Slashdot Mirror


Mega Bloks Wins Supreme Court Battle Against Lego

saskboy writes "Canada's highest court ruled unanimously Thursday that Mega Bloks can continue to sell their Lego styled stackable blocks in Canada. CBC writes, 'The Supreme Court of Canada decision marks the end of a long-running trademark battle between the Montreal-based Mega Bloks and Denmark's Lego.'"

254 comments

  1. Score One for Interoperability by Kelson · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I remember when I was a kid I had a ton of Legos, including some of the larger Duplo blocks left over from when I was *really* young. At one point my brother and I picked up a set of Tyco blocks (some dinosaur mecha, if I remember right). What was interesting about it was that the blocks and pegs were the same size, so they could connect with Legos, but the flat pieces were half the thickness of a normal piece instead of one-third. That made for some interesting possibilities.

    There was also a set of Tic-Tac-style candies (I forget the name -- Ipso or something like that) that we found at some store that came in square plastic boxes with pegs on two edges and holes on the other. Each edge was exactly like the top or bottom of an 8x2 Lego piece. We'd use them to build walls or base plates. I never saw them anywhere else, so I assumed they were discontinued pretty quickly, whether Lego put pressure on them or they just didn't catch on.

    We'd mix and match those different brands of blocks all the time. Having the other companies' blocks never stopped us from buying more Legos.

    1. Re:Score One for Interoperability by glyph42 · · Score: 1

      Those orange tic-tac boxes were the best! Great for the outermost walls of my lego fortresses. And you could put lego men's heads inside the little square hole in the corner!

      --
      Music speeds up when you yawn, but does not change pitch.
    2. Re:Score One for Interoperability by Mattcelt · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The candies are still around - I bought some a few months ago in North Carolina. I don't know if they still click with Legos, but they can be built on their own for sure. (Might be a different brand, I don't know.)

      What I remember about the Tyco blocks is that while they technically did intermingle with real Legos, for some reason they did not hold the connections between blocks well at all. I remember several times getting very frustrated with the Tyco blocks because my creations would fall apart wherever I had used them. I eventually (at 9 or 10 years old) purged my Lego collection of any Tycos whatsoever and never bought them again. To this day that collection is Lego-brand only.

    3. Re:Score One for Interoperability by Kayamon · · Score: 1

      Aaaargh! It's not "Legos", it's LEGO.

      "Lego" is already the pluralised form. It's one of those words that doesn't use an 's' suffix, like "sheep". As in, "I dropped some LEGO on the floor."

      I guess the singular would be "a piece of LEGO".

      </rant>

      --
      Kayamon
    4. Re:Score One for Interoperability by Puf_Almighty · · Score: 1

      Oh yea you're right, that's less cumbersome.

    5. Re:Score One for Interoperability by silverkniveshotmail. · · Score: 1

      calm down there man, you were acting like it mattered there for a second.

    6. Re:Score One for Interoperability by Kayamon · · Score: 4, Funny

      Come the revolution, you will be first against the wall.

      --
      Kayamon
    7. Re:Score One for Interoperability by paniq · · Score: 1

      But Lego put all these "Lego" signs on every little bump. It _must_ be protected.

      --
      Do not trust this signature.
    8. Re:Score One for Interoperability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut up.
      We know, and we don't care. Seriously.

    9. Re:Score One for Interoperability by feijai · · Score: 1
      "Lego" is already the pluralised form.
      Untrue. LEGO is a trademark and a name for the company. It is not a plural or mass noun, but but is a coined phrase cobbled together from leg godt which means "to play well".

      LEGO discourages use of the term "legos" because they are concerned it dilutes their trademark. They'd prefer we use the phrase "LEGO products" or "LEGO set" -- anything that would suggest it's a trademarked item. It has nothing to do with grammar.

    10. Re:Score One for Interoperability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My problem with the Tyco -n- Lego intermingling was the difficulty in seperating a tyco brick from a lego brick. They were just a bit snugger to get together and once I did, it was next to impossible to seperate them. I too got tired of this and seperated my Tycos from my Legos and since I sometimes ran out of Legos, would still intermingle them, but never in a way that made it hard to seperate them.

  2. Oh no! by slimey_limey · · Score: 5, Informative

    I always hated Mega Bloks. They are made out of the cheapest plastic, and don't stay together. Even though they may have needed to win (legally) they shouldn't have (quality-wise).

