions of and etc the MOC)
I wouldn't see why not.
> And what about someone wanting to use the parts in a kit and then selling
> the kit? Does the use of the part mean that its no longer LEGO?
Well,the selling of a custom kit isn't LEGO anyways, in my opinion. It's an
individual's interpretation of an item using LEGO, but it's not done with the
approval of LEGO.
> And what about someone wanting to sell these parts on Bricklink or
> whatever? (perhaps they have bought some wheels in one color and then
> realized that they need a different color)
Don't see a problem...there WILL be a demand for the parts, as it addresses a
part people want. like the weapons.
Joe Meno
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Jonathan Wilson wrote:
> Now that we are seing more "custom" parts being made (for example the
> Starwars weapons, the Castle accessories and the Train wheels), it raises
> an important question...
> What about LDRAW, what if someone wants to create a LDRAW part file for
> these parts (the train driver in particular), will the LDRAW people accept
> it? (I can forsee people using the train driver in MOCs then wanting to CAD
> and render and make instructions of and etc the MOC)
> And what about someone wanting to use the parts in a kit and then selling
> the kit?
I remember a thread about user defined model-folders in mlcad: IMHO there should
also be a folder for custom parts and not-yet-certified
parts(parts-I-currently-author). As long as they are clearly marked I can't see
a reason why we shouldn't use them. One thing is the official ldraw release,
another one unofficial/custom parts. I would love to see them collected
somewhere. It would also prevent from messing up my Parts- and P-folders.
w.
ps. hmm ... sounds like a matter for the LSC. BTW have they ever met, sat down,
posted anything. To make it simple: is the LSC alive?
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Hi all,
My two cents:
This has come up before in several forms. Here are two recent ones.
http://news.lugnet.com/cad/dev/?n=8120
http://news.lugnet.com/cad/?n=9358
When it comes to building, I'm a purist: not Lego = no way.
But when it comes to Ldraw, I do a 180 on that. I can understand why Ldraw.org
is currently 100% focused on Lego. Among other things, it seems like the
currently available resources are better put to use in a focused direction.
But I also think that completely ignoring (even unconsciously) other initiatives
based around Ldraw might be missing future opportunities and interesting
developments for all.
I am aware of the legal / technical issues involved. But let me point to the
bright pink elephant sitting in the middle of the room which goes by the name of
POVray. If you use an infinite plane for a floor in POVray, are you not using a
non-Lego part? How is that different from, say, creating a POVray city using
this app:
http://www.geocities.com/ccolefax
and adding your Ldraw MOC to it? Where does the difference between a simple
plane and bunch of more complex structures lie?
I bring this to the discussion precisely because I've been working lately on
scenes that bring together POVray code generated via L3P and via other
non-Lego-centric apps. And while I am a staunch defender of Ldraw as a great
entryway into 3D computer graphics arena (even if you are not a die-hard Lego
fan), it is also very clear to me that any user who wants to take the software
to the limits (even if the theme of the image or animation is kept strictly
within the Lego realm) must necessarily go beyond the world of Ldraw (i.e. use
POVray).
Thus, I would advise to at least keep an eye on (and ideally add some structure
to) these other initiatives. You never know when they might become handy.
Cheers
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Miguel Agullo wrote:
> I am aware of the legal / technical issues involved. But let me point to the
> bright pink elephant sitting in the middle of the room which goes by the name of
> POVray. If you use an infinite plane for a floor in POVray, are you not using a
> non-Lego part? How is that different from, say, creating a POVray city using
> this app:
>
> http://www.geocities.com/ccolefax
>
> and adding your Ldraw MOC to it? Where does the difference between a simple
> plane and bunch of more complex structures lie?
Although I am not a 100% lego purist, I see nothing wrong in using a
'background' in Povray. Real builders build their models on non-lego tables,
non-lego floors in non-lego houses and probably photograph them in non-lego
gardens. The same if you Povray your LDraw model with a digital non-lego
background.
Niels
| | | | | | |
