 | | | | | |
Hi all,
I mentioned to the group last week that I would see if I could come up
with some logo ideas for the VLC. Well, I've been working on it a
bit, and have posted one of the ones I like best so far. Check it out
on brickshelf, at:
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=1131
The logo is fairly simple, 2 dimensions, basic colours only, and
compresses nicely. For tighter spots on the web site, or wherever, we
could use just the lego brick by itself, with the "VLC" on the top of
the stud. It can easily be rendered in any colour we need.
I tried to capture something of the character of the city in the word
Vancouver (snow capped mountains under a blue sky). I kind of
"borrowed" the style from the logo of a local tourist outfit.
Somehow, it really appealed to me.
I have lots of other ideas where this one came from, and will develop
them further if necessary. I do like this one, however.
Okay. Feedback? Ideas? Suggestions? Don't quit the day job? Let
me have it.
Robin
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.ca.vlc, Robin Sather writes:
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=1131
>
> I tried to capture something of the character of the city in the word
> Vancouver (snow capped mountains under a blue sky). I kind of
> "borrowed" the style from the logo of a local tourist outfit.
> Somehow, it really appealed to me.
Hmm, where did everybody else go? Probably down to Seattle...
Anyway, I like it! The logo definitely captures the character of our city
with the snow/mountains/sky. It's much brighter than incorporating rain into
the logo, hehe...
Bryan
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Ooops...
I love the logo. I think it's fantastic. Now hopefully this will update to
the news server. I've been having some trouble lately.
Any other comments on the proposed logo? I love it.
Xan
Robin Sather <robinsather@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:399deab5.1203991@lugnet.com...
> Hi all,
>
> I mentioned to the group last week that I would see if I could come up
> with some logo ideas for the VLC. Well, I've been working on it a
> bit, and have posted one of the ones I like best so far. Check it out
> on brickshelf, at:
>
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=1131
>
> The logo is fairly simple, 2 dimensions, basic colours only, and
> compresses nicely. For tighter spots on the web site, or wherever, we
> could use just the lego brick by itself, with the "VLC" on the top of
> the stud. It can easily be rendered in any colour we need.
>
> I tried to capture something of the character of the city in the word
> Vancouver (snow capped mountains under a blue sky). I kind of
> "borrowed" the style from the logo of a local tourist outfit.
> Somehow, it really appealed to me.
>
> I have lots of other ideas where this one came from, and will develop
> them further if necessary. I do like this one, however.
>
> Okay. Feedback? Ideas? Suggestions? Don't quit the day job? Let
> me have it.
>
> Robin
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
I thought I'd throw another logo idea up for perusal. Well actually a
couple of variations on the same theme. Again, we could use the
"woodcut" lego brick alone, without the words, anywhere we wanted to
have a more compact "logo".
Robin
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> I thought I'd throw another logo idea up for perusal. Well actually a
> couple of variations on the same theme. Again, we could use the
> "woodcut" lego brick alone, without the words, anywhere we wanted to
> have a more compact "logo".
Same URL to take a look, by the way ...
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=1131
I was going for something a little more "classy", or upscale. Why, I
don't know. Is that what we represent? Who knows? Nobody knows. I
just liked the look of it. I don't know which of the two styles I
like best, but I think I like the "black" woodcut better than the
"white" one.
Maybe they will look different tomorrow. I'm exhausted. Goin' to
bed.
Sweet dreams all,
Robin
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Robin Sather wrote:
> with some logo ideas for the VLC. Well, I've been working on it a
> bit, and have posted one of the ones I like best so far. Check it out
> on brickshelf, at:
I like the logo idea with the mountains the word Vancouver a lot. The
only reservation I have is that TLC asked for the "LDRAW" on the studs
of the Ldraw logo brick to be removed, so that VLC on teh studs may not
be what we want. I can't remember the details, but it was in the
negotiations before LDraw took part in teh Kidvention.
Kevin
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Personal Lego Web page:
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/kwilson_tccs/lego.html
Open Air Market: Limited edition kit
http://kevc.bricksmiths.com/cat-mrkt.htm
Craftsman Kits & Custom Lego models: http://kevc.bricksmiths.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
I also prefer the mountain one as well.
The others are very creative and artistic, but I think the first one truly
defines the region in which we live.
Xandria
Kevin Wilson <kwilson_tccs@compuserve.com> wrote in message
news:39A009C0.52B60EEE@compuserve.com...
> Robin Sather wrote:
> > with some logo ideas for the VLC. Well, I've been working on it a
> > bit, and have posted one of the ones I like best so far. Check it out
> > on brickshelf, at:
>
> I like the logo idea with the mountains the word Vancouver a lot. The
> only reservation I have is that TLC asked for the "LDRAW" on the studs
> of the Ldraw logo brick to be removed, so that VLC on teh studs may not
> be what we want. I can't remember the details, but it was in the
> negotiations before LDraw took part in teh Kidvention.
>
> Kevin
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Personal Lego Web page:
> http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/kwilson_tccs/lego.html
> Open Air Market: Limited edition kit
> http://kevc.bricksmiths.com/cat-mrkt.htm
> Craftsman Kits & Custom Lego models: http://kevc.bricksmiths.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> I also prefer the mountain one as well.
>
> The others are very creative and artistic, but I think the first one truly
> defines the region in which we live.