    1. Re:Oh no! by dada21 · · Score: 1

      Right. Which is why the market is the best judge.

    2. Re:Oh no! by Fallingcow · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're exactly right. The damn things fall apart if you try to build anything big with them.

      I had some Mega Bloks dinosaur thing when I was little. I never managed to build it all the way, because it would fall apart any time more than 1/3 of the blocks were stuck together at once. What a piece of crap.

      Legos are way better. I wish they'd re-make some of their classic sets, like some of the old Pirate and Castle ones. That, and not charge 10,000% markup. $100 for an 18-inch-long lego boat? Madness.

    3. Re:Oh no! by slideroll · · Score: 4, Funny

      Remember, it's colder in Canada, so the blocks contract. That way they stay together better. Also, Canadian children often spit on them to freeze the joints together.

    4. Re:Oh no! by v1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I had a huge box full of legos when I was a kid. The 2x4 bricks and the 2x12/2x14 were by far the most useful. Did you know you can build a functional tumbler locked storage box that requires a lego key to open? (if you glued the blocks together, you wouldn't get in without either the key or a torch)

      Years later I bought a set of knock-off blocks to play around with, and was sorely disappointed in the difference in quality. The bricks would sometimes stick, sometimes not, and sometimes you'd need two pair of pliers to separate them. Stacking bricks, the sides would be smooth and even from block to block with Legos; the knock-offs were jagged. Couldn't build a lock with them because the bricks would catch or jam on bricks next to them because of the crummy tolerances.

      But despite all that, patents need to expire after the artist/creator has had an opportunity to recoup their investment of creativity. Lego has certainly gotten their nickel back and then some, time to open the market.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    5. Re:Oh no! by dslauson · · Score: 1
      "Even though they may have needed to win (legally) they shouldn't have (quality-wise)."
      Well, yeah, Mega Bloks suck compared to Legos, but obviously a court case like this shouldn't take sheer awesomeness into consideration. If it did, I'd become a trial lawyer. Ha!

      Seriously, though, that part of it gets sorted out by the market, which is why there's an entire aisle of Legos in my local Target, and I'm not sure if they even stock Mega Bloks anymore.

    6. Re:Oh no! by Ced_Ex · · Score: 1

      I always hated Mega Bloks. They are made out of the cheapest plastic, and don't stay together. Even though they may have needed to win (legally) they shouldn't have (quality-wise).

      Well, the only other option you have is LEGO, and it completely sucked when you get two flat LEGO pieces stuck together. That frustrated my parents to no end as they had to get a razor blade to pry the two pieces apart.

      --
      Live forever, or die trying.
    7. Re:Oh no! by Bootvis · · Score: 1

      There are tricks for that situation. But I can't remember them though. Besides most of them cost you your fingernails.

      --
      Read, refresh, repeat.
    8. Re:Oh no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there is a tool for that...

    9. Re:Oh no! by Demolition · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, the only other option you have is LEGO, and it completely sucked when you get two flat LEGO pieces stuck together. That frustrated my parents to no end as they had to get a razor blade to pry the two pieces apart.

      What you needed was an official Lego Brick Separator. It separates pieces without denting or cutting them (or yourself) as could occur if you used fingernails, tools, etc. Also, it prevents one of the more common problems of children swallowing pieces while trying to separate stuck pieces with their teeth.

    10. Re:Oh no! by annex1 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      It's as cold here as your blind bigotry and predjudice.

    11. Re:Oh no! by raap · · Score: 1

      Hey! You stole my idea! :-)
      Well, seriously, I built a tumbler lock myself with Legos and was pretty sure up until now that I was the only one to have ever thought about that.

      Oh well, another hole in my theory that I'm a genius.

      BUT: I did it more than 30 years ago. So at least I can claim prior art. (There can't be anyone older than me on slashdot.)

    12. Re:Oh no! by Pharmboy · · Score: 3, Informative

      BUT: I did it more than 30 years ago. So at least I can claim prior art. (There can't be anyone older than me on slashdot.)

      Lots of slashdotters are 40+, myself included. The most vocal, perhaps not. But it's not all kiddies here, it just seems like it lately. If you troll around the yro sections (Your Rights Online) you tend to find more mature /.ers. Well, older anyway. Same with the more science topics.

