 | | Trademark defense doesn't work vs Mega Bloks —Erik Olson
|
| | | Saw this scroll by on Bloomberg: Mega Bloks Confirms Cancellation of Lego Shape Mark by European Union Trademark Office (URL) (20 years ago, 4-Aug-04, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Trademark defense doesn't work vs Mega Bloks —Matthew Jeffery
|
| | | | | (...) Well, that's fair enough. The LEGO trademark on the standard brick must have expired years ago, it's only the fact that the community automatically associates said brick design with LEGO that prevented Megabloks taking it for themselves ages (...) (20 years ago, 4-Aug-04, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Trademark defense doesn't work vs Mega Bloks —Juergen Stuber
|
| | | | | | | Hi Matt, (...) don't confuse trademarks (which don't expire), patents (which do 20 years after filing), and copyright (which expire 70 years ofter the death of the creator). Here LEGO had a patent on the shape of the blocks, which expired long ago, (...) (20 years ago, 4-Aug-04, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Trademark defense doesn't work vs Mega Bloks —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | (...) Impartial? Well, sort of, but not in the way that you seem to think. It's called PRNewswire. PR, as in Press Release or Press Relations. This appears to be a website where various corporations can upload their press releases for various news (...) (20 years ago, 4-Aug-04, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Trademark defense doesn't work vs Mega Bloks —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Goodness. I can think of close to a dozen brands that use some variation of the tubes-and-studs clutch system, so recognition could definitely be a problem! (URL) This item> has been mentioned previously on LUGNET, but it seems relevant to (...) (20 years ago, 4-Aug-04, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Trademark defense doesn't work vs Mega Bloks —David Eaton
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Uh-- did they really 'allow' it to expire? I was under the impression that the patent lasted 20 years, then 'tough noogies'. 1958 was the patent year for the stud-and-tube system, so 1978 would fit the bill... I was interested to see some of (...) (20 years ago, 4-Aug-04, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Trademark defense doesn't work vs Mega Bloks —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) Hmm. My mistake. I thought you could renew patents, but I guess not. (...) Those are pretty neat! Dave! (20 years ago, 4-Aug-04, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Trademark defense doesn't work vs Mega Bloks —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) That's only because Mickey Mouse can't be patented. If he could, you'd be able to renew patents by now. Disney would have seen to it. (...) Since TLC only owned the patent on the fully tubed variety, and none of those clones seems to use a (...) (20 years ago, 4-Aug-04, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Trademark defense doesn't work vs Mega Bloks —David Eaton
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) I dunno about "a few" decades since there was only about an 11 year overlap before the warehouse fire :) Truth is there were lots of similar products on the market going back to the early 1930's (about 15-20 years before Automatic Binding (...) (20 years ago, 5-Aug-04, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Trademark defense doesn't work vs Mega Bloks —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Whoops, you're right. I was thinking back to the beginning of the company, but the ABBs weren't introduced until '49, and introduction of the stud-and-tube design in '58 was when they really took off. The warehouse fire in '60 wasn't really (...) (20 years ago, 5-Aug-04, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Trademark defense doesn't work vs Mega Bloks —Eric Brok
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Actually, the original 'tubes patent' explicitly included substituted shapes for the tubes, such as crosses. TLG patents even what they will *not* produce, and in this case quite understandably. Eric Brok (20 years ago, 6-Aug-04, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Trademark defense doesn't work vs Mega Bloks —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Well, TLC certainly seems to agree, which is why they've been fighting tooth-and-nail to make everyone else stop making clone bricks. (...) Patents expire, whether you want them to or not. The idea is that you can patent something that you (...) (20 years ago, 4-Aug-04, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Trademark defense doesn't work vs Mega Bloks —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | (...) This won't likely happen. Previous lawsuits have ruled that MEGABLOKS has erred in marketing its product in a way that can confuse the buyer into thinking that MEGABLOKS are affiliated with or endorsed by LEGO. Therefore, for close to a (...) (20 years ago, 4-Aug-04, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Trademark defense doesn't work vs Mega Bloks —Kelly McKiernan
|
| | | | | | | (...) PR Newswire is a service that distributes raw press releases from myriad companies, for a fee. The release (above) is straight from MB, hence it's not intended to be a fair and balanced news article... rather, it's that company's own raw (...) (20 years ago, 5-Aug-04, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Trademark defense doesn't work vs Mega Bloks —James Stacey
|
| | | | | | "Dave Schuler" <orrex@excite.com> wrote in message news:I1xvnx.1pEM@lugnet.com... (...) As a (...) see (...) I got one of the smaller 'Dragons' sets just to see what it was like, how the figs looked and (shh tell noone - if any of the parts would be (...) (20 years ago, 6-Aug-04, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Trademark defense doesn't work vs Mega Bloks —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | (...) As much as I love the trollish Vorgans and some of the Dragons pieces (particularly the rough-hewn bricks), I really don't care for the painting on a good many of the elements, and the over-juniorization leaves me cold. Aside from being a (...) (20 years ago, 6-Aug-04, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Trademark defense doesn't work vs Mega Bloks —John Fiala
|
| | | | | | (...) Actually, I bought the various little metal boxes of figs for use in D&D. I ended up with a number of little hill pieces, as well as the juniorized wall segments. I've taken these and used them to make a little tower on one of the bases, which (...) (20 years ago, 6-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Trademark defense doesn't work vs Mega Bloks —Rocco J. Carello
|
| | | | (...) planning to appeal the case, for it seems like it will be a waste of money. I think TLC would be able to better compete with MegaBloks on price if they didn't spend so much money trying to compete in the courtroom. It seems like better prices (...) (20 years ago, 6-Aug-04, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| | | | |