After sleeping on it, I tend to agree with you. The mountain logo
captures Vancouver, and is also more "fun" than the other. Maybe I'll
revamp the other, and use it on my own lego page, whenever I get that
finished ... (or started ;-)
Robin
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Course, now I'm getting sleepy again, and forgetting things ...
I meant to re-solicit any suggestions for changes, improvements, etc.
What should be done about the "stud" question? Do you think TLC would
choke on it considering that it's a fan club? Meaning that it's not a
"product" or "service" that stands to make money, or represent TLC is
some way. Of course, LDraw is free, but you get my meaning.
Should it somehow be presented to them? Through Brad Justus, perhaps?
Or perhaps just a change to the design in some way. We could put
"VLC" on the sides of the brick perhaps.
Robin
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Robin Sather wrote:
> Course, now I'm getting sleepy again, and forgetting things ...
>
> I meant to re-solicit any suggestions for changes, improvements, etc.
>
> What should be done about the "stud" question? Do you think TLC would
> choke on it considering that it's a fan club? Meaning that it's not a
> "product" or "service" that stands to make money, or represent TLC is
> some way. Of course, LDraw is free, but you get my meaning.
>
> Should it somehow be presented to them? Through Brad Justus, perhaps?
> Or perhaps just a change to the design in some way. We could put
> "VLC" on the sides of the brick perhaps.
>
> Robin
I would recommend leaving it as it is. IF Lego gets 'pissy' we just say
it's a Mega-BLok... <GRIN>
Seriously though maybe sending the 'proof of concept' to Lego would be
good. Brad isn't the guy, he's the bulk one. Maybe that Susan From
Consumer Affairs could send us in the right direction.
As a second VLC on the side of the brick would be good too IMHO.
Dean
--
Coin-Op's For Sale!: http://www.akasa.bc.ca/tfm/coin-op.html
Dean's Lego Workshop: http://www.akasa.bc.ca/tfm/lego_wr.html
Vancouver Lego Club: http://www.akasa.bc.ca/vlc
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
And a custom colour brick... I mean, I would love to have one with a purple
brick and others may want other colours. How difficult is it to offer
different coloured bricks in the logo? I agree with Dean... I can find out
who to talk to... as much I like to deny it, getting information is my
forte.
Xan
Dean Husby <nntp@akasa.bc.ca> wrote in message
news:39A16F59.E1A328D5@akasa.bc.ca...
> Robin Sather wrote:
>
> > Course, now I'm getting sleepy again, and forgetting things ...
> >
> > I meant to re-solicit any suggestions for changes, improvements, etc.
> >
> > What should be done about the "stud" question? Do you think TLC would
> > choke on it considering that it's a fan club? Meaning that it's not a
> > "product" or "service" that stands to make money, or represent TLC is
> > some way. Of course, LDraw is free, but you get my meaning.
> >
> > Should it somehow be presented to them? Through Brad Justus, perhaps?
> > Or perhaps just a change to the design in some way. We could put
> > "VLC" on the sides of the brick perhaps.
> >
> > Robin
>
> I would recommend leaving it as it is. IF Lego gets 'pissy' we just say
> it's a Mega-BLok... <GRIN>
>
> Seriously though maybe sending the 'proof of concept' to Lego would be
> good. Brad isn't the guy, he's the bulk one. Maybe that Susan From
> Consumer Affairs could send us in the right direction.
>
>
> As a second VLC on the side of the brick would be good too IMHO.
>
> Dean
> --
> Coin-Op's For Sale!: http://www.akasa.bc.ca/tfm/coin-op.html
> Dean's Lego Workshop: http://www.akasa.bc.ca/tfm/lego_wr.html
> Vancouver Lego Club: http://www.akasa.bc.ca/vlc
>
>
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> And a custom colour brick... I mean, I would love to have one with a purple
> brick and others may want other colours. How difficult is it to offer
> different coloured bricks in the logo?
Extraordinarily easy. Different colours, shadings (lit from above,
below, etc.), textures (marble, wood, etc.). No problem.
This was essentially my thought. For example, the brick itself in
different colours (or whatever) could be hyperlinking buttons, etc.
> I agree with Dean... I can find out
> who to talk to... as much I like to deny it, getting information is my
> forte.
I suspect the very act of us approaching them for permission will
grant us that permission. Has anyone read the recent post from Brad
Justus (Lego Direct) regarding the pulling of the 2001 info from
Lugnet. In his explanation of the incident, he also stresses that TLC
is beginning to "get it", meaning essentially that the corporation is
wising up to the fact that AFOL's in general, and Lugnet specifically,
represent substantial buying power and a networking force that can be
used in public, either for good, or for bad (in TLC's eyes). It looks
as though they will increasingly be more supportive of AFOL's, clubs,
fan-sites, fan-zines, etc. Events like the PNLTC attempt reinforce
this belief. Think about how much "free" publicicity TLC received
from the event. Tons. All done completely independently of TLC
itself. They have to take notice of that.
Robin
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
I've contacted TLC's legal department. I'll repartee with him to get this
all worked out. I'll let you know as I know.
Xan
Robin Sather <robinsather@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:39a1bc9d.24048105@lugnet.com...
>
> > And a custom colour brick... I mean, I would love to have one with a • purple
> > brick and others may want other colours. How difficult is it to offer
> > different coloured bricks in the logo?
