Subject:
|
Laws and Copying 2x4 Bricks, was Re: Solid Aluminum 2x4 Bricks!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade
|
Date:
|
Tue, 4 Jun 2002 15:27:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
944 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade, Richard Marchetti writes:
> Plus, while the lawsuits between TLC and Ritvik Mega Bloks fly -- it's still
> fairly certain that the idea of basic bricks and their clutching engineering
> is probably in public domain, or at least no longer protected as an idea
> unique to a single company in the U.S., Canada, and a host of other countries.
If it were fairly certain, the court cases would be over. (See below for
some references within LUGNET.)
Lego are taking the issue beyond the mechanical. It is certain that many
patents have expired (including the minifig) in the US and other countries.
However Lego's belief, as stated in their Fair Play policy, is that it is
only "loopholes" in the law that allow their competitors to get away with
"copying" original Lego products. Lego are trying to change the law.
At issue are not just Lego patents and copyrights. Patents expire on a fixed
date; it's not clear how copyright applies to industrial design (but Lego
are taking no chances.) Even when copyrights eventually expire, trademarks
endure. Attached to trademarks are phenomena such as goodwill and what goes
on in the typical buyer's head (I guess it takes a jury to figure that.)
Lego - as seen in their response to Canada's recent ruling - are taking up
the goodwill, consumer confusion, and unfair competition issues. They have
already asserted (and lost in France) that the 2x4 brick is a trademarked
image that announces "Lego made this" even when it's a Megabloks brick.
Failing that line of reasoning, Lego are grasping at more intangible things,
like goodwill, the things Lego say Canada recognized as relevant facts.
The law in these areas (beyond patent, copyright, and trademark) is hard to
fathom (speaking as a layperson who has tried.) Lego's Fair Play policy is
pretty uncompromising though: "In the LEGO Group, we believe that any
original product design should be protected against copying for as long as
it is produced and marketed." "[our lawyers are] making sure that consumers
can have confidence that anything bearing the LEGO Group's trademarks or
characteristic product features is a LEGO brand product."
It is clear that Lego have an ethical stance based on creator's rights,
apart from the embodiment of those rights in current laws. They do not (can
not anymore) rely merely on patent protection for "characteristic product
features" but rather on concepts of brand that claim much more than a
patent. And, of course, if Lego made it first, the others are just copying
it, and should get their own original ideas. That's something even a child
could understand.
However, in the real world, ideas outlive their creator. Human beings
survive by copying the ideas of those who went before. Patent and copyright
laws create a boundary where ideas and their expression pass from exclusive
control of one person, who trades on the invention for fair value in
exchange, to the world at large, perhaps after the creator and any
survivor's estate are gone. On the other hand, trademarks are not subject
to expiration, and corporations don't die necessarily. In between these
poles are all the other issues at stake.
For an introduction to these issues, check out NOLO Press (a line of do it
yourself law guides) _Patent It Yourself_. You will also want a text on IP
litigation (I'm still looking for a good one.)
Pressman, David. Patent It Yourself. 2002 (9th ed). NOLO Press.
Lego Fair Play policy:
http://www.lego.com/eng/info/fairplay.asp
Recent Court Outcomes:
"Lego Company Responds to Judgement "
http://news.lugnet.com/mediawatch/?n=650
"Federal Court Throws out Lego's Trademark Case"
http://news.lugnet.com/mediawatch/?n=649
"LEGO and Mega Bloks Still in Court"
http://news.lugnet.com/mediawatch/?n=566
"Toy companies: Original vs Copycats"
http://news.lugnet.com/mediawatch/?n=533
Tangential reading on "patterns" copying as necessary to human building:
Alexander, Christopher. A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction.
1977. Oxford Univ Press. (Volume 2 in a series, after Alexander's Timeless
Way of Building.)
...and a great book on old traditions of making things:
Seymour, John. The Forgotten Arts and Crafts. 2001 (1984). DK Publishing.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Solid Aluminum 2x4 Bricks!
|
| (...) :: the usual "I am not a lawyer" bit here:: The point is that these aluminum bricks are merely similar, and not exactly like lego bricks. In law, tiny details matter a lot. Even the tiniest differences can render something unique under the (...) (22 years ago, 4-Jun-02, to lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade)
|
26 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
|
|
|
|
