Subject:
|
Re: Lego not an original idea?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Mon, 18 Dec 2000 15:55:13 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
564 times
|
| |
|
|
r2 wrote:
>
> Santosh Bhat wrote in message ...
> > Apparently Lego has taken Australian (and other) companies to court over • their
> > product. Whilst they themsleves may be illegitimate themselves.
>
> I do have one question relating to this. Our son is getting a Rokenbok set
> for Christmas which is a RC type building set. The ELEVATED road plates are
> Lego compatible (Mom has her eyes on these). The catalog states that in the
> US and Canada the road plates are Lego compatible but in all other markets
> they have a grid pattern. Why would this be? Are North American laws more
> generous ?
I'm not sure. What I do know (or have an opinion on) is that the LEGO
compatibility of these plates is of marginal value. They only have studs
on top, and it looks like really all you could do is build on top of
them, which seems pretty pointless.
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Lego not an original idea?
|
| Santosh Bhat wrote in message ... (...) their (...) I do have one question relating to this. Our son is getting a Rokenbok set for Christmas which is a RC type building set. The ELEVATED road plates are Lego compatible (Mom has her eyes on these). (...) (24 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.general)
|
7 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