>
> Extraordinarily easy. Different colours, shadings (lit from above,
> below, etc.), textures (marble, wood, etc.). No problem.
>
> This was essentially my thought. For example, the brick itself in
> different colours (or whatever) could be hyperlinking buttons, etc.
>
> > I agree with Dean... I can find out
> > who to talk to... as much I like to deny it, getting information is my
> > forte.
>
> I suspect the very act of us approaching them for permission will
> grant us that permission. Has anyone read the recent post from Brad
> Justus (Lego Direct) regarding the pulling of the 2001 info from
> Lugnet. In his explanation of the incident, he also stresses that TLC
> is beginning to "get it", meaning essentially that the corporation is
> wising up to the fact that AFOL's in general, and Lugnet specifically,
> represent substantial buying power and a networking force that can be
> used in public, either for good, or for bad (in TLC's eyes). It looks
> as though they will increasingly be more supportive of AFOL's, clubs,
> fan-sites, fan-zines, etc. Events like the PNLTC attempt reinforce
> this belief. Think about how much "free" publicicity TLC received
> from the event. Tons. All done completely independently of TLC
> itself. They have to take notice of that.
>
> Robin
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Dear Alexandria -
Thank you for forwarding the URL location of your proposed logo to me.
I apologize that it has taken me so long to get back to you.
I have reviewed the logo and have several comments.
1. We discourage the use of images of something that looks very similar to
our bricks in any logos. Especially when it is given so much prominence in
the logo. With the lettering on the knob, your brick looks at first glance
exactly like one of our bricks. (Note - LUGNET does not have any writing on
their knobs and the image of the connecting bricks is much smaller.) Your
brick makes your logo look like it is an official logo of the LEGO Group.
If you really want to use a brick-like image, it would need to be a lot
smaller, less like a LEGO brick, with no lettering on the top of the knob
and you would need to include a disclaimer (see below).
2. As it stands now, we have a registered trademark in the photographed
image of our 1x1 and the dotted outline of our 1x1. If you really want to
use a brick-like image, you will need to include a disclaimer right under
the logo (maybe off to the side) which states: "LEGO(R) and the brick
configuration are trademarks of the LEGO Group. The LEGO Group does not
sponsor or endorse this Club." Because you would not be using an actual
image of a LEGO brick, but a representation of one, you would NOT need to
add our standard disclaimer language which states: "The LEGO elements are
used here with permission."
3. "LEGO Club" should be written as "LEGO(R) Club" with the Circle R
registration mark following the word LEGO because the word LEGO is a
trademark. Since you would like to use LEGO as a word mark, I would also
recommend using the disclaimer I mentioned above.
I addressed many of these same issues with Tim Courtney from LDraw when he
was designing the logo for the posters he used at Kidvention in July. He
agreed to remove LDraw from the knobs and use smaller images/representations
of bricks that looked less like LEGO bricks.
Please let me know what you plan to do and if you have any questions.
I really appreciate you checking with us before you proceeded to use the
logo.
Play well!
Corporate Counsel
LEGO Systems, Inc.
555 Taylor Road
P.O. Box 1600
Enfield, CT 06083-1600
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Comments are inlined (please excuse any disparaging remarks ...)
> 1. We discourage the use of images of something that looks very similar to
> our bricks in any logos. Especially when it is given so much prominence in
> the logo. With the lettering on the knob, your brick looks at first glance
> exactly like one of our bricks.
That kinda was the idea ...
> (Note - LUGNET does not have any writing on
> their knobs and the image of the connecting bricks is much smaller.) Your
> brick makes your logo look like it is an official logo of the LEGO Group.
Why thank you ;-)
> If you really want to use a brick-like image, it would need to be a lot
> smaller, less like a LEGO brick, with no lettering on the top of the knob
> and you would need to include a disclaimer (see below).
I'll come up with some alternatives. Suggestions?
> 2. As it stands now, we have a registered trademark in the photographed
> image of our 1x1 and the dotted outline of our 1x1. If you really want to
> use a brick-like image, you will need to include a disclaimer right under
> the logo (maybe off to the side) which states: "LEGO(R) and the brick
> configuration are trademarks of the LEGO Group. The LEGO Group does not
> sponsor or endorse this Club."
Not likely. We'll just change the logo.
> 3. "LEGO Club" should be written as "LEGO(R) Club" with the Circle R
> registration mark following the word LEGO because the word LEGO is a
> trademark. Since you would like to use LEGO as a word mark, I would also
> recommend using the disclaimer I mentioned above.
I'll put the "(R)" in there (much smaller, of course), but are we
actually required to have the disclaimer "right under the logo" each
time we use the word "Lego". I think that's a little crazy. I would
think that having the disclaimer prominently displayed on the home
page of the website would be sufficient, no?
> I addressed many of these same issues with Tim Courtney from LDraw when he
> was designing the logo for the posters he used at Kidvention in July. He
> agreed to remove LDraw from the knobs and use smaller images/representations
> of bricks that looked less like LEGO bricks.
The Ldraw logo has a stylized red 2 x 3 brick that is quite obviously
a Lego brick (minus the writing on the studs), and is the primary
image in the logo. I don't quite understand the above statement.
