Subject:
|
Re: Lego patents
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Thu, 27 Dec 2001 18:36:07 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Scott D. Yelich <SCOTT@SCOTTYELICH.COMstopspammers>
|
Viewed:
|
690 times
|
| |
|
|
On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, Allan Bedford wrote:
> By simply creating a LEGO project, you are not expanding the device used to
> make the basic bricks, upon which someone else already has a patent. You
> *might* be able to obtain a copyright on your design, or trademark the name
> of the company under which you intend to sell your creations, but you can't
> really patent a LEGO project, unless I misunderstand your question.
Actually, the distinction is simple... the legos are what is used to
implement the invention -- the patent would surely not claim that the
invention is due to the legos and is confined to existing only when
implemented with legos.
With that said, the word invention is a good choice. If you make an
invention, you could get a patent. However, patents are everything.
For instance, to me, the invention is worth far more than the patent.
Scott
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Lego patents
|
| (...) This bears repeating, and ought to be heeded by those who wish to teach IP law or speak about it and be taken seriously... the correct term is a lot closer to "LEGO(r) brick" or "LEGO brand building element" than it is to "legos", and if you (...) (23 years ago, 27-Dec-01, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Lego patents
|
| (...) Just be sure that in your class you refer to them as "LEGO bricks" and not LEGOs. To do so would be doing your students a disservice. :) (...) This question isn't clear to me. Are you asking if someone can obtain a patent (or at least build a (...) (23 years ago, 27-Dec-01, to lugnet.robotics)
|
9 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
|
|
|
|