      You can fix that at Preferences/Hompage, and deselect some of the "younger" topic areas, and give YRO and Science higher priority. Politics, Games, Hardware and Linux areas seem to attract the young and the fanboys.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    13. Re:Oh no! by Ced_Ex · · Score: 1

      A Lego Brick Separator??? I don't think they had that 20 years ago, and even if they did, I was too young to know any better. Plus, name me one dad who didn't think they could get it apart with their own tools?

      --
      Live forever, or die trying.
    14. Re:Oh no! by raap · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the tips. I never realized that you could change the Homepage appearance of slashdot with the preferences. I will try it.

    15. Re:Oh no! by CodeMunch · · Score: 0

      You can't give Lego to your 6 to 36 month old. Mega Bloks aren't made for you - they are made for infants/children so they can't choke on 'em. They put EVERYTHING in their mouth wether you like it or not. They need to be easy to separate for infants to actually enjoy.

    16. Re:Oh no! by spectre_240sx · · Score: 3, Funny

      Damned crossword puzzles... Anyone know a 4 letter word said to inspire laughter?

    17. Re:Oh no! by adreana · · Score: 1

      Yes, well, i live in Canada, and while i may have been known to use my teeth now and then to get the lego blocks apart, i've never used spit to freeze them together. In all actuality, that would just worsen the problem... Being someone who still plays with Lego, MegaBlocks do suck. They don't connect nearly as well, and the colors aren't quite as nice.

      --
      "A life? COOL! Where can I download one of those?"
    18. Re:Oh no! by Blondie-Wan · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Unfortunately, the market is being kinder to MegaBloks than to LEGO. LEGO has fallen on hard financial times in recent years, while MB has been eating away at their market, and doing so using a basic brick design cribbed from LEGO.

      Parents buying construction toys for their kids don't necessarily know how much higher the quality of the plastics used by LEGO are to their competitors, or how much better-engineered the bricks are, but they do know MB is a hell of a lot cheaper than LEGO, and many of them buy accordingly. It's a shame, but there it is.

      And then, of course, there are substantial numbers of people who don't even realize there's a difference. There've been surveys showing a lot of people think MB is some sort of LEGO subsidiary or sister brand.

    19. Re:Oh no! by superiority · · Score: 1

      Errr...I think you're confusing Mega Bloks with 'large' versions of Lego and knock-off products. Mega Bloks are exactly the same* as Lego, and come in a variety of sizes, just like Lego. Big ones are called Duplo or somesuch.


      *When I say 'exactly the same', I mean the same product. I recognise that Mega Bloks are inferior, and are a piece of crap when it comes to staying together.

    20. Re:Oh no! by slimey_limey · · Score: 1

      I've had mine for ... ten years? I haven't used my Legos much recently. Shame.

      Name me one dad who didn't think they could get it apart with their own tools.

      I can't think of one. Wierd, isn't it?

    21. Re:Oh no! by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Yeah, they're not as good in many respects, but that's not the point.

      They're a lot cheaper, and actually provide direct competition for Lego. People have the right to a choice. Lego is extremey expensive for what it is.

    22. Re:Oh no! by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      I played with LEGOs as a kid, and I remember the brick separator existing (although I didn't have one). What sometimes worked for me was to connect more blocks to the top and bottom of the stuck pieces, and squeeze them at an angle to make a sort of lever action.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    23. Re:Oh no! by aug24 · · Score: 1

      Why didn't I read /. in 1979? I lost two tooth caps that way!

      J.

      --
      You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
    24. Re:Oh no! by ClayDowling · · Score: 3, Informative

      Speaking as a parent and somebody who plays with the blocks himself, I can say that there are situations where the Mega Blocks are a better choice. Lego kits in the last few years have been mostly specialty parts and fewer basic bricks. This means that I'm a lot more restricted in what I can build with a Legos kit. Sadly MegaBlocks seems to be hopping on this trend as well, but last time I purchased blocks I found that a kit contained a lot of basic blocks that were easily recombined into other things.

      The loose coupling of MegaBlocks is also useful for somebody like me who likes to idly assemble pieces to make strange buildings and alien monuments. These blocks were shockingly good therapy when I was waiting for my wife to come out of surgery a few years back.

    25. Re:Oh no! by milgr · · Score: 1

      Until about 2 years ago, it was getting increasingly difficult to find lego basic sets.
      In the last year or two, Lego has been releasing sets with lots of basic pieces -- plenty
      of standard bricks, and also windows, wheels, and other odd pieces that combine nicely.