Granted, in very fine print, Tim has put appropriate disclaimers below
the logo itself. Doesn't look as good in my opinion.
There are numerous examples of obvious brick shapes in logos. Look at
Lugnet's "Cool Lego Site of the Week", for instance. Look at many of
the other lego clubs on the web. Many of the web ring logos are
actual original TLC models, etc. Too many examples to list.
> Please let me know what you plan to do and if you have any questions.
> I really appreciate you checking with us before you proceeded to use the
> logo.
At least we get that much credit :-)
Here's another idea. To avoid the requirement of a disclaimer for the
logo itself, we could use a more abstract shape for the brick, yet
still have it identifiable.
Furthermore, and this is just a thought, we could change the name of
the club to something that doesn't include the word "Lego". Some
ideas; "Vancouver Builders Club", "Vancouver Brick Builders", the
"B.C.B.C." (British Columbia Brick [or Builders] Club). Suggestions?
<Begin Lego philosophy rant mode> ...
Just a thought. I really dislike all the legalese crap. Necessary, I
know, in today's business climate, but it just takes away from the
innocent enjoyment of my favourite toy, and to me Lego is still
primarily a toy, not a corporation. At some point with this kind of
stuff, I lose the "fun", and it gets a little too much like real life,
and I've already got plenty of that ;-).
<End Lego philosophy rant mode>
Robin
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
dear Robin (and any others who are reading this):
Robin Sather <robinsather@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:39ac09f1.1138298@lugnet.com...
> Comments are inlined (please excuse any disparaging remarks ...)
>
> > 1. We discourage the use of images of something that looks very similar • to
> > our bricks in any logos. Especially when it is given so much prominence • in
> > the logo. With the lettering on the knob, your brick looks at first • glance
> > exactly like one of our bricks.
>
> That kinda was the idea ...
perhaps I should have sent this to the Lego companies conceptual artist
rather than legal department. Creativity does not seem to abound in that
direction and land any understanding of the concept.
>
> > (Note - LUGNET does not have any writing on
> > their knobs and the image of the connecting bricks is much smaller.) Your
> > brick makes your logo look like it is an official logo of the LEGO Group.
>
> Why thank you ;-)
any true Lego fan knows exactly what the Lego logo really is, and those who
are not Lego fans, will not care one way or the other.
>
> > If you really want to use a brick-like image, it would need to be a lot
> > smaller, less like a LEGO brick, with no lettering on the top of the knob
> > and you would need to include a disclaimer (see below).
>
> I'll come up with some alternatives. Suggestions?
how about using a 1x2 brick -- that has not been registered yet. Or change
the letter V into some kind of a Lego brick appearance.
>
> > 2. As it stands now, we have a registered trademark in the photographed
> > image of our 1x1 and the dotted outline of our 1x1. If you really want • to
> > use a brick-like image, you will need to include a disclaimer right under
> > the logo (maybe off to the side) which states: "LEGO(R) and the brick
> > configuration are trademarks of the LEGO Group. The LEGO Group does not
> > sponsor or endorse this Club."
>
> Not likely. We'll just change the logo.
rather full of themselves, are they? I wonder if the legal department
realizes that we're responsible for his paychecks.
>
> > 3. "LEGO Club" should be written as "LEGO(R) Club" with the Circle R
> > registration mark following the word LEGO because the word LEGO is a
> > trademark. Since you would like to use LEGO as a word mark, I would also
> > recommend using the disclaimer I mentioned above.
>
> I'll put the "(R)" in there (much smaller, of course), but are we
> actually required to have the disclaimer "right under the logo" each
> time we use the word "Lego". I think that's a little crazy. I would
> think that having the disclaimer prominently displayed on the home
> page of the website would be sufficient, no?
he said that he recommends, and therefore we do not have to. I do agree
with putting the little registered symbol.
>
> > I addressed many of these same issues with Tim Courtney from LDraw when • he
> > was designing the logo for the posters he used at Kidvention in July. He
> > agreed to remove LDraw from the knobs and use smaller • images/representations
> > of bricks that looked less like LEGO bricks.
>
> The Ldraw logo has a stylized red 2 x 3 brick that is quite obviously
> a Lego brick (minus the writing on the studs), and is the primary
> image in the logo. I don't quite understand the above statement.
> Granted, in very fine print, Tim has put appropriate disclaimers below
> the logo itself. Doesn't look as good in my opinion.
just because one individual will collapse beneath the weight of the Lego
Company's lawyers, does not mean we have to do the exact same thing.
>
> There are numerous examples of obvious brick shapes in logos. Look at
> Lugnet's "Cool Lego Site of the Week", for instance. Look at many of
> the other lego clubs on the web. Many of the web ring logos are
> actual original TLC models, etc. Too many examples to list.
just goes to show you exactly how "in the know" the Lego Company's lawyers
are. Perhaps we never should've brought this to their attention. But
there's no point in debating what has been done.
>
> > Please let me know what you plan to do and if you have any questions.
> > I really appreciate you checking with us before you proceeded to use the
> > logo.
>
> At least we get that much credit :-)
but not much more. What I would like to do cannot be mentioned ;-)
But seriously... we can turn this around into something constructive
>
> Here's another idea. To avoid the requirement of a disclaimer for the
> logo itself, we could use a more abstract shape for the brick, yet
> still have it identifiable.
