Results 1101 – 1120 of 1413.
|
Search took 0.01 CPU seconds.
|
|
 | | Re: Latest update from LEGO Direct
|
| (...) Thanks for the info. But wait, what about the "unknown" LoM sets? The back of the Alien DIscovery pak clearly shows two more small LoM sets, but absolutely no one has seen them. I know you probably cannot reply to this, but will we every see (...) (24 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
| |
|  
sets
(score: 0.214)
|
|
| |
|
sets
(score: 0.214)
|
|
| |
|
sets
(score: 0.214)
|
|
| | Mystery of LEGO 6500
|
| Now that we have established LEGO insiders reading this group, I wonder if they can do a little information digging and tell us the real story of 6500 Holiday Village ((URL) Were any ever produced? Why was it not released? My only guess is that the (...) (24 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
| |
|
sets
(score: 0.214)
|
|
| |
|
sets
(score: 0.214)
|
|
| |
|
sets
(score: 0.214)
|
|
| | Re: Latest update from LEGO Direct
|
| "Jake McKee" <jacob.mckee@america.lego.com> wrote in message news:G6x2KK.Fo@lugnet.com... (...) 2001 (...) Jake, Thanks for mentioning this about the train line. I suppose I should start saving my Lego budget for later in the year! Can you clarify (...) (24 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
| |
|
sets
(score: 0.214)
|
|
| |
|
sets
(score: 0.214)
|
|
| | Re: Latest update from LEGO Direct
|
| (Crossposting to loc.au) (...) Last I heard they were talking about the second half of 2001. Are we really going to have to wait that long? Any indication from Jake or his colleagues would be greatly appreciated (please?!!) (Non) availability must (...) (24 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.loc.au)
| |
|
sets
(score: 0.214)
|
|
| | Latest update from LEGO Direct
|
| Greetings! I have finally gotten caught up after the holiday break and then the mad rush to get back up to speed when you get back to the office! Anyway, I have been sorting through the lugnet.lego.direct newsgroup and wanted to respond to/update a (...) (24 years ago, 9-Jan-01, to lugnet.lego.direct) !!
| |
|
sets
(score: 0.214)
|
|
| |
|
sets
(score: 0.214)
|
|
| | Re: Surely this is not legal
|
| Pretty much my point. Not distinctly illegal, (other than the obvious intellectual property issue), but exceedingly stupid since you can get most of them free. Also, you'd have to have most of the sets anyway just to build what you see in each (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
| |
|
sets
(score: 0.213)
|
|
| | Re: Surely this is not legal
|
| (...) Agreed, but for MOST people (which is what I was trying to say) it's pretty useless. That's not to say there aren't exceptions to the rule. Kinda like shell promo sets selling for ridiculous prices or some such. It'd be pretty stupid for ME to (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
| |
|
sets
(score: 0.213)
|
|
| | Re: Surely this is not legal
|
| (...) I'm going to kinda agree with Geoffrey here. This COULD be illegal, except I don't think Lego will care, really, unless this turns into some sort of lucrative market. The images presented are under Lego's copyright. Lego has asked that no sets (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
| |
|
sets
(score: 0.213)
|
|
| |
|
sets
(score: 0.213)
|
|
| | Re: Surely this is not legal
|
| Richard Schamus <legoman34@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:G6G36G.1uB@lugnet.com... (...) It doesn't look legal to me - the reason being the prominent LEGO logo displayed with their 'Just Imagine...' trademark on the top, acting like it was (...) (24 years ago, 1-Jan-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
| |
|
sets
(score: 0.213)
|
|
| |
|
sets
(score: 0.213)
|
|
| |
|
sets
(score: 0.213)
|
|
| |
|
sets
(score: 0.213)
|
|
| |
|
sets
(score: 0.213)
|
More: Next Page >>
|
