| |
In lugnet.loc.au, Kerry Raymond writes:
> I'm not sure if they can come a-stomping.
>
> Firstly, they would have to have registered LegOz as a trademark, business
> name, etc. I don't think having registered "Lego" would be sufficient to
> prevent names like "LegOz".
>
> Secondly, stomping only makes sense if there is economic risk. For example,
> if a competitor used a name very similar to Lego, then obviously it would
> make sense to try and stop them. Or if someone was trying to misrepresent
> the company by using its name. However, it's hard to see how stomping on a
> "fan club" would make a lot of sense; it would only make enemies of their
> customers and make them look like a bunch of pratts in the media.
>
> Fan clubs and user groups usually have a symbiotic relationship with the
> parent company. Lego has already shown some good faith in this area already,
> e.g. the use of its box covers and instructions as images on LUGnet and
> brickshelf. Lego holds the copyright over these and could prevent their use.
> Similarly, Lego could probably have threatened or taken action against the
> people who reverse-engineering the RCX and provided the third-party software
> like NQC.
>
> As I see it, any publicly-visible LegOz activities (like this train show)
> are just free advertising for Lego. Why try to stop us?
Although IANAL, a lot of my work covers trademark law (also, I know a lot
about meat, but that's probably not relevent to this!). In order to maintain
its trademark, TLG must not allow its trademark to become generic. (When you
hear the term "Glad Wrap" do you think of Glad brand or do you think of any
plastic film wrap, or do people who "hoover" their carpets do so only with
Hoover brand products?).
TLG discourages use of the word "Legos" do describe it's products, because
they are Lego (tm) bricks. If trademarks are to be maintained they must be
used as adjectives. (ie Lego brick, Hoover vaccuum cleaner etc). In fact,
the Xerox company invented the word "photocopier" so they could use their
xerox trademark as an adjective. (This is also why they are McDonalds
*Restaurants*, much to the amusement of many!)
The term "LegOz" would, I think, be regarded in court as confusingly similar
to the trademark owned by Lego.
The "stomping" would likely be a polite request, not formal court action.
They may have difficulty pinning down who to sue (if that ever became
necessary).
Why try to stop us? Consider this: a number of Australian AFOLs dabble in
the dark side. What if Megablox etc were publicly exhibited under the
"LegOz" banner? I don't think TLC would like that!
I hope this helps.
Cheers
Richie Dulin
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Whats all this about?
|
| (...) Now this is a valid point, and something to be borne in mind, if we do put on a public display (e.g. the train show). If the Lego word is used, then we probably have to ensure there are no clones. If there are clones, then we probably need to (...) (24 years ago, 23-Mar-01, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.org.au)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Whats all this about?
|
| (...) come-a- (...) I'm not sure if they can come a-stomping. Firstly, they would have to have registered LegOz as a trademark, business name, etc. I don't think having registered "Lego" would be sufficient to prevent names like "LegOz". Secondly, (...) (24 years ago, 23-Mar-01, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.org.au)
|
41 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
|
|
|
|
