To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 14418
14417  |  14419
Subject: 
Re: Cultures, words, meanings and ownership (was Was Re: "piffle!" (bowdlerised for your protection)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Tue, 30 Oct 2001 18:16:09 GMT
Viewed: 
153 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Low writes:
In lugnet.technic.bionicle, Larry Pieniazek writes:
John's right, this IS debate fodder. He should have set XFUT, but I will.

XFUT o-t.debate and let's keep it out of other groups if it veers into the
subject areas... that would be my strong preference and I suspect many
others as well.

reposting my debatable comments

In lugnet.technic.bionicle, John Neal writes:

, yet, when a company, like
Lego decides to rip-off names from another culture, words that have deep
religous meaning to them, you think they are the ones that are wrong.  Well,

As many are pointing out elsewhere in this thread, it is absurd to believe that
a "culture" "owns" anything.  What a load of hooey!

Why is it more absurd than a corporation's claim to a trademark? Note that
the Treaty of Waitangi (1840) http://www.govt.nz/aboutnz/treaty.php3
explicitly acknowledges Maori entitlement to cultural heritage, which
includes their language.
http://www.knowledge-basket.co.nz/waitangi/reports/wai11.html

I think we all have a cultural heritage. But if we take your argument to its
(il)logical extreme, should we have the right to stop movies being made
depicting our culture? I suppose Scottish examples would be "Braveheart",
"Whisky Galore" or even “Brigadoon” (prospective tartan clad tourists please
note the place does *not* exist).


If LEGO can acknowledge the importance of cultural sensitivity, why is it a
problem for so many AFOLs (one or two in particular)?

I say shame on Lego, first to use the names and then to deny where they
originated, saying they made them up.  You should really be saying, shame on
Lego.  Here, I thought they came up with all this stuff on their own to find
out they plagiarized it all.  Just like you can't copy someone else's work
in school, the business world is just the same.

Except that this "culture" who thinks they have a case mostly certainly isn't a
*business*.

Why should corporations be privileged over other cultural groups with a
distinct identity?

Because they have better lawyers? :)

Scott A



--DaveL



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Cultures, words, meanings and ownership (was Was Re: "piffle!" (bowdlerised for your protection)
 
(...) Then what was that place the tourist operator took me to???? ...Oh... And I didn't wear any tartan the entire time I was there ... Crawford tartan is so blechy. McIntyre (my mum's side) is much nicer. ROSCO (23 years ago, 31-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Cultures, words, meanings and ownership (was Was Re: "piffle!" (bowdlerised for your protection)
 
(...) reposting my debatable comments (...) Why is it more absurd than a corporation's claim to a trademark? Note that the Treaty of Waitangi (1840) (URL) acknowledges Maori entitlement to cultural heritage, which includes their language. (URL) LEGO (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

4 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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR