Subject:
|
Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.mediawatch
|
Date:
|
Mon, 2 Feb 2004 19:06:08 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1947 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.mediawatch, Matthew Miller wrote:
> <http://slumbering.lungfish.com/>, top story today.
>
> Attention Lego fanatics: you are missing the point when you claim that
> the word "Lego" can't be pluralized into "Legos," but should instead be
> "Lego bricks."
Huh? "LEGO bricks" is the standard preferred term. And who does he think he
is, going around and lecturing people on proper trademark protection when he's
typing "Lego" instead of "LEGO"? Just because someone says that "LEGO" can't be
pluralized into "LEGOS" doesn't mean that they're saying that "LEGO" is the
plural of "LEGO".
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
| (...) I think you need to read the last paragraph again. :) As for the capitalization issue: that's a very long-standing conflict between marketing/sales/companies and journalists. See: (URL) Which includes the classic summary: "You want all caps? (...) (21 years ago, 2-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
| (URL), top story today. Attention Lego fanatics: you are missing the point when you claim that the word "Lego" can't be pluralized into "Legos," but should instead be "Lego bricks." If your concern is trademark protection, then plurality doesn't (...) (21 years ago, 2-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
35 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
|
|
|
|
