Subject:
|
Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.mediawatch
|
Date:
|
Tue, 3 Feb 2004 04:41:47 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1732 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.mediawatch, Matthew Miller wrote:
> <http://slumbering.lungfish.com/>, top story today.
>
> Attention Lego fanatics: you are missing the point when you claim that
> the word "Lego" can't be pluralized into "Legos," but should instead be
> "Lego bricks." If your concern is trademark protection, then plurality
> doesn't enter into it. In other words, if you can't say "Hand me some
> Legos," you also can't say "Hand me that Lego."
>
> I know that the Lego trademark page says to never say "Legos." That
> doesn't mean that the plural of "Lego" is "Lego," it means that they
> don't want you to use the term generically. Get it straight.
>
> Also, for consistency's sake, you should also apply this rule to other
> companies. If you don't always say "Hand me that Kleenex tissue" and "I
> need a Band-Aid adhesive bandage," then you should keep quiet. If you do
> always say "Kleenex tissue" and "Band-Aid bandage," you should keep quiet
> for a different reason.
<sigh> I'm going to play with my legos.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
| (URL), top story today. Attention Lego fanatics: you are missing the point when you claim that the word "Lego" can't be pluralized into "Legos," but should instead be "Lego bricks." If your concern is trademark protection, then plurality doesn't (...) (20 years ago, 2-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
35 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- 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
|
|
|
|
