| |
In lugnet.general, Dan Boger writes:
> Dave Schuler wrote:
> > One of my coworkers (who doesn't know of my little ABS addiction) mentioned
> > off-handedly that his brother, while in college for architecture, used to
> > build "really complex bridges and things out of LEGO." I'm not anal about
> > "LEGO" versus "LEGOs," but this marks the absolute first time I've ever
> > heard any non-AFOL refer to LEGO correctly. Wacky.
>
> heh, I'm not anal about it, but isn't the proper use "LEGO Bricks"?
IANAE(1) but I think it's actually "LEGO brand building bricks" :-)
1 - I am not anal either
tongue set firmly in cheek. FUT set firmly to ot.f.
++Lar
|
|
Message has 4 Replies:
 | | Re: Proper usage of "LEGO"
|
| (...) Well, sadly, I am pretty anal, but I think Dan was right... I think The Lego Company has asked (back when it was The Lego Group) that their building brick product be referred to as "Lego bricks" or "Lego toys". IANALR (not a Lego Rep) DaveE (25 years ago, 13-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
| | | Re: Proper usage of "LEGO"
|
| I wish I could explain it into words that make sense about the LEGO® Company of the proper usage of LEGO. What I mean is over the years many years with the change of trademarks, copyrights, statemarks, slogans, theme logo designs and company logos. (...) (25 years ago, 14-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
| | | Re: Proper usage of "LEGO"
|
| Larry Pieniazek <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:GI0zED.1vy@lugnet.com... (...) mentioned (...) to (...) about (...) I am pretty sure it is Lego Bricks, since they have a patent and all. -- Markham Carroll Who needs sanity when you (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
Message is in Reply To:
12 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
|
|
|
|
