 | | Re: Wal-Mart in USA now sells "LEGOS" —Stéphane Simard
|
| | | (...) Personally, I never understood Lego's big fuss over the use of the term "Legos" for their products. (Or any Lego fan's big fuss, for that matter). They tried for 25 years (maybe more) to tell people to stop using the term, yet people still do. (...) (21 years ago, 9-Jul-03, to lugnet.market.shopping)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Wal-Mart in USA now sells "LEGOS" —John Neal
|
| | | | | (...) Your examples are not analogous. More like "Xerox" or "Kleenex" or "Rollerblades". These company's brand names have fallen victim to the equation of a product, but not necessarily their product. (...) Not true at all! If "legos" becomes (...) (21 years ago, 9-Jul-03, to lugnet.market.shopping, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Wal-Mart in USA now sells "LEGOS" —Larry Lesser
|
| | | | | | (...) Okay I never really understood why any one puts a big fuss, but I do understand where they come from. As far as saying Lego or Legos. There was an article in the Arizona Repulsive about lego. The reporter kept saying legos. I remember a number (...) (21 years ago, 9-Jul-03, to lugnet.market.shopping, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Wal-Mart in USA now sells "LEGOS" —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) Clearly no one should be using reporters as sources for proper English usage. There should not be any presumption of competency there, just because they write for a living. (...) Yes,it does. At least in my view. (21 years ago, 9-Jul-03, to lugnet.market.shopping, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Wal-Mart in USA now sells "LEGOS" —William R. Ward
|
| | | | (...) It's a legal issue. Trademarks are only valid if you defend them. And the only way to properly use a trademark is as an adjective. That's why you see things like "Kleenex(R) Brand Facial Tissues" instead of just "Kleenexes" in Kimberly-Clark's (...) (21 years ago, 10-Jul-03, to lugnet.market.shopping)
|
| | | | |
