 | | Re: LEGO® Blocked by Best-Lock —Thomas Main
| | | | (...) <snip> (...) It's interesting that the Best-Lock logo uses their version of a 1 x 6 brick, not a 2 x 4 brick design. Did they change from a 2 x 4 logo during the course of this suit? Lego used to use the 2 x 4 as part of the "SYSTEM" logo, but (...) (19 years ago, 11-Oct-05, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.general)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: LEGO® Blocked by Best-Lock —Dave Schuler
| | | | | (...) That's a good question. I have some Best-Lock instruction books (but no boxes) from '98 or '99, and I'll check them when I get home to see if the logo included a brick. I didn't realize that about the LEGO logo. Hmm... (...) Very true. There (...) (19 years ago, 11-Oct-05, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.general)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: LEGO® Blocked by Best-Lock —Jan-Albert van Ree
| | | | | (...) They're not... In the Netherlands, MegaBlocks started a similair trial, lost and since sales of Brick, MegaBlocks and the like are illegal in the Netherlands. And I for one am glad about it, since they're way too close to the real thing and (...) (19 years ago, 11-Oct-05, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.general)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: LEGO® Blocked by Best-Lock —Dave Schuler
| | | | | (...) I didn't know that--well, score one for LEGO, I guess. They've lost numerous similar cases, though, wherein it's been ruled that the patent expired long ago. Do you know when this case was decided? Dave! (19 years ago, 11-Oct-05, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
| | | | | | |
