To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.roboticsOpen lugnet.robotics in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Robotics / 24598
     
   
Subject: 
Re: Mindstorms on Slashdot
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.robotics
Date: 
Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:00:10 GMT
Original-From: 
Mr S <SZINN_THE1@antispamYAHOO.COM>
Viewed: 
2530 times
  

Personally, I believe that the discussions on business
models for TLG are a bit off key. Lego already has
solid products, and sells to a defined market segment.
Their bread and butter product lines sell because of
novelty in many cases. Those film related lego sets
sell because of the film tie-in novelty *AND* because
of the puzzle value. Some people need instructions,
and are unable to simply begin creating things like
the Harry Potter sets on their own.

With the advent of some robot toys (that need no
construction) the appeal of Lego loses some luster.
Straight forward building toys of any manufacturer
have lost ground over the last few years. What I
believe that Lego needs to do is repackage the RCX in
a "Lego Advance" product line. All of the sets that
AFOLs want would be in that product line. It requires
little manufacturing change, and creates revenue with
little or no distribution issues as most AFOLs are
willing and able to purchase on-line.

As for the on-line forum, this one is quite handy, and
would be quite suitable for "Lego Advance" products.
Lego wouldn't even need to do anything but
monitor/contribute to this forum.

Using both the forum, and their ability to repackage
Lego parts into Lego Advance kits, they could
revitalize that segment of the populace that *IS*
interested in straight forward building toys.

By showing support for this market segment, Lego would
benefit from all the ideas that would be supported.
That would take part of their product line out of the
'toy' category and place it firmly in the 'inventor
systems' category, even though it is arguably already
so.

Looking at the big picture, robots and systems with
embedded processors around the house have specific
developmental requirements. By this I mean that toys
are already being produced that are a shortcut to what
Lego offers. Could you build a robot vacuum from Lego?
A sentry robot? A system that monitors your house? The
Aibo (even though I'll never buy from Sony again) is a
certain winner for the kids in deciding which they
want for the holidays. How much would you pay for a
Lego kit that creates something similar to the Aibo?
1500, 2000?

TLG will not generate huge revenues by simply
reinventing what Lego has already. They need to aim at
a more technically savvy and technically aware
audience. TLG needs to create the Lego Advance line of
products and develop further on that so that
tomorrow's kids will be building things that are not
yet available in the same market segment/place today.

Sure, there are lots of things that you can build with
Lego now, but imagine if TLG were to turn the volume
up by several notches?
All the things that we (AFOLs) would like to be able
to buy would help do that, but there has to be a
business model that fundamentally fits with the creed
of Lego in general. The Lego Advance has to be more
than a toy, but less than a home security system.
Along with sales, they must avoid legal issues, and
trying to sell into markets that are already well
attended.

Some suggestions (workable or not) would be:

1 - A tie-in with X-10 products for control of those
products
2 - Wireless communications with sensors (bluetooth?)
3 - More advanced sensors (get out of the experimentor
stage)
4 - Ready made shells for home-brew parts/sensors
5 - Products that link systems together at home in
ways that are not available to home users in general.
For example, look at new home construction products
and how they function over networks.

All of that would have to be Lego Advance products,
and not cut into their other business of movie tie-ins
etc. It also requires that Lego begin competing in
areas that they have never tried before.

Anyway, the Lego Advance systems is what I would like
to see.

--- Steve Hassenplug <Steve@TeamHassenplug.org> wrote:

On Mon, November 28, 2005 5:12 pm, Steve Lane
yahoo.co.uk@qs483.pair.com> wrote:
I think a business approach that can never fail is • to take a popular product ie
"Mindstorms" and just re-invest some of the • profits to develop the basic idea,
eg, an improved RCX every five years or so.

How long has the current version of the RCX been
around?

... and an online forum would be the icing on the
cake.

What would you want to see in an online forum?  What
would it include that's not
available here (LUGNET) and/or on LEGOfan?

Steve






__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com

   
         
     
Subject: 
Re: Mindstorms on Slashdot
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.robotics
Date: 
Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:31:07 GMT
Original-From: 
Matthew Davidson <matthew@blank^antispam^.org>
Viewed: 
2524 times
  

On Nov 29, 2005, at 12:00 PM, Mr S wrote:

Some suggestions (workable or not) would be:

1 - A tie-in with X-10 products for control of those
products
2 - Wireless communications with sensors (bluetooth?)

