Subject:
|
Re: LEGO Company Welcomes Adult LEGO Enthusiasts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.lego.direct
|
Date:
|
Wed, 6 Dec 2000 19:47:57 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
9459 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.lego.direct, Richard Marchetti writes:
> In lugnet.lego.direct, Mark Sandlin writes:
> > It's all very interesting and exciting, but I'm not very interested in
> > losing rights to my designs. We shall see.
>
>
> I have said it before and I shall say it again (at least for myself) -- If I
> can get the elements from TLC, I don't care if they ever design or a sell a
> pre-packaged set again. When I thought that their agenda was preclusive of
> selling me just the much prized elements -- let's say a pitchfork, for
> example -- I wanted them to re-release older set designs that included these
> elements. If this new plan of theirs includes such older elements -- then I
> just don't care if they sell ANY sets at all. And I certainly don't care if
> they sell these juniorized piles of junk they have been selling of late!
>
> To be honest, I think they may be able to make more money this way -- often
> I have looked at a set in a store aisle and just thought, "Gee, this is okay
> and all -- but it just doesn't have enough of the elements I want." No sale
> -- not at BOGO 50%, not at BOGO, not at any price! When TLC moves from a
> position of not selling a thing at all, to one where they are at least
> selling the elements someone actually wanted, I have to assume there is
> money to be made.
And that is one thing that I want make sure is happening. I want TLC to be
able to make money. If they aren't making money, it will mean that they
will go under, to be bought out by someone else. I think that as much as
TLC policies sometimes don't jive with what we want, there are a lot worse
corporate managements out there. Especially with direction things seem to
be going with Lego Direct. I'd hate to loose this.
> To what degree can one own the rights to a thing built entirely from the
> patented and copyrighted elements of a particular toy company? When does a
> particular assemblage of elements take on a meaning owned more by its
> designer, and in opposition to the rights of the company that created the
> elements of that same assemblage?
I don't think that is an issue unless written into some type of end user
license agreement. And since they sell "building materials", I have a hard
time thinking they could make it stick in court even then.
Regards,
Steve Martin
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: LEGO Company Welcomes Adult LEGO Enthusiasts
|
| (...) Rights? I don't disagree with your fundamental assertions here, Mark -- but what exactly do you think happens when you post several detailed images of your stuff to the internet? Sure, maybe some people write to you and want either the (...) (23 years ago, 6-Dec-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
231 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
|
|
|
|