>
> Furthermore, and this is just a thought, we could change the name of
> the club to something that doesn't include the word "Lego". Some
> ideas; "Vancouver Builders Club", "Vancouver Brick Builders", the
> "B.C.B.C." (British Columbia Brick [or Builders] Club). Suggestions?
personally, I do not wish to concede that point. We are Lego enthusiasts,
and very proud ones at that. The amount of Lego that our club alone
purchases (thanks mostly to Kevin) is astronomical! We are walking talking
advertisements. How many people have each of us converted into Lego
enthusiasts who in turn buy tons of Lego and so on...
>
> <Begin Lego philosophy rant mode> ...
>
> Just a thought. I really dislike all the legalese crap. Necessary, I
> know, in today's business climate, but it just takes away from the
> innocent enjoyment of my favourite toy, and to me Lego is still
> primarily a toy, not a corporation. At some point with this kind of
> stuff, I lose the "fun", and it gets a little too much like real life,
> and I've already got plenty of that ;-).
in the meantime, we can settle on a new design incorporating some of the
Lego companies legal requirements. I can then formulate a cogent reply
expressing our views with a certain amount of passion and persuasion. With
this be acceptable? Our only other alternative is to ignore their request,
choose a logo we want and deal with it if and when we ever have to.
Personally, I would rather try and persuade them to our point of view and
remind them that their paychecks emanate from our investment.
Xandria
>
> <End Lego philosophy rant mode>
>
> Robin
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
I whipped up a quick and dirty modification to the original logo. The
"piece" is a top down view of a corner slope, minus the text on top of
the stud. Anyone not familiar with Lego will probably not even
recognize this image for what it is (and hence not "confuse" our fan
site with TLC's). A "true fan", however, will know immediately (I
suspect) what it is, and think something like "Gee, I sure wish I had
more of those ...". ;-)
Link is at:
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=12780
Robin
P.S. I also added the "(R)" and moved the maple leaf from the middle
to the right end.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(canceled)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(canceled)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.ca.vlc, Robin Sather writes:
> I whipped up a quick and dirty modification to the original logo. The
> "piece" is a top down view of a corner slope, minus the text on top of
> the stud. Anyone not familiar with Lego will probably not even
> recognize this image for what it is (and hence not "confuse" our fan
> site with TLC's). A "true fan", however, will know immediately (I
> suspect) what it is, and think something like "Gee, I sure wish I had
> more of those ...". ;-)
>
> Link is at:
>
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=12780
>
> Robin
>
> P.S. I also added the "(R)" and moved the maple leaf from the middle
> to the right end.
I like this logo. I think it's pretty sharp. I especially like the mountains
in the word Vancouver. Very stylish. The (r) after LEGO needs to be
superscript, though. That is the standard way that the trademark symbols are
done, (both TM and (r)) they are significantly smaller than the text they are
associated with and either flush or slightly above the top edge of that text.
I read a fair bit of this thread and I think some of you are overreacting a
bit. Just my opinion. The changes that TLC asked for are reasonable, IMHO. To
the extent that we come off as passionnate, yet reasonable, we will get
reasonable responses as well.
Here's a guy that took the time to research a fair bit of precedent, cited
reasons for everything he asked for, showed some reasonableness in his
response and even thanked you for asking, and some of you are ready to lynch
him. To the extent that TLC reads these groups, one has to ask if you're
setting the right tone. My opinion and my opinion only.
++Lar
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> In lugnet.org.ca.vlc, Robin Sather writes:
> > I whipped up a quick and dirty modification to the original logo. The
> > "piece" is a top down view of a corner slope, minus the text on top of
> > the stud. Anyone not familiar with Lego will probably not even
> > recognize this image for what it is (and hence not "confuse" our fan
> > site with TLC's). A "true fan", however, will know immediately (I
> > suspect) what it is, and think something like "Gee, I sure wish I had
> > more of those ...". ;-)
> >
> > Link is at:
> >
> > http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=12780
> >
> > Robin
> >
> > P.S. I also added the "(R)" and moved the maple leaf from the middle
> > to the right end.
>
> I like this logo. I think it's pretty sharp. I especially like the mountains
> in the word Vancouver. Very stylish. The (r) after LEGO needs to be
> superscript, though. That is the standard way that the trademark symbols are
> done, (both TM and (r)) they are significantly smaller than the text they are
> associated with and either flush or slightly above the top edge of that text.
>
> I read a fair bit of this thread and I think some of you are overreacting a
> bit. Just my opinion. The changes that TLC asked for are reasonable, IMHO. To
> the extent that we come off as passionnate, yet reasonable, we will get
> reasonable responses as well.
>
> Here's a guy that took the time to research a fair bit of precedent, cited
> reasons for everything he asked for, showed some reasonableness in his
> response and even thanked you for asking, and some of you are ready to lynch
> him. To the extent that TLC reads these groups, one has to ask if you're
> setting the right tone. My opinion and my opinion only.
Ya, I'm sorry for my messages earlier. I canceled both of them. I'm having a
REALLY bad week and that didn't help any...
I keep forgetting that more then just our club can read this forum. I don't
really know if that's appropriate.
