 | | Re: Anyone heard this story yet?
|
| (...) By having an ever vigilant, and understanding AFOL community? (...) Point-taken, but there is an issue of possible "abuse" of trademarks here. If a site registered as (URL) and only sold clone bricks that would in IMHO be illegal. ( misleadig (...) (24 years ago, 1-Sep-00, to lugnet.general)
| | | | | Re: Anyone heard this story yet?
|
| (...) Right. That's both illegal and smarmy. Just registering the domain with the hope of selling it to Lego also under the new law illegal and definitely smarmy (although having that be illegal sort of troubles me -- just because it's not nice, or (...) (24 years ago, 1-Sep-00, to lugnet.general)
| | | | | legopolis.com
|
| (...) Just for the record, they didn't. Rather, the domain legopolis.com was given up voluntarily after a general FTF meeting with two Lego attorneys in October, 1997, in which they explained that they felt that the domain name diluted the LEGO (...) (24 years ago, 1-Sep-00, to lugnet.general)
| | | | | Re: legopolis.com
|
| Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote: [a bunch of stuff which I'd snipped] Thanks for explaining more clearly. The whole thing was slightly before my lego on-line time, so it's a bit hazy to me. Sorry. (...) And that's actually the part that was (...) (24 years ago, 2-Sep-00, to lugnet.general)
| |