      My kids have lots of Legos. We additionally have some Megablocks, and one set of Tonka.
      The Legos stay together better than any of the other brands. For standard sized bricks I won't
      buy any brand but Lego. (For bigger blocks, Megablocks seems OK).

      --
      Where law ends, tyranny begins -- William Pitt
    26. Re:Oh no! by slavemowgli · · Score: 1

      That's pretty much LEGO's own fault, though. I used to have tons of LEGOs as a kid, and still have some today, too (not to mention that those I had when I was younger are still stowed away in my parents' attic - I should bug them about digging them out for me again), but I almost never buy new LEGO sets.

      Why? A couple of reasons, really:

      1. They're unoriginal. I don't really care about Harry Potter or Star Wars sets in the slightest; I don't care about Bionicle or whatever they named that crap, either. And I don't want sets where pretty much every piece was specially designed for just that set, severely reducing its usefulness for my own creations. What I do want is original stuff where I don't feel I'm paying extra for buying a merchandising product. Which brings me to...

      2. They're expensive. Really, the pricetags on LEGO sets these days are ridiculous when you consider that they're just a collection of small pieces of plastic that are manufactured with pretty much no human intervention at all (I saw a documentary on their brick factory in Denmark once; very impressive). I'm not sure LEGO was cheaper really when I was a kid (but I didn't pay for it myself back then, of course, so I wouldn't know), but it definitely is too expensive right now. Sometimes, when I see a new set that actually catches my interest, I look at the price tag and say "no, I'm definitely not paying that much".

      3. They discontinued the space sets. OK, they have Star Wars now, but that's boring and unoriginal (see above); most of the original space sets (classic, Blacktron, Space Police and all that) just had that certain "special something" that's missing from LEGO sets these days.

      4. LEGO does not seem to emphasise building your own stuff as much anymore as they did. I had a few LEGO books in my younger days that had wonderful ideas for what to build; these days, it seems that the company is mostly interested in churning out new sets every year, expecting everyone to buy them before they go out of production again, and never use them to build anything except for the licensed Star Wars or Harry Potter (or whatever) models. There simply doesn't seem to be any room for real imagination anymore.

      That being said, I still do buy LEGO occasionally, but given the prices and the general lack of interesting models these days, it's only on eBay. So if someone from LEGO is reading this... you've lost a good customer in me, and I think that's highly unfortunate. I *like* LEGO, and I would love to buy more, but you just don't produce anything that interests me really, and you charge prices that I'm not willing to pay.

      --
      quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
    27. Re:Oh no! by Generic+Guy · · Score: 2, Informative

      I understand what you are saying, that the Mega Bloks (of old) are cheap crappy knockoffs. However, now as parent of my own kids, I've been impressed at how much improved the Mega Blok products have become. At the same time, I'm very distressed at how expensive and "specialized" a lot of the LEGO blocks have become -- so many of the LEGO pieces are no longer "bricks" but specially shaped or curved pieces. So, I've embraced the dark size of building blocks and have been purachasing a lot more Mega Blok products, lately.

      --
      { - Generic Guy - }
    28. Re:Oh no! by Chelloveck · · Score: 1
      Why didn't I read /. in 1979? I lost two tooth caps that way!

      I knocked the braces off my front teeth more than once, myself...

      The brick separator is really good, though. My Mindstorms kit has one, and it does a great job of getting two stuck flat pieces apart. Better than my teeth, and better than the screwdriver that I eventually just tossed into my Lego bin.

      Lego's quality may be their downfall, though. I still have my old bin of Lego bricks. Now my kids play with those same pieces. There's no real reason for me to buy the basic bricks for them, 'cause they have a huge supply already. They do love the Bionicles, though. And it turns out, you can use the specialty Bionicle parts to make original creations. My kids have created some pretty interesting-looking monsters from those sets.

      --
      Chelloveck
      I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
    29. Re:Oh no! by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      I had one of those and two flat 2ers attached to each other were still impossible to separate since you couldn't hold the lower one in position while prying away at the upper one. I used a bread knife for those situations.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    30. Re:Oh no! by eli173 · · Score: 1
      I wish they'd re-make some of their classic sets, like some of the old Pirate and Castle ones.


      They've started to. You just need to get back on their catalog mailing list.... I mean, what kind of geek are you? ;) I thought I saw one of the classic pirate ships in their latest catalog, but I'm not seeing it on lego.com. They do have a "classic" section there with some of their older sets they've brought back.

