| |
In lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, Sonnich Jensen wrote:
> Funny, I bought and wrote this...
>
> Now I read this:
> http://www.lego.com/eng/info/default.asp?page=pressdetail&contentid=13026&countrycode=2057&yearcode=&archive=false
>
> It is just across the waters, 80 km from here.
>
> 10 tons, 10000 sets :-)
> That is a lot!
It's not quite accurate for them to describe all of the sets as "blatant copies"
of LEGO sets. Granted, many sets were direct copies, and Shifty certainly
copied numerous patent-protected parts, but the Shifty castle set that I bought
has no direct LEGO equivalent; neither does the one shown in the top picture,
AFAIK.
To recap:
Cheers to LEGO for protecting its patent rights.
Jeers to LEGO for over-simplifying the actual situation.
> PS: I will keep the set, in case I have to do a setup/show sometime again. It
> will go under "bad bad bad copies"
That's a good idea. An unfortunate side effect of this, which LEGO may or may
not realize, is that they're actually helping out legitimate competitor brands
by destroying a bogus brand. The removal of the poor-quality bootleg will
protect the remaining clones from the "cheap knock-off" label.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
11 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
|
|
|
|
