Subject:
|
Re: LEGO® Launches Battle Over Trademark
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.mediawatch
|
Date:
|
Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:24:49 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
13474 times
|
| |
|
|
| |
In lugnet.mediawatch, Dave Schuler wrote:
|
| |
But it’s not “their” market, and it hasn’t been “their” market since the
patent expired. What we’ve seen for several decades is competitor brands
moving into the market, not into “LEGO’s” market.
|
But it is their system. What the clones should be doing is creating unique
bricks that work within the LEGO system, not recreating them.
JOHN
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: LEGO® Launches Battle Over Trademark
|
| (...) Why can't they do both? Mega Bloks has a huge number of unique elements that are LEGO-compatible, in addition to the more basic and conventional pieces. If they were only to produce unusual elements and no basic pieces, then they'd almost (...) (15 years ago, 18-Nov-09, to lugnet.mediawatch, FTX)
| | | Re: LEGO® Launches Battle Over Trademark
|
| (...) Doesn't work that way. Without a core of standard basic elements, the best they'd be able to hope for is a business model similar to what you see with BrickForge/BrickArms/Little Armory etc. If all you can make are elements that enhance the (...) (15 years ago, 18-Nov-09, to lugnet.mediawatch, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: LEGO® Launches Battle Over Trademark
|
| (...) The duplication of designs not protected by patent is not "ripping off." (...) But it's not "their" market, and it hasn't been "their" market since the patent expired. What we've seen for several decades is competitor brands moving into the (...) (15 years ago, 18-Nov-09, to lugnet.mediawatch, FTX)
|
30 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
|
|
|
|