      Play well.
    31. Re:Oh no! by eli173 · · Score: 1
      What you needed was an official Lego Brick Separator.

      I'm not sure they had those when I was a kid.. but... you really want two of those. With two plates stuck together, you put one on the top plate, and the other on the bottom plate so they make handles that look like pliers, and then squeeze them like pliers. Works great.
    32. Re:Oh no! by the+stapler · · Score: 1

      Lego has re-released several old sets through the years. Unless I'm halucinating, I seem to remember them re-issuing the Black Seas Baracuda pirate ship last year. You just have to keep your eyes open.

      If you really want one of the old sets, try something like http://www.bricklink.com/ and just buy an old one. Or if you are feeling ambitious, build it yourself. Legos are interchangable, after all. :) Find the instruction sheet online at somewhere like http://peeron.com/ and go buy the bricks in bulk from http://shop.lego.com/.

    33. Re:Oh no! by Fallingcow · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I know! I hate the movie themed lego crap. It seems like they dropped their Space stuff and replaced it with Star Wars, and replaced their Castle sets with Harry Potter! If kids want to play with movie themed stuff, there are perfectly good action figures for that. Legos should be about making your own thing, or at least having no pre-made storyline tying you down or prejudicing your views of the characters before you start, even if you just build what's on the box.

    34. Re:Oh no! by CodeMunch · · Score: 1

      Well, the only Mega Bloks I've seen are the large versions of Lego - Take 4 keys from your keyboard, stick 'em together and they're about that square but slightly smaller. They say Mega Bloks on the outside - Duplo might exist on the packaging somewhere, I have not checked. We purchased a Mega Bloks wagon full of these things for our son for his 1st b-day - I have not opened them yet from good ole Toys R Us. I am by no means a toy fanatic and I have not seen the smaller versions of these Mega Bloks of which they speak although I guess they exist. I have also never seen the large LEGO versions although by what you say, they must also exist.

    35. Re:Oh no! by kchoboter · · Score: 1

      perhaps... could it be... "joke"... but a "joke" on /. .. that's unheard of

      --
      4B4556494E
    36. Re:Oh no! by not-enough-info · · Score: 1

      how the heck does that work?

      --
      ---k--
      </stupid>
    37. Re:Oh no! by nfgaida · · Score: 1

      I thought I remember reading that LEGO was having financial problems *because* they were not providing the "scripted" play. Times had changed and kids now had their imaginations lobotomized and weren't interested in toys where they had to think.

      Or something.

      --
      *elevator music plays*
  3. Insert EOLAS joke here by Orrin+Bloquy · · Score: 0

    Seriously, good for Mega Bloks. LEGO is cool but the notion of preventing someone from manufacturing toys that play with your toys is cruel.

    --
    "Made up/misattributed quote that makes me look smart. I am on /. and I must look smart."
    1. Re:Insert EOLAS joke here by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1
      it's more a tradmark dispute than anything... Lego is saying that the shape and type of their blocks should be covered under their tradmark too.. Being as they've been around 50 years!!!! now it is only fair that any patents would have worn off by now. Lego has the same problem as the Rollerblade people keeping their trademark from becoming a common noun in the dictionary. Allowing somebody to make a matching product without any challange dilutes their tradmark.

      That said, Lego's QA on their product is second to none! I have blocks I got hand-me-down that still fit perfectly with new blocks off-the-shelf. The knock-off brands just don't get the quality part.. they try to make cheaper blocks or more features, but the key to Lego's success is simple quality...

  4. Next up... by OakDragon · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...Microsoft and Amazon race to patent 'bumps on blocks.'

    1. Re:Next up... by SirWhoopass · · Score: 1
      Microsoft and Amazon race to patent 'bumps on blocks'.

      Except that they're too late. "Toy Building Brick", US Patent #3,005,282 issued to G.K. Christiansen (assigned to Lego) in 1964.

      "Blocks adapted to be connected together by means of projections extending from the faces of the elements".

      Which is one of the reasons this suit was lost. The court found that Lego's patents had expired and that they couldn't use trademark law to protect the design of their blocks.

    2. Re:Next up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Global warming!!

  5. Dump all non-physical property rights. by dada21 · · Score: 4, Interesting


    I'm always here decrying the value is striking copyright, patents and trademark rights. At the most basic, they're a way to gain government's monopoly on force for yourself.

