Brick Shops : 357


Marketplace / Brick Shops / 357

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Matthew Gerber

(...) Wow...I just finished reading the thread in the BrickBay forum...what utter nonesense. A suggestion was made to register displeasure with eBay over this issue, and I agree. An organized boycott (another suggestion) would likely do a world of (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Rose Regner

"Matthew Gerber" <matthew@digitaliris.com> wrote in message news:GqGwFq.Fz8@lugnet.com... (...) utter (...) and (...) use (...) Does anyone know if they really have any legal standing on this? It seems a bit far fetched to me. Rose (23 years ago, 25-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Tim Courtney

"r2" <lego@r2eng.com> wrote in message news:GqH4BA.Fzq@lugnet.com... (...) world (...) form (...) a (...) I don't think they have any legal grounds, but IANAL. I think it would be beneficial to organize a boycott of LEGO buyers and sellers on eBay. (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Kyle Peterson

I agree with Tim. We should organize a letter of complaint threatening to Boycott. Many would definitely participate. -Kyle PS..thanks LUGNET for allowing this discussion. (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Adrian Drake

(...) You'll have my endorsement. Adrian (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Calum Tsang

(...) Actually, they have plenty of legal ground. Again, similarly, I am not a lawyer. (And also a Canadian!) But I have been to lectures about intellectual property, and it is my understanding that trademark infringement is based on similar service (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Matthew Gerber

(...) Yes, they do...but... (...) Perhaps for a lax judge, but you have made a couple of false indications in your example; Brickbay is not an auction site, sellers do not conduct auctions there...it is a private commerce site for the buying and (...) (23 years ago, 26-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Ronald Vallenduuk

Another ?0,02 worth: I think Matthew has a good point in that the basics of the service are essentially different: Brickbay is not an auctions site. Another point the judge might look at is the fact that on eBay you can sell anything, and Brickbay (...) (23 years ago, 27-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Matthew Gerber

(...) Now, see, I think it has a lot to do with the service, maybe even more so than the name. I'm sure eBay does regular sweeps of the Web, WHOIS, domain registrars and such, and looks for *Bay names...mostly assuming that these services ARE (...) (23 years ago, 27-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Matthew Gerber

(...) D'OH! Sorry Dan...head meant to type about BrickBay, fingers decided to type about BrickShelf! Matt (23 years ago, 27-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Calum Tsang

(...) Ah, yes, I forgot that, right. I think that proves to some degree the association being made. I've only browsed Brickbay occassionally and never bought anything from a vendor on there (I prefer my addictions from local retail :) yet I made the (...) (23 years ago, 27-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Matthew Gerber

(...) Hee-hee...I meant it more like eBay would have other, bigger fish to fry before they really took the time to flex more muscle at Brickbay...others were more blatently harming them, they'll deal with those faster/more actively...gives Dan some (...) (23 years ago, 27-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops)

(canceled) —Tony Priestman

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Tony Priestman

On Fri, 25 Jan 2002, Calum Tsang (<GqIJsD.HKr@lugnet.com>) wrote at 21:31:25 <snip> (...) Just butting in to say that it isn't Larry's trademark. The mark belongs to the Guild of Bricksmiths(tm). :-) Carry on. (23 years ago, 26-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Right. Thanks, it did need pointing out. You can substitute Milton Train Works(tm) as an example of a personal trademark of mine if you like, or change "his trademark" to "the group's trademark" if you like, and either way it stands. (23 years ago, 26-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Tom Reed

(...) I don't know if this sheds any more light on the situation, but here is my understanding of large companies defending their trademark: I was reading an article in Florida one day that was telling of "Disney" sueing a day care center for using (...) (23 years ago, 27-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Grant Giandonato

(...) I'm no lawyer either, but I know DC Comics took legal action against a elementary football team called the "Superman." They also used the Superman logo on their helmets. Now, I'm sure DC could've careed less... heck, they probably liked it. (...) (23 years ago, 28-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Josh Baakko

(...) It should also be noted that MANY Brickbay shops point users to eBay (Including mine!)... Would they be willing to loose this!? (...) Maybe a defence by-way-of TLG!? Little far fetched for an "unoffical Lego site", but, hey, can it hurt to try (...) (23 years ago, 26-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Ross Crawford

(...) Trouble is, unless he can find a lawyer willing to work pro bono, the cost to find out will be prohibitive. Best thing is probably to tell as many people as possible (in the media preferably). And tell eBay you'll boycott them if they don't (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Ray Sanders

(...) ( speculating idly ) I wonder if all the sites that eBay is challenging in this manor got together, might it possible to get class action status ? If so, then they could all combine efforts which might make it a fair fight after all. Ray (23 years ago, 25-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Chris Osborn

(...) I just submitted it too. It seems like it requires tons of people to submit anything before they will post it. I'm sure they'll reject it from me too, they reject everything I submit. (23 years ago, 25-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —David Goeb

(...) May get added to Quickies. Taco lurks here now and then so I would bet he is aware of the situation already. You could mail him direct and ask. He has been known to be nice on one or two days of the year. [/:-) Best DaveG (23 years ago, 25-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops)

Re: Slashdot (was:Bad News for Brickbay!?) —Ross Crawford

(...) I think it's a bit luck-of-the-draw as to which "editor" reads it. I've only ever had 1 story accepted 8?( ROSCO FUT off-topic.geek (23 years ago, 25-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)

Re: Slashdot (was:Bad News for Brickbay!?) —Kevin Loch

I think it depends more on how the title is phrased, which category is chosen and how it is written. I have had success by writing submissions in that certain 'slashdot style'. KL (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)

Re: Slashdot (was:Bad News for Brickbay!?) —Chris Osborn

(...) There's so many categories to choose from, it's hard to know which one is right. (...) Ah, of course. I guess I should have misspelled every 3rd word and made it sound like incoherent clueless rambling. (23 years ago, 26-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)

Re: Slashdot (was:Bad News for Brickbay!?) —Ross Crawford

(...) Mentioning one or more of the slashdot "editors" often helps, too. ROSCO (23 years ago, 2-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)

Re: Slashdot (was:Bad News for Brickbay!?) —Chris Osborn

(...) Yah, I'm guessing that most of the "editors" don't read what you're submitting, they just reject it. That's probably why it takes tons of submissions to get a story up, you have to get enough in that it slips past the rejectors. (23 years ago, 25-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Kevin Wilson

Matthew Gerber wrote in message ... (...) and (...) As I posted in the Brickbay discussion forums, If you (the collective YOU, not Matt specifically :-) ) really want to fight eBay, this is NOT a good forum to discuss tactics or strategy. It's a (...) (23 years ago, 27-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Frank Filz

(...) Could I also suggest that lugnet.general may not be the best forum to discuss this in. Perhaps it's time to keep this to lugnet.market.brickshops. FUT: lugnet.market.brickshops Frank (23 years ago, 27-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)

Re: Bad News for Brickbay!? —Jean-Marc Détraz

(...) I'm an eBay user and I don't think that it would be of any use to do a boycott. It seems to me that no matter what you want to do against eBay, it is a lost cause. They just don't care! They make millions anyway so why would you spend energy (...) (23 years ago, 27-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.brickshops, lugnet.general)