 | | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
|
(...) They can, but not for stuff like this. Ignoring the trademark-owner's wish on usage does not actually constitute a legal trademark violation. Improper usage, yes, but legal violations are only when one person is using and/or claiming as his (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
|
(...) This is pretty much my position. The purpose of language is to communicate ideas. It doesn't really matter what words are used, as long as the idea behind them is understood. If using 'legos' or 'lego' communicates the idea as well as using (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
|
(...) Still, I've heard people say "I'd never buy a Ford" or "Fords suck" or that kind of thing, so at some level it is true that people can equate a brand with all subsets of the brand. Nevertheless, your point is well taken. (...) Eeek! Good (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
|
(...) Can you tell me the one automobile brand name that is generically equated with all automobiles? That's right, there isn't one. Most auto companies refer to their own vehicles in that style, even as part of their own jingos. This is the other (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
|
I'm going to chalk this one up to human nature. As far as I can tell, people like to shorten names. Instead of saying "LEGO brand building bricks", they say "LEGOs". Call it a nick-name, or even an abbreviation .I could walk around all day saying (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
|
(...) Well, sure. But the original article was *days* ago--my mayfly attention span hardly let's get to the end of (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
|
(...) There's the exact same technical/legalistic rule against saying "Fords" or "Toyotas" or "Burger Kings" or "Pentiums" or "Dells" or "Dumpsters". Or "Kleenexes" or "Band-Aids". Again as the original article pointed out. :) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
|
(...) Excellent observation! I submit "food" as a likewise flexible singular/plural form. Dave! (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
|
(...) If "Legos" grates on you the way "nukuler" grates on me, then you have my sympathy! Still, someone can refer to "Fords" or "Toyotas" without causing an uproar, so there is some precedent for pluralized brandnames, however incorrectly it might (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
|
(...) ... (...) ... Ok... I *have* to jump in at this point. Since when does 'sand' NOT have a plural? It has been pluralized throughout the sands of time. Merriam-Webster, and every other reputable dictionary will back me up on this. Eric (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
|
(...) When the subject/word comes up that is the best way I can describe it as well... the fact that it 'grates' on me. (...) Excellent analogy! And part of why the plural version grates on me is that it sounds like someone is saying the equivalent (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
|
The word "Legos" really grates on me. It's not that lego is like sheep where the plural is also sheep, it's that lego is like sand: it doesn't have a plural. "Pass me those legos" is completely ambiguous: do you mean parts, sets, models, boxes or (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
|
I want to know why I visit lugnet.com instead of lug.net. (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch, FTX)
|
| |
| | onQ, WQED Pittsburgh
|
|
Lego was mentioned and shown several times on a segment about differences between how boys and girls are educated. This segment was locally produced by WQED Pittsburgh (PBS) as a local companion piece to the national documentary "The case of missing (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
|
<snip> (...) Enjoy playing with your mindstorms alternate software program.... (21 years ago, 3-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
|
(...) The problem with legos, as I see it, is there really isn't any other term for them besides "legos". Sure the company would like you to call them Lego bricks or Lego toys, and I try to do so in formal writing--only because I am a fan. But no (...) (21 years ago, 3-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
|
(...) It's part of what remains of the former Brunching Shuttlecocks, which was one of the funniest humor sites on the web before its recent demise. Probably not coincidentally, today's Book of Ratings (another fragment of said site) also refers to (...) (21 years ago, 3-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
|
(...) Then I will sincerely ask.... what kind of blog is it? (...) And then why not just use it the way the company has asked? I honestly don't see why people put up such a fuss over this. When speaking with friends, or just in your own head while (...) (21 years ago, 3-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
|
(...) True, but the title page shows LUGNET in all caps. Hmm... Admins, I demand transparency on this pressing issue--why so secretive all of a sudden? 8^) Dave! (21 years ago, 3-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
|
(...) I think the correct way is "LUGNet" - because it refers to LEGO Users Group Network. And re: Kleenex and Band-Aids - I dont like those companies. I like TLG - and I try to do what TLG asks me to because I hope they do what I ask them to (good (...) (21 years ago, 3-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch, FTX)
|