    Legos. Plastic bricks. The value in their logo is held up by showing consumers that Lego makes the most consistent blocks, with the easiest instructions and with the most fun creations. The State-granted monopoly that gave Lego sole use of the design isn't the power behind the brand.

    I'd normally get replies saying "Without protections, no one would write music/invent/make plastic blocks!!!" But this is not true.

    If you open a restaurant, do you get a monopoly for running a restaurant in your area? Isn't it wrong for someone to open a restaurant in a new community, build a customer base for years and then have some whipper-snapper open a new restaurant across the street and steal your customers?

    I own retail stores (board sports and paintball). It costs about $25 in marketing to get a new customer into the sport and into my store. At least yearly I have someone see our good fortune and open a few miles away. They underprice me, steal some business and then go bankrupt and sell everything at half price. In 3 years I've outlived 7 such competitors.

    Why is my time (or my managers' time) building my product different than a song writer or a book writer? It isn't. Yet they're legally protected with monopoly powers.

    Trademark (and copyright) is bunk. Freedom means the freedom to compete.

    Create a product. If it's copied easily, find a way to make yours better.

    1. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm... were it not for trademark law, a guy on the street could put swamp water in a bottle, call it Pepsi, and sell it to you. And you wouldn't know anything different until you had bought it.

      While trademarks can certainly be misused, they do their fair share to protect the consumer.

    2. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by dada21 · · Score: 1

      You buy your Pepsi on the cit streets?

      I buy it from Albertson's or Target. They're the people who confirm my Pepsi is real (some Indian and Mexican stores sell fakes). They also make sure my lamps are UL tested and that my toilet paper isn't sand paper.

      The market protects Pepsi. Not a law.

    3. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by ralph1 · · Score: 1

      Its ok if they expire in 20 years. But ala disney they keep extending it somehow.
      I never buy disney product not even videos for the kids.

      Everyone has a vote with there dollars.

    4. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by sedyn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Create a product. If it's copied easily, find a way to make yours better."

      That's how I feel about the issue as far as software is concerned.

      But, what if your creation can be reverse engineered somewhat easily, and adding new properties is difficult?

      Don't get me wrong, I don't like the idea of not being able to do something because someone did it first (especially when it happened decades before I was born and therefore I didn't have a chance to make it). But I still think some, limited, form of protection is needed.

      --
      Am I open minded towards open source, or closed minded towards closed source?
    5. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by semper · · Score: 1

      The problem with your argument is what happens when someone decides to open a store near yours with the same name and logo as yours? Now they are competing merchendise and cashing in on your advertising and good name. This is the sort of thing that Trademark Law is meant to protect against.

      I would agree that most, if not all, Patent and Copyright protection is garbage, but Trademark protection protects only your name and image.

      --
      Unfortunately no one can be shown what Linux is, one must experience for oneself.
    6. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by dada21 · · Score: 1

      Our name and our logo is not us.

      Are we cheaper? No.

      Are we better stocked? No.

      Are we located in the best spot? No.

      We have the best service and most knowledgable staff. Name and logo is nothing.

      Our sign says "Paintball" not our logo. I welcome my competition to use my name.

    7. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, a law does. Where I live, Safeway would sell it's own version of Pepsi in a second - and make it look just like original Pepsi - if they could get away with it. They do it already with a ton of their own-brand stuff - eg. make it look like the name-brand competitor they're trying to compete against. Think you can trust a big corporation to do the right thing? Where have you been living?

    8. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      how do you know that Albertsons or Taret is run by the real company without trademark law? do you want digitally signed certs to be sent by a kiosk as you enter the store to make sure or what?

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    9. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      It's quite difficult to dump trademarks, copyrights and patents. I doubt it would happen in the US because it would require a constitutional amendment.

      I don't believe your retail or restaurant analogy fits. I don't believe that the market can fix all problems, and I don't believe that government can fix all problems. I would personally like some form of government protection if some competitor used my name and somehow managed to convinced the sheep that they are the real thing, and later ruining my reputation.

      Also, the fact that something can be abused doesn't mean that thing should be dumped altogether.

    10. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by cecom · · Score: 1

      Hmmmm. Interesting. Where is your store located ? I am thinking of opening one myself ... ;-)

    11. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by TCQuad · · Score: 1

      Legos. Plastic bricks. The value in their logo is held up by showing consumers that Lego makes the most consistent blocks, with the easiest instructions and with the most fun creations.

      Clearly, you never had grandparents who thought the one who could create the biggest pile of plastic toys on a budget won.