I thought about bluetooth, but I personally feel 802.11 would be
better. I bought a Roku Soundbridge new for around $125 and that
included a WiFi card.

3 - More advanced sensors (get out of the experimentor
stage)
4 - Ready made shells for home-brew parts/sensors
5 - Products that link systems together at home in
ways that are not available to home users in general.
For example, look at new home construction products
and how they function over networks.

Is there a composite wish list for a next-generation RCX-like
microcontroller anywhere? Might make some interesting reading.

Regardless, if Mindstorms was a runaway financial success for TLG,
the product line would not have stalled. Even if a company has the
ability to produce a product, does not mean it makes financial sense
for them to do so. Launching any new product (even if it is a
aggregate of existing R&D) is a commitment. A financial commitment.
And, it involves work. Sure, it could be a source of profit, but that
is not enough. The projected sales figures have to reach a certain
point for a product launch to be deemed worth doing. If catering to
AFOLs and robotics enthusiasts registered on TLG's financial radar,
I'm sure they'd do it in a heartbeat.

- matthew
http://www.stretta.com/~matthew

    
          
     
Subject: 
Re: Mindstorms on Slashdot
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.robotics
Date: 
Wed, 30 Nov 2005 02:34:20 GMT
Original-From: 
steve <sjbaker1@airmail&StopSpammers&.net>
Viewed: 
2525 times
  

Matthew Davidson wrote:

On Nov 29, 2005, at 12:00 PM, Mr S wrote:

Some suggestions (workable or not) would be:

1 - A tie-in with X-10 products for control of those
products
2 - Wireless communications with sensors (bluetooth?)


I thought about bluetooth, but I personally feel 802.11 would be
better. I bought a Roku Soundbridge new for around $125 and that
included a WiFi card.

3 - More advanced sensors (get out of the experimentor
stage)
4 - Ready made shells for home-brew parts/sensors
5 - Products that link systems together at home in
ways that are not available to home users in general.
For example, look at new home construction products
and how they function over networks.

There have been dozens and dozens of discussions here about what
might or might not make a great RCX replacement - I don't think
there is much chance of it happening - so it's really a waste of
time to discuss it.

Regardless, if Mindstorms was a runaway financial success for TLG,  the
product line would not have stalled. Even if a company has the  ability
to produce a product, does not mean it makes financial sense  for them
to do so.

Right.

The trouble is, we AFOL's see something as absolutely mouth-wateringly
great - but the general public might not even understand it.

We are a *TINY* fraction of TLG's business.  I'd bet that even if
every one of us bought several 'new RCX' sets, Lego wouldn't come
even close to breaking even on the high R&D costs of such a part.

RCX is really the worst of both worlds - it's expensive to develop
(so high NRE) but has a small market niche (so cost-recovery is
difficult).

You can see why (if faced with a choice) they'd make a few standard
parts in new colours - *maybe* design a couple of new pieces - stick
a 'Harry Potter' label on it - and sell them in vast quantities.

That has a tiny NRE (mostly the licensing of the movie rights) - and
large quantity sales.   If a set fails for some reason, the NRE was low,
so the loss is small.   If you invest to make a new RCX and it fails,
you've just blown a couple of million dollars.

The only fix for that is to stick a big price tag on the set - but
that's just going to drive the market share down yet futher.

> Launching any new product (even if it is a  aggregate of
existing R&D) is a commitment. A financial commitment.  And, it involves
work. Sure, it could be a source of profit, but that  is not enough. The
projected sales figures have to reach a certain  point for a product
launch to be deemed worth doing. If catering to  AFOLs and robotics
enthusiasts registered on TLG's financial radar,  I'm sure they'd do it
in a heartbeat.

Yep - exactly.

   
         
   
Subject: 
Re: Mindstorms on Slashdot
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.robotics, lugnet.dear-lego
Date: 
Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:53:13 GMT
Viewed: 
6754 times
  

While I personally love to see that, I just dont see them putting
their neck out on that one. As stated before, we (AFOLs and advanced
users) are barely a blip on the register of the bean counters, and it
is to them that any business development will now fundamentally answer
to. I suppose the good thing is, if they really can make the right
decisions (and I am not sure what faith I have) that win them more
money and profitability in the market, then later on they will have
the strength to get as bold as they have been before again.

