Subject:
|
Re: LEGO® Launches Battle Over Trademark
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.mediawatch
|
Date:
|
Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:12:57 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
14125 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.mediawatch, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
1. Competition. I wonder what path LEGO would have chosen in the mid-90s if
they didn’t have a significant market competitor to deal with. Mega Bloks
was just starting to reach its stride when LEGO was mired in juniorization,
clothing lines, and dubious software ventures. A good many of Mega Bloks’
sets, in fact, were basically bulk-brick delivery systems, while LEGO was
still moving into its “some assembly required” phase. Sure, the LEGO
pendulum has swung very nicely back toward cool designs that require actual
building, but it was touch-and-go there for a while.
|
You’re assuming that TLC actually took cues from MB in terms of how to fix their
business model. In terms of the AFOL market, all it meant to TLC was that their
customers stopped buying as much stuff, not that they started buying the
competition. Parents who were buying strictly for their kids might not have
even noticed any difference in design style.
| |
I’m also quite sure that Star Wars gave LEGO a big boost, but I don’t
believe that it was sufficient in itself to turn LEGO away from the
juniorization Dark Side.
|
Star Wars was, in the early 00’s, only the second-best selling theme for TLC.
The top seller was BIONICLE, with the Designer/Creator sets and Harry Potter
filling the next two spots in the ranking. Two of those lines (SW and HP) were
very likely more about the property than anything to do with set design, since
both pulled in a significant market share of people who were fans of those
properties, but that had no real interest in the LEGO system in general (and
still don’t). BIONICLE had a strong original story combined with the whole
collectible angle to make it a success, and it sold so strongly that even as the
rest of the LEGO lineup was faltering, they had to set up a new production line
to keep up with the demand for BIONICLE parts sometime in late 2001/early 2002.
| |
2. I would characterize Mega Bloks, Best-Lock, and K’NEX as legitimate
competitors in the LEGO-compatible construction business, because each has
staked out its own section of the marketplace, and each produces sets that
are distinct from anything that LEGO has ever put out. But there are many
questionable brands that routinely defy patents and intellectual property
rights, copying LEGO sets outright and even copying current or recent Mega
Bloks sets (“cloning the clones,” as Larry Marak has coined it). These
latter brands are acting unethically and (in some cases) illegally, and they
contribute to the overall negative opinion of “clone” brands.
|
I think you’re blurring the lines between competitors, clones, and bootlegs. If
it’s an original system like K’Nex, it’s a straight competitor. If it’s
original sets using the same basic system/dimensions as the LEGO system, it’s a
clone. If it’s just copies of older LEGO sets (such as those that are regularly
kicked out of the Asian Toy Fairs), then it’s a bootleg. Whether the clones are
as legitimate in terms of competition as those companies that came up with their
own original construction toy systems is still a matter of legal contention.
| |
Competition is key to protect us from the likes of Galidor, but legal
standards must still be maintained so that proprietary rights aren’t
violated.
|
Galidor is the key to protect us from the likes of Galidor. Nothing contributed
to the demise of that theme more than the simple fact that the TV show
completely failed to find a market. Without the show, the toys were destined to
be a flop. If the show had become the next Power Rangers, the toys would have
sold like hotcakes, regardless of what any AFOLs think.
Remember, when Galidor was announced, there was a huge AFOL backlash against
licensed themes. These rants failed to account for the already massive success
of the SW and HP themes, the future success of Dora, Thomas the Tank Engine,
Spongebob, and Indiana Jones, or the simple fact that BIONICLE was not licensed
like the rest of those themes and was outselling everything.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: LEGO® Launches Battle Over Trademark
|
| (...) That's a great point, Dave, and it brings to mind two related issues: 1. Competition. I wonder what path LEGO would have chosen in the mid-90s if they didn't have a significant market competitor to deal with. Mega Bloks was just starting to (...) (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
|
|
|
|
