Subject:
|
Re: LEGO® Launches Battle Over Trademark
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.mediawatch
|
Date:
|
Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:34:38 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
13243 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.mediawatch, David Eaton wrote:
| |
In lugnet.mediawatch, John Neal wrote:
| |
I guess I am just an old dog stuck using that with which I’ve always known:
LEGO. Even if another company were in fact able to do a better job than TLG,
I doubt that I would convert.
|
I guess here’s the rub:
To turn it around for a minute, suppose that MegaBloks had come out first,
and produced poor quality bricks. Then, when their patent ran out, LEGO
decided to make awesome bricks that matched the MegaBloks standard, simply
because MegaBloks at the time of LEGO’s inception happened to be the market
leader. Should LEGO have been forced to pick a different scale so that they
didn’t conflict with the MegaBlok iconic image?
|
If TLG produced better quality bricks, I wouldn’t see the advantage of making
them compatible with a competitor’s inferior product.
| |
| |
Yeah, yeah: capitalism. Though I would say that it is amoral rather than
immoral.
|
True. Capitalism itself is amoral, while its practitioners can be immoral.
DaveE
|
Yes they can.
JOHN
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: LEGO® Launches Battle Over Trademark
|
| (...) I guess here's the rub: To turn it around for a minute, suppose that MegaBloks had come out first, and produced poor quality bricks. Then, when their patent ran out, LEGO decided to make awesome bricks that matched the MegaBloks standard, (...) (15 years ago, 19-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
|
|
|
|