Look at it this way, Lego are/have sold off the theme parks - which
have been apart of the Lego experience for as long as I can remember.
This is not a company in rude healt (expression meaning very good
health over here), but a company who are becoming very timid and
careful as they are seeing a market migration. Of course- one thing
that may dawn upon them is that their traditional market of younger
kids is drying up, while the 20-40 year olds who grew up with Lego are
dyed in the wool followers, and better targetting/support of that
market - and aiming squarely at the 20 somethings who havent done a
lot with Lego yet, may yeild furthar sales. New markets are a good
thing to have when old ones are beginning to stagnate.

A lot of parents see Lego as expensive. Not all kids (as Mr S points
out) dont have the patience, or the "building bug" to want Lego, and
that seems be slowly dwindling in that cross section. However -
websites like thinkgeek show that a healthy geeky market of people
willing to spend money online on cool and interesting gadgets,
including construction toy ranges. AFAIK - thinkgeek have no bricks
and mortar sites, and have displaced (in the uk) the Gadget shop
fairly well here. Lego really could move in to making a good market by
carrying the most comprehensive range online, and getting the more
electronic toys carried on sites like thinkgeek as well.

I do remember the star-wars mindstorms tie-ins as disappointing (being
based on the low-spec microscout). Maybe they could reuse the
electronics from the SpyBots to get more interesing star wars bot
tie-ins - again aimed at the 200something market.

Anyway I still feel that crossposting to .dear-lego (or continuing the
thread there) would be a good step here. I have therefore added it in
to my response.
--
Danny Staple MBCS
OrionRobots
http://orionrobots.co.uk
(Full contact details available through website)


On 29/11/05, Mr S <lego-robotics@crynwr.com> wrote:
Personally, I believe that the discussions on business
models for TLG are a bit off key. Lego already has
solid products, and sells to a defined market segment.
Their bread and butter product lines sell because of
novelty in many cases. Those film related lego sets
sell because of the film tie-in novelty *AND* because
of the puzzle value. Some people need instructions,
and are unable to simply begin creating things like
the Harry Potter sets on their own.

With the advent of some robot toys (that need no
construction) the appeal of Lego loses some luster.
Straight forward building toys of any manufacturer
have lost ground over the last few years. What I
believe that Lego needs to do is repackage the RCX in
a "Lego Advance" product line. All of the sets that
AFOLs want would be in that product line. It requires
little manufacturing change, and creates revenue with
little or no distribution issues as most AFOLs are
willing and able to purchase on-line.

As for the on-line forum, this one is quite handy, and
would be quite suitable for "Lego Advance" products.
Lego wouldn't even need to do anything but
monitor/contribute to this forum.

Using both the forum, and their ability to repackage
Lego parts into Lego Advance kits, they could
revitalize that segment of the populace that *IS*
interested in straight forward building toys.

By showing support for this market segment, Lego would
benefit from all the ideas that would be supported.
That would take part of their product line out of the
'toy' category and place it firmly in the 'inventor
systems' category, even though it is arguably already
so.

Looking at the big picture, robots and systems with
embedded processors around the house have specific
developmental requirements. By this I mean that toys
are already being produced that are a shortcut to what
Lego offers. Could you build a robot vacuum from Lego?
A sentry robot? A system that monitors your house? The
Aibo (even though I'll never buy from Sony again) is a
certain winner for the kids in deciding which they
want for the holidays. How much would you pay for a
Lego kit that creates something similar to the Aibo?
1500, 2000?

TLG will not generate huge revenues by simply
reinventing what Lego has already. They need to aim at
a more technically savvy and technically aware
audience. TLG needs to create the Lego Advance line of
products and develop further on that so that
tomorrow's kids will be building things that are not
yet available in the same market segment/place today.

Sure, there are lots of things that you can build with
Lego now, but imagine if TLG were to turn the volume
up by several notches?
All the things that we (AFOLs) would like to be able
to buy would help do that, but there has to be a
business model that fundamentally fits with the creed
of Lego in general. The Lego Advance has to be more
than a toy, but less than a home security system.
Along with sales, they must avoid legal issues, and
trying to sell into markets that are already well
attended.

Some suggestions (workable or not) would be:

1 - A tie-in with X-10 products for control of those
products
2 - Wireless communications with sensors (bluetooth?)
3 - More advanced sensors (get out of the experimentor
stage)
4 - Ready made shells for home-brew parts/sensors
5 - Products that link systems together at home in
ways that are not available to home users in general.
For example, look at new home construction products
and how they function over networks.

