 | | Re: LEGO® Launches Battle Over Trademark —John Neal
|
| | | (...) I wonder if the clones would have enjoyed the success that they've had were they to have created a brick system that didn't replicate the dimensions of LEGO bricks. Clearly a case of wanting your brick and repeating it, too. JOHN (15 years ago, 15-Nov-09, to lugnet.mediawatch, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: LEGO® Launches Battle Over Trademark —Larry Marak
|
| | | | | (...) The answer to your question is obvious. Enlighten and others manufacture for a market that never could afford to buy Lego bricks. The success of Lego's clone of the Kiddiecraft brick has had very little influence on the success of later (...) (15 years ago, 17-Nov-09, to lugnet.mediawatch, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: LEGO® Launches Battle Over Trademark —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | (...) Not a valid analogy I believe. LEGO didn't clone Kiddiecraft; it took the idea and ran with it. Since their improvements were superior to the original, the original died off. Clones today exist because of their compatibility with LEGO, not (...) (15 years ago, 17-Nov-09, to lugnet.mediawatch, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: LEGO® Launches Battle Over Trademark —Jim Hughes
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Lego did not license the Kiddicraft design. They took it and *slightly* modified it. The Kiddicraft design, although patented in the UK, was not protected in Denmark. They bought all of the residual rights to the brick (in the early 1980s) (...) (15 years ago, 18-Nov-09, to lugnet.mediawatch, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: LEGO® Launches Battle Over Trademark —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | (...) The LEGO Company did not clone the Kiddiecraft brick. They licensed the design, then bought the rights to it outright, and then improved upon it with the addition of the tubes inside the bricks that prevent cross-stacked parts from sliding (...) (15 years ago, 17-Nov-09, to lugnet.mediawatch, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: LEGO® Launches Battle Over Trademark —David Eaton
|
| | | | | | (...) From what I recall, LEGO received KiddieCraft bricks in 1947 along with their first molding machine. The bricks were (if I infer correctly) presented to LEGO as examples of what can be done with plastic injection molding. LEGO probably didn't (...) (15 years ago, 19-Nov-09, to lugnet.mediawatch, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: LEGO® Launches Battle Over Trademark —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | (...) Well of course they wouldn't, but so what? The question isn't whether or not clones could thrive in the absence of the original; it's whether the original still retains exclusive rights to the studs-n-tubes design, and many courts have already (...) (15 years ago, 17-Nov-09, to lugnet.mediawatch, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: LEGO® Launches Battle Over Trademark —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) Well, then, my question is WRT the dimensions of the studs-n-tube design. Shouldn't TLG's dimensions be propriety? I mean, yeah, copy the design, but don't rip-off the dimensions. JOHN (15 years ago, 18-Nov-09, to lugnet.mediawatch, FTX)
|
| | | | |