Dean
--
Coin-Op's For Sale!: http://www.akasa.bc.ca/tfm/coin-op.html
Dean's Lego Workshop: http://www.akasa.bc.ca/tfm/lego_wr.html
Vancouver Lego Club: http://www.akasa.bc.ca/vlc
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dean Husby wrote:
> I keep forgetting that more then just our club can read this forum. I don't
> really know if that's appropriate.
Larry reads *everything*. Or he used to. Dunno if anyone else does.
If we want a private forum (like PNLTC has) we can set up a mailing
list. I run several on eGroups and find it very easy to use and
convenient. It does have the disadvantage that others find it harder to
find out about us since we would no longer be in evidence on LUGNET as
an organisation if discussion moved to a mailing list. Before the world
record train event I looked in the PNLTC's org.us.pnltc group for info
about it and there's nothing at all there.
Kevin
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Personal Lego Web page:
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/kwilson_tccs/lego.html
Open Air Market: Limited edition kit
http://www.lionsgatemodels.com/cat-mrkt.htm
Craftsman Kits & Custom Lego models: http://www.lionsgatemodels.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.ca.vlc, Kevin Wilson writes:
> Dean Husby wrote:
> > I keep forgetting that more then just our club can read this forum. I don't
> > really know if that's appropriate.
>
> Larry reads *everything*. Or he used to. Dunno if anyone else does.
>
> If we want a private forum (like PNLTC has) we can set up a mailing
> list. I run several on eGroups and find it very easy to use and
> convenient. It does have the disadvantage that others find it harder to
> find out about us since we would no longer be in evidence on LUGNET as
> an organisation if discussion moved to a mailing list. Before the world
> record train event I looked in the PNLTC's org.us.pnltc group for info
> about it and there's nothing at all there.
That's because the discussion occured in lugnet.trains and lugnet.trains.org.
It is probably a good idea for organizations to set up a private list for
internal discussions (NELUG showed the necesity of this with all the bustle
about the age policy), but should use the lugnet.org... group(s) to announce
events and to conduct discussion which might be of reasonable interest to
others (like a train group deciding which table standard to follow might want
to have at least some discussion be open so others can contribute and learn).
Remember that these days, a lot of people read Lugnet using the web interface,
and many of them presumably do so from the news home page with no filters set
(like I do), which effectively means they read everything (so much for my
compartmentalized dorkdom...).
Frank
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.ca.vlc, Frank Filz writes:
> In lugnet.org.ca.vlc, Kevin Wilson writes:
> > Dean Husby wrote:
> > > I keep forgetting that more then just our club can read this forum. I don't
> > > really know if that's appropriate.
> >
> > Larry reads *everything*. Or he used to. Dunno if anyone else does.
I no longer read everything. It's not possible. :-) But I DO use the web
interface, two ways of finding things, looking at the traffic page, and just
scrolling backward in the "entire" posting list that you get when you first
enter... either of those will find a hot and controversial topic, so I skim
in, read the tree and then stick my oar in. I also search for my name so find
references to myself. (egoboo, I know)
I think PNLTC has swung TOO far to the private mail list but private lists are
indispensable. Guild of Bricksmiths would never get anything done without them.
++Lar
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Kevin Wilson wrote:
> Dean Husby wrote:
> > I keep forgetting that more then just our club can read this forum. I don't
> > really know if that's appropriate.
>
> Larry reads *everything*. Or he used to. Dunno if anyone else does.
>
> If we want a private forum (like PNLTC has) we can set up a mailing
> list. I run several on eGroups and find it very easy to use and
> convenient. It does have the disadvantage that others find it harder to
> find out about us since we would no longer be in evidence on LUGNET as
> an organisation if discussion moved to a mailing list. Before the world
> record train event I looked in the PNLTC's org.us.pnltc group for info
> about it and there's nothing at all there.
I would suggest only using the secure group for 'private' or club only
discussions.
I can get us a fully featured message board if we are interested in such... I
think most banter can still be here...
Dean
--
Coin-Op's For Sale!: http://www.akasa.bc.ca/tfm/coin-op.html
Dean's Lego Workshop: http://www.akasa.bc.ca/tfm/lego_wr.html
Vancouver Lego Club: http://www.akasa.bc.ca/vlc
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Wow!! Leave the forum for awhile, and things heat up!!
> I like this logo. I think it's pretty sharp. I especially like the mountains
> in the word Vancouver. Very stylish. The (r) after LEGO needs to be
> superscript, though. That is the standard way that the trademark symbols are
> done, (both TM and (r)) they are significantly smaller than the text they are
> associated with and either flush or slightly above the top edge of that text.
Right, and duly noted! Thanks for spotting that.
> I read a fair bit of this thread and I think some of you are overreacting a
> bit. Just my opinion. The changes that TLC asked for are reasonable, IMHO. To
> the extent that we come off as passionnate, yet reasonable, we will get
> reasonable responses as well.
Granted. I thought TCL would be a lot more lenient, but I completely
understand their position. There is still a lot of room for us to be
creative and represent "the toy" while not drawing the ire of TLC's
legal dept.
> Here's a guy that took the time to research a fair bit of precedent, cited
> reasons for everything he asked for, showed some reasonableness in his
> response and even thanked you for asking, and some of you are ready to lynch
> him. To the extent that TLC reads these groups, one has to ask if you're
> setting the right tone. My opinion and my opinion only.