All of that would have to be Lego Advance products,
and not cut into their other business of movie tie-ins
etc. It also requires that Lego begin competing in
areas that they have never tried before.

Anyway, the Lego Advance systems is what I would like
to see.

--- Steve Hassenplug <Steve@TeamHassenplug.org> wrote:

On Mon, November 28, 2005 5:12 pm, Steve Lane
yahoo.co.uk@qs483.pair.com> wrote:
I think a business approach that can never fail is • to take a popular product ie
"Mindstorms" and just re-invest some of the • profits to develop the basic idea,
eg, an improved RCX every five years or so.

How long has the current version of the RCX been
around?

... and an online forum would be the icing on the
cake.

What would you want to see in an online forum?  What
would it include that's not
available here (LUGNET) and/or on LEGOfan?

Steve






__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com


   
         
   
Subject: 
Re: Mindstorms on Slashdot
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.robotics
Date: 
Thu, 1 Dec 2005 22:01:33 GMT
Original-From: 
dan miller <danbmil99@^StopSpammers^yahoo.com>
Viewed: 
2974 times
  

this may sound a bit dumb, but give it a few seconds of consideration (and
try to supress your own prejudices):

One of the problems with being an AFOL is that the bright, happy colors of
Lego pieces make everything look like a preschool toy.  If I could replace
all my pieces with a few shades of grey and battleship green, I would do it
in a heartbeat.

Another factor that could even help make AFOL's and older children better
(ie paying more) customers would be to focus on making models that are
permanent rather than transitory.  This would encourage more purchasing of
sets (I've bought 5 already mainly to avoid taking apart complex robots).

I know some of these ideas fly in the face of the hard-core Lego culture and
aesthetics, but the point is, this market is potentially much larger than
TLG is assuming, and they are just giving it away -- to Technics, to Vexx
(both of which are $300+ btw), and it just seems sad.

One final piece of advice that will surely not be listened to:  Stop being
so anal about people selling sets that interoperate with Lego.  As far as I
can tell, vendors like Charmed Labs still have to be careful not to actually
sell pieces that can snap together with Lego -- you have to strip wires and
so on.  This is diametrically in opposition to how new technology paradigms
succeed -- think of open source, or the IBM PC and clones.

In summary, I think they just don't have the imagination to make this work,
but it's sort of sad.  I guess we'll just buy the stuff on Ebay for 20 or 30
years, and kluge up our own electronics.  Oh well.

-dbm


--- danny staple <orionrobots@gmail.com> wrote:


While I personally love to see that, I just dont see them putting
their neck out on that one. As stated before, we (AFOLs and advanced
users) are barely a blip on the register of the bean counters, and it
is to them that any business development will now fundamentally answer
to. I suppose the good thing is, if they really can make the right
decisions (and I am not sure what faith I have) that win them more
money and profitability in the market, then later on they will have
the strength to get as bold as they have been before again.

Look at it this way, Lego are/have sold off the theme parks - which
have been apart of the Lego experience for as long as I can remember.
This is not a company in rude healt (expression meaning very good
health over here), but a company who are becoming very timid and
careful as they are seeing a market migration. Of course- one thing
that may dawn upon them is that their traditional market of younger
kids is drying up, while the 20-40 year olds who grew up with Lego are
dyed in the wool followers, and better targetting/support of that
market - and aiming squarely at the 20 somethings who havent done a
lot with Lego yet, may yeild furthar sales. New markets are a good
thing to have when old ones are beginning to stagnate.

A lot of parents see Lego as expensive. Not all kids (as Mr S points
out) dont have the patience, or the "building bug" to want Lego, and
that seems be slowly dwindling in that cross section. However -
websites like thinkgeek show that a healthy geeky market of people
willing to spend money online on cool and interesting gadgets,
including construction toy ranges. AFAIK - thinkgeek have no bricks
and mortar sites, and have displaced (in the uk) the Gadget shop
fairly well here. Lego really could move in to making a good market by
carrying the most comprehensive range online, and getting the more
electronic toys carried on sites like thinkgeek as well.

I do remember the star-wars mindstorms tie-ins as disappointing (being
based on the low-spec microscout). Maybe they could reuse the
electronics from the SpyBots to get more interesing star wars bot
tie-ins - again aimed at the 200something market.

