To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.generalOpen lugnet.general in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 General / 45468
45467  |  45469
Subject: 
1 Question: assurances & limitations [Re: LEGOFan.net - central community... ]
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.general, lugnet.lego
Date: 
Fri, 13 Feb 2004 09:27:02 GMT
Viewed: 
3657 times
  
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
   In lugnet.general, Mark Papenfuss wrote:
   -snip newsgroup flooding-

I would be very surprised if Lego let you use “Lego” in the URL for the site. They are pretty tough on these things - and if they let you do it they will be opening one heck of a can of worms. Because IF they let you do it they will be “diluting the brand name” as is the popular term here on Lugnet.

Mark, you are certainly correct that we have a policy of not allowing unauthorized uses of “LEGO” in the domain name. It is very important that consumers are clear who has developed the site, and using “LEGO” in the domain tends to tell people that the site is supported by the LEGO Company. From our Fair Play policy:

The LEGO trademark should not be incorporated into an Internet address. Internet addresses have become useful tools for people to identify the source of a homepage. Using “LEGO” in the domain name would be creating the misleading impression that the LEGO Group sponsored the homepage.

However, in this case, we are indeed supporting this project. We still aren’t quite clear what exactly the support will be, or whether the LEGOFan team will actually accept our support. Assuming they do, one thing that have agreed to offer is that domain name usage.

Jake can you clarify this? I expect ‘support’ and use of the word “lego” in the url has been given subject to assurances or limitations with regard the content of the site. If possible, I’d be interested to know what those assurances or limitations are. For instance, will users see:

a) ‘controversial’ content (or links to it)? (The work of Brendan Powell Smith comes to mind.)

b) condemning reviews of new & upcoming lego product lines or sets?

Please forgive me if this has been covered elsewhere in this sprawling thread.

Scott A

Have you had a look at Arthurs Seat Yet?



  
You can see a similar exception with the LEGOWorld.nl domain. This was a site co-developed by the company and fans.

Hope this helps!

Jake

---
Jake McKee
Community Liaison
LEGO Community Development



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: 1 Question: assurances & limitations [Re: LEGOFan.net - central community... ]
 
(...) Actually not. What we _have_ discussed is to make it possible for parents to decide that some classes of content is unsuitable for their children, and for users of the site to decide some age limits for access to content/discussion groups they (...) (20 years ago, 15-Feb-04, to lugnet.org, lugnet.general, lugnet.lego)  

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: LEGOFan.net - central community run hub for all areas of the LEGO community.
 
(...) Mark, you are certainly correct that we have a policy of not allowing unauthorized uses of "LEGO" in the domain name. It is very important that consumers are clear who has developed the site, and using "LEGO" in the domain tends to tell people (...) (20 years ago, 11-Feb-04, to lugnet.general, lugnet.lego, FTX)  

208 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR