Subject:
|
Re: Two Questions and a Comment (was Re: A Community Problem)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 29 Dec 2004 19:24:56 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
9269 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
> > I'd like to mention that legitimate competitors such as BTR and MegaBloks do
> > not engage in the illegal duplication of TLC's protected intellectual
> > property, so these two companies (at least) should be considered separate
> > from those less reputable corporations that *do* copy TLC's stuff.
>
> That's generally accurate, although IIRC there have been lawsuits eating up time
> and money from both TLC and MB. And I expect this is primarily "Comapny X"
> against Lego, like the Lego against the China knock-off, or Lego against
> Best-Lock.
That's true. Of course, the LEGO v MegaBloks suits are somewhat different from
LEGO v Shifty/Brick, since LEGO's beef with MegaBloks involves the specific
design of the studs-n-tubes interlocking system and the "look" of the 2x4 brick,
whereas LEGO has sued Shifty because Shifty has outright stolen trademarked
designs.
I've wondered about TLC's choice to continue pursuing their claim against
MegaBloks, because to date they've lost every single case[1], and each
subsequent loss is a weakness in future litigation[2].
> I admit I probably wouldn't know about it if it was happening, but I
> don't think there are as many suits between, say, MegaBloks and Best-Lock.
> Hence, my guess is that it really IS hurting Lego moreso than other competing
> brands, but that also comes with the territory of being the best known in the
> building block market.
That's probably true, too. However, I recently mentioned in a different thread
that Shifty appears to have stolen some MegaBloks designs, too, so perhaps such
a case might still come to pass?
http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/clone-brands/?n=2408
[1] Well, TLC *did* succeed in requiring MegaBloks to drop the "works with LEGO"
claim from MegaBloks products, so that's a legitimate victory
[2] Inasmuch as one can apply precedent from one country to another, which
probably isn't all that much. Still, I've read write-ups along the lines of "in
this case as in previous cases in other countries, LEGO's claim was found to be
invalid" or what have you. So who knows?
Where's that LLCA AFOL lawyer when you need him?!?
Dave!
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
257 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