Anyway I still feel that crossposting to .dear-lego (or continuing the
thread there) would be a good step here. I have therefore added it in
to my response.
--
Danny Staple MBCS
OrionRobots
http://orionrobots.co.uk
(Full contact details available through website)


On 29/11/05, Mr S <lego-robotics@crynwr.com> wrote:
Personally, I believe that the discussions on business
models for TLG are a bit off key. Lego already has
solid products, and sells to a defined market segment.
Their bread and butter product lines sell because of
novelty in many cases. Those film related lego sets
sell because of the film tie-in novelty *AND* because
of the puzzle value. Some people need instructions,
and are unable to simply begin creating things like
the Harry Potter sets on their own.

With the advent of some robot toys (that need no
construction) the appeal of Lego loses some luster.
Straight forward building toys of any manufacturer
have lost ground over the last few years. What I
believe that Lego needs to do is repackage the RCX in
a "Lego Advance" product line. All of the sets that
AFOLs want would be in that product line. It requires
little manufacturing change, and creates revenue with
little or no distribution issues as most AFOLs are
willing and able to purchase on-line.

As for the on-line forum, this one is quite handy, and
would be quite suitable for "Lego Advance" products.
Lego wouldn't even need to do anything but
monitor/contribute to this forum.

Using both the forum, and their ability to repackage
Lego parts into Lego Advance kits, they could
revitalize that segment of the populace that *IS*
interested in straight forward building toys.

By showing support for this market segment, Lego would
benefit from all the ideas that would be supported.
That would take part of their product line out of the
'toy' category and place it firmly in the 'inventor
systems' category, even though it is arguably already
so.

Looking at the big picture, robots and systems with
embedded processors around the house have specific
developmental requirements. By this I mean that toys
are already being produced that are a shortcut to what
Lego offers. Could you build a robot vacuum from Lego?
A sentry robot? A system that monitors your house? The
Aibo (even though I'll never buy from Sony again) is a
certain winner for the kids in deciding which they
want for the holidays. How much would you pay for a
Lego kit that creates something similar to the Aibo?
1500, 2000?

TLG will not generate huge revenues by simply
reinventing what Lego has already. They need to aim at
a more technically savvy and technically aware
audience. TLG needs to create the Lego Advance line of
products and develop further on that so that
tomorrow's kids will be building things that are not
yet available in the same market segment/place today.

Sure, there are lots of things that you can build with
Lego now, but imagine if TLG were to turn the volume
up by several notches?
All the things that we (AFOLs) would like to be able
to buy would help do that, but there has to be a
business model that fundamentally fits with the creed
of Lego in general. The Lego Advance has to be more
than a toy, but less than a home security system.
Along with sales, they must avoid legal issues, and
trying to sell into markets that are already well
attended.

Some suggestions (workable or not) would be:

1 - A tie-in with X-10 products for control of those
products
2 - Wireless communications with sensors (bluetooth?)
3 - More advanced sensors (get out of the experimentor
stage)
4 - Ready made shells for home-brew parts/sensors
5 - Products that link systems together at home in
ways that are not available to home users in general.
For example, look at new home construction products
and how they function over networks.

All of that would have to be Lego Advance products,
and not cut into their other business of movie tie-ins
etc. It also requires that Lego begin competing in
areas that they have never tried before.

Anyway, the Lego Advance systems is what I would like
to see.

--- Steve Hassenplug <Steve@TeamHassenplug.org> wrote:

On Mon, November 28, 2005 5:12 pm, Steve Lane
yahoo.co.uk@qs483.pair.com> wrote:
I think a business approach that can never fail is • to take a popular product ie
"Mindstorms" and just re-invest some of the • profits to develop the basic idea,
eg, an improved RCX every five years or so.

How long has the current version of the RCX been
around?

... and an online forum would be the icing on the
cake.

What would you want to see in an online forum?  What
would it include that's not
available here (LUGNET) and/or on LEGOfan?

Steve






__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com






__________________________________________
Yahoo! DSL – Something to write home about.
Just $16.99/mo. or less.
dsl.yahoo.com

   
         
   
Subject: 
Re: Mindstorms on Slashdot
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.robotics
Date: 
Fri, 2 Dec 2005 10:11:12 GMT
Viewed: 
2688 times
  

In lugnet.robotics, dan miller <danbmil99@yahoo.com> wrote:
this may sound a bit dumb, but give it a few seconds of consideration (and
try to supress your own prejudices):

One of the problems with being an AFOL is that the bright, happy colors of
Lego pieces make everything look like a preschool toy.  If I could replace
all my pieces with a few shades of grey and battleship green, I would do it
in a heartbeat.

Another factor that could even help make AFOL's and older children better
(ie paying more) customers would be to focus on making models that are
permanent rather than transitory.  This would encourage more purchasing of
sets (I've bought 5 already mainly to avoid taking apart complex robots).

I know some of these ideas fly in the face of the hard-core Lego culture and
aesthetics, but the point is, this market is potentially much larger than
TLG is assuming, and they are just giving it away -- to Technics, to Vexx
(both of which are $300+ btw), and it just seems sad.

One final piece of advice that will surely not be listened to:  Stop being
so anal about people selling sets that interoperate with Lego.  As far as I
can tell, vendors like Charmed Labs still have to be careful not to actually
sell pieces that can snap together with Lego -- you have to strip wires and
so on.  This is diametrically in opposition to how new technology paradigms
succeed -- think of open source, or the IBM PC and clones.

That's a very interesting point "should Lego allow others to make Mindstorms
pieces". It would mean a big culture change. On the one hand they could lose
sales to an outside company, but on the other hand they could generate sales by
selling parts packs (beams & stuff) to support the 3rd party sensors.

It would be the first time Lego wasn't wholly responsible for the product, and
their high standards of quality could cause problems with third parties. But if
Lego provided the casing's it shouldn't be too hard.

They could have a "Lego approved" program for 3rd party parts.

I think the main benefit to Lego apart from selling more RIS kits is that it
would generate a lot of info of what people do and don't want. If a particular
sensor sold well Lego might consider buying up the 3rd party's patent, or coming
up with something similar. Although putting newly formed third parties out of
business wouldn't be popular.

And if everything was licensed, Lego would retain control, so that 3rd parties
couldn't bring out a replacement RCX for example without their permission.

Steve

   
         
   
Subject: 
Re: Mindstorms on Slashdot
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.robotics
Date: 
Fri, 2 Dec 2005 14:23:53 GMT
Viewed: 
2758 times
  

In lugnet.robotics, Steve Lane wrote:
That's a very interesting point "should Lego allow others to make Mindstorms
pieces". It would mean a big culture change. On the one hand they could lose
sales to an outside company, but on the other hand they could generate sales by
selling parts packs (beams & stuff) to support the 3rd party sensors.

It would be the first time Lego wasn't wholly responsible for the product, and
their high standards of quality could cause problems with third parties. But if
Lego provided the casing's it shouldn't be too hard.

They could have a "Lego approved" program for 3rd party parts.

I think the main benefit to Lego apart from selling more RIS kits is that it
would generate a lot of info of what people do and don't want. If a particular
sensor sold well Lego might consider buying up the 3rd party's patent, or coming
up with something similar. Although putting newly formed third parties out of
business wouldn't be popular.

And if everything was licensed, Lego would retain control, so that 3rd parties
couldn't bring out a replacement RCX for example without their permission.


Steve brings up some very interesting points here, some of which I am already
familiar with.

As far as TLG is concerned, I talked with folks like Brad and Jake some years
ago about the company's attitude toward my plans for making and selling
Mindstorms sensors. They basically explained the ground rules of how to work
within their system of trademarks and other legal issues.

There are no laws which cover consumer purchase of Lego bricks, subsequent
machining and re-use as sensor housings, and reselling. In fact, TLG continue to
have a quite positive attitude toward any supplier who offers to fill market
niches which they cannot fill.

As far as coming out with a directly competitive product, unless there are
patents in place, free competition is a legal right. However, if TLG decide a
device is worth making, its is likely to be because they perceive a large
potential market which means they can use some serious industrial muscle to
reduce manufacturing costs to well below what a light manufacturing company
could hope to compete with.

As to the question of whether the company would ever "endorse" a third party
device, I would think it unlikely for a low volume product. However, there are
quite a few examples of this happening already for medium volume products such
as watches. TLG do not make watches!

The only downside, in my opinion, of a lack of endorsement by TLG of Mindstorms
compatible sensors made by third party suppliers is that in structured activity
like FLL, the participants are denied use of these sensors because they aren't
"official" parts.

JB

 

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