Agreed. I was simply disappointed and stated that. At least I
apologized beforehand. :-)
I completely understand TLC's position, and will be happy to live
within the bounds set by them. After all, without TLC, who would have
any fun!!!
Robin
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Robin Sather wrote:
I completely understand TLC's position, and will be happy to live
> within the bounds set by them. After all, without TLC, who would have
> any fun!!!
>
> Robin
With out buyer's Lego would not have any fun...
--
Coin-Op's For Sale!: http://www.akasa.bc.ca/tfm/coin-op.html
Dean's Lego Workshop: http://www.akasa.bc.ca/tfm/lego_wr.html
Vancouver Lego Club: http://www.akasa.bc.ca/vlc
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Robin Sather wrote:
> I whipped up a quick and dirty modification to the original logo. The
> "piece" is a top down view of a corner slope, minus the text on top of
> the stud. Anyone not familiar with Lego will probably not even
This looks very good, Robin. I actually like this corner slope better
than the 1x1 brick.
Kevin
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Personal Lego Web page:
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/kwilson_tccs/lego.html
Open Air Market: Limited edition kit
http://www.lionsgatemodels.com/cat-mrkt.htm
Craftsman Kits & Custom Lego models: http://www.lionsgatemodels.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> This looks very good, Robin. I actually like this corner slope better
> than the 1x1 brick.
I'm not sure I do. It was just a quick mockup, an idea. I'm trying
to think of a way to implement Alex's idea. She suggested doing
something with the "V".
Still pondering,
Robin
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.ca.vlc, Robin Sather writes:
> > This looks very good, Robin. I actually like this corner slope better
> > than the 1x1 brick.
>
> I'm not sure I do. It was just a quick mockup, an idea. I'm trying
> to think of a way to implement Alex's idea. She suggested doing
> something with the "V".
I like the corner slope. If you rotated it 90 degrees clockwise, you'd have
an L for LEGO, and if you went 45 degrees, you'd have a V for Vancouver...
Just some feedback from your sunny neighbour to the east. :-)
SRC
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(canceled)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Guys.... Lego has to protect their IP. That includes their trademarks
(be that the word Lego or the image of the brick). If they don't, those
things will morph into the public domain... so that in the end Megabloks
could advertise themselves as "Lego". Not what we want, right? And these
issues had already been publicised on LUGNET when Tim was working on the
LDraw logo for Kidvention. We contacted their lawyer for clarification
and that is what we got... quite politely, I thought, although lawyerly.
That's the person's job. The fact that we buy a lot of Lego and "pay
their salary" has nothing to do with it. Nor does that fact that there
are lots of logos out there with bricks in that Lego hasn't noticed yet
make it OK... does the fact that 90% of the cars on the freeway are
speeding make it legal?
I guess in a way this is my fault since if I hadn't pointed out the
LDraw logo precedent we could have pretended we didn't know, not asked,
and just gone ahead. It might have been annoying later though, when Lego
got around to asking for all the brick logos to be changed.
Kevin
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Personal Lego Web page:
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/kwilson_tccs/lego.html
Open Air Market: Limited edition kit
http://www.lionsgatemodels.com/cat-mrkt.htm
Craftsman Kits & Custom Lego models: http://www.lionsgatemodels.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.ca.vlc, Kevin Wilson writes:
> Guys.... Lego has to protect their IP. That includes their trademarks
> (be that the word Lego or the image of the brick). If they don't, those
> things will morph into the public domain... so that in the end Megabloks
> could advertise themselves as "Lego".
<much good stuff snipped>
Speaking as a *former* Lego employee (who knows that "Lego" should be in ALL
CAPS), protecting their name and image is very important in the company. We
were told to never refer to the bricks as 'Legos', they were always 'Lego
bricks', 'Lego pieces' or 'Lego elements'. Yes, it took some getting used to,
but it became pretty easy after a while.
Think of the terms 'kleenex', 'band-aid' or 'thermos' - these are all
registered trademarks, but through constant use have become more generic - at
least here in the USA. ('facial tissue', 'adhesive bandage', 'vacuum
bottle') Lego doesn't want its good name to become a generic term
for 'building blocks'.
BTW - I really like the new proposed logo. The stylized 2x2 corner roof brick
is very well done, and looks great.
JohnG, GMLTC
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.ca.vlc, John Gerlach writes:
> In lugnet.org.ca.vlc, Kevin Wilson writes:
> > Guys.... Lego has to protect their IP. That includes their trademarks
> > (be that the word Lego or the image of the brick). If they don't, those
> > things will morph into the public domain... so that in the end Megabloks
> > could advertise themselves as "Lego".
> <much good stuff snipped>
> Speaking as a *former* Lego employee (who knows that "Lego" should be in
> ALL CAPS), protecting their name and image is very important in the company.
>
> Think of the terms 'kleenex', 'band-aid' or 'thermos' - these are all
> registered trademarks, but through constant use have become more generic
<more good stuff snipped>
As a *former* SONY employee, I should quote one of their slogans:
"If it isn't a SONY, it isn't a Walkman."
SRC
Man, these ALL CAPS show up are all over the place... ;-)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> Guys.... Lego has to protect their IP. That includes their trademarks
> (be that the word Lego or the image of the brick). If they don't, those
> things will morph into the public domain... so that in the end Megabloks
> could advertise themselves as "Lego". Not what we want, right? And these
> issues had already been publicised on LUGNET when Tim was working on the
> LDraw logo for Kidvention. We contacted their lawyer for clarification
> and that is what we got... quite politely, I thought, although lawyerly.
