Subject:
|
Re: LEGO® Launches Battle Over Trademark
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.mediawatch
|
Date:
|
Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:27:28 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
13743 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.mediawatch, John Neal wrote:
| |
| |
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.
|
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 certainly fail. LEGO would simply start producing similarly unusual
elements and try to get its arms around more of the market share once again.
A great many basic elements are no longer under patent, so these are fair game.
Almost every compatible brand has its own version of the 2x4 brick, for
instance. The unusual, brand-specific elements are complements to the basic
pieces, but they aren’t sufficient to float the brand on their own.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
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
|
|
|
|