> That's the person's job. The fact that we buy a lot of Lego and "pay
> their salary" has nothing to do with it. Nor does that fact that there
> are lots of logos out there with bricks in that Lego hasn't noticed yet
> make it OK... does the fact that 90% of the cars on the freeway are
> speeding make it legal?
The voice of reason. I agree with you 100%, Kevin. If my tone was
too harsh in my reply, I apologize (are you listening, TLC?). I've
just never liked the legal crud that we are all forced to put up with
(for our protection, mind you) because of the host of unscrupulous
types that think nothing of pushing whatever limits are in place. The
other 99% of us are happy to use our common sense and decency, and get
along just fine. Just gets a little frustrating.
> I guess in a way this is my fault since if I hadn't pointed out the
> LDraw logo precedent we could have pretended we didn't know, not asked,
> and just gone ahead. It might have been annoying later though, when Lego
> got around to asking for all the brick logos to be changed.
Not at all. I thought it was a great idea to check with them.
Unfortunately, I naively assumed that they would be more supportive
right off the bat. However, I realize that TLC support and respect
are earned commodities. Perhaps after we've been around a bit, had an
event or two, and generated some actual, measurable, consistent
positive feedback for TLC, they will perhaps be open to a more
supportive role. Other clubs have certainly experienced this, so
there's no reason to believe that ours would be any different. Here's
to the future!!
Robin
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.ca.vlc, Robin Sather writes:
> Kevin Wilson said:
> > I guess in a way this is my fault since if I hadn't pointed out the
> > LDraw logo precedent we could have pretended we didn't know, not asked,
> > and just gone ahead. It might have been annoying later though, when Lego
> > got around to asking for all the brick logos to be changed.
>
> Not at all. I thought it was a great idea to check with them.
> Unfortunately, I naively assumed that they would be more supportive
> right off the bat. However, I realize that TLC support and respect
> are earned commodities. Perhaps after we've been around a bit, had an
> event or two, and generated some actual, measurable, consistent
> positive feedback for TLC, they will perhaps be open to a more
> supportive role. Other clubs have certainly experienced this, so
> there's no reason to believe that ours would be any different. Here's
> to the future!!
Right on. Here's to the future.
Every club that acts responsibly, does interesting and neat stuff, and builds
a good rep with TLC (well, with TLC individuals) makes it easier for the next
one to leverage that good relationship and to move on to doing meaningful
things with TLC support more quickly if that's what they want to do.
We as a whole (fans, the LUGNET community, clubs and all the permutations
thereof) are changing TLC perception of us *FROM* crackpots who are a nuisance
and who are all whiney talk, and who violate IP and give TLC a bad name, *TO*
passionate indivduals who get things done, band together into effective (yet
fun) organisations, run events that get TLC lots of positive publicity, and
who are a significant force in the marketplace, with important ideas to share
with TLC about future direction, worthy of consultation with and marketing to.
It doesn't happen overnight but the tide is slowly turning.
Thanks go to *all* clubs everywhere and to *all* dedicated, yet
rational/reasonable AFOLs everywhere around the world who are making this
happen for the benefit of all of us (and who are having some great fun at the
same time).
Just my opinion. But we live in interesting times! Thank you EVERYONE.
++Lar
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
yes, to the future.
And to messages where playful sarcasm doesn't fly.
ok... seriously...
1. the registered symbol is a must.
2. do we want to change the name? I feel that having LEGO (R) in the
club's name is important to truly define us. Others...
3. the brick motif. Incorporating a brick motif into the V would really be
cool. Alternatively, something a tad more rare (technic piece ;-) )...
the sloped corner piece is a little squarish in my opinion... just my
opinion. But I don't know what piece would work here...
Other thoughts...
Xan
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Alexandria Husby wrote:
> yes, to the future.
>
> And to messages where playful sarcasm doesn't fly.
>
> ok... seriously...
>
> 1. the registered symbol is a must.
>
> 2. do we want to change the name? I feel that having LEGO (R) in the
> club's name is important to truly define us. Others...
>
> 3. the brick motif. Incorporating a brick motif into the V would really be
> cool. Alternatively, something a tad more rare (technic piece ;-) )...
> the sloped corner piece is a little squarish in my opinion... just my
> opinion. But I don't know what piece would work here...
>
> Other thoughts...
>
> Xan
What about a Lego montage? Like say a Light Sabre, Castle shield, Tecnic beam,
RCX Sensor type thing?
Just a thought...
Dean
--
Coin-Op's For Sale!: http://www.akasa.bc.ca/tfm/coin-op.html
Dean's Lego Workshop: http://www.akasa.bc.ca/tfm/lego_wr.html
Vancouver Lego Club: http://www.akasa.bc.ca/vlc
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> What about a Lego montage? Like say a Light Sabre, Castle shield, Tecnic beam,
> RCX Sensor type thing?
If TLC was upset about a 1x1 brick, imagine the kafuffle over this!
Unfortunately, we need to make it a little more generic. I'll come up
with something "brick-ish", but not too obviously "Lego-ish". I've
been super busy the last few days, but will get something out soon.
Robin
| | | | | | |