    12. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by ClearlyPennsylvania · · Score: 1

      I disagree. Just because something can be copied easily doesn't mean that the invention process was trivial. Let's look at this mathematically: Currently: Expected profits = (odds of success) * (sales of Foo if successful) - costs to develop Foo Without protections, if you invent Foo: Expected profits = (odds of success) * ( [sales of Foo is successful ] / [companies copy & producing Foo]) - costs to develop Foo Without protections, if you don't invent Foo: Expected profits = (odds of success) * ( [sales of Foo is successful ] / [companies copy & producing Foo]) Clearly, without protections, you're better off NOT inventing Foo and just copying another company when they do. After all, why pay the development costs yourself if you can just cheat? And thus, no one invents stuff. The difference between an actual invention of Foo and your store is that another store can't just lower their costs by copying you. But, in fact, if your store were a restaurant and someone stole your recipes, then yes, you would be protected.

    13. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by doubledoh · · Score: 0, Redundant
      When and if scamsters attempt to pierce any market, 3rd party organizations like Consumer Reports or Better Business Bureau will quickly report the scams--not to mention the millions of blogs and independant media websites that snap at the chance to boo-hoo bad products (iPod Nano anyone?).

      No one is arguing that cheats don't exist, it's just that we freedom loving folks are arguing that the free market and free speech are much more efficient mechanisms for protecting consumers against fraud. And besides, at the end of the day, as far as I'm concerned, it's buyer beware. I'd rather have the freedom to choose, than have some big-brother entity stamp everything with their approval (after a long beauracratic process--and of course a fee).

      --
      I think, therefore I doh.
    14. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by kryten_nl · · Score: 1

      I never buy disney product not even videos for the kids.

      Ssshhh... it won't be long, until this falls in the legal definition of child abuse....

      --
      For the perfect anti-Unix, write an OS that thinks it knows what you're doing better than you do and let it be wrong.
    15. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by Woldry · · Score: 1

      If you open a restaurant, do you get a monopoly for running a restaurant in your area? Isn't it wrong for someone to open a restaurant in a new community, build a customer base for years and then have some whipper-snapper open a new restaurant across the street and steal your customers?

      It sounds absurd, but in some jurisdictions there are actually people attempting (with varying degrees of success) to put restrictions in place that would have this kind of effect. They are generally zoning laws, not trademark protections, but very often existing businesses support them for exactly the same reasons Lego was trying to slap down Mega Bloks: to stifle potential competition. Thus some communities limit the number of fast food joints, factories, "adult entertainment" businesses, etc. And the idiots who run the existing fast food joints, factories, and strip joints in those communities support these limitations as being in their short-term interest -- and then are baffled and annoyed when the now-all-powerful zoning board denies their requests to, say, open a second burger franchise across town, or build a new warehouse on land already owned by the factory, or take over the lot next door to add new parking for the happy-hour striptease junkies.

      True, it's not trademark law. But it is, like a lot of trademark litigation, the abuse of the entire concept of property law in a short-sighted attempt to stifle competition.

      --
      How can a post be modded "overrated" or "underrated" when it hasn't been rated yet?
    16. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by weierstrass · · Score: 1
      they don't sell counterfeit pepsi, dude.
      they sell grey-market-import indian/mexican/whatever pepsi.

      that is, if as i assume you live in the western world.
      or perhaps you can produce documented evidence of people making fake pepsi (or coke) in which case i stand corrected.

      --
      my password really is 'stinkypants'
    17. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by danielk1982 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Dump all intellectual property rights?

      Tell me, what is the incentive to create a $100 million movie when on completion you don't even own it? What about a $10 million game (like half-life2 or World of Warcraft).

      Why not just dump ALL property rights. Why not have your customers help themselves to anything they want in your store?


      Create a product. If it's copied easily, find a way to make yours better.


      Thats the thing about IP, its pathetically easy to duplicate, whether we're talking about software, music, books, or movies. The costs are not in the duplication or distribution but creation (as opposed to retail where profit and costs come from distribution and creation costs $0). It takes months or years to create (or research) most IP, and might involve many people, each of which needs to eat and provide for his family.

      Yeah..your way is dumb.

      Why is my time (or my managers' time) building my product different than a song writer or a book writer?

      At heart is the concept of property. You own your sporting merchandise and you choose to give it away for profit. A song writer owns his song and he chooses to do with it what he will (usually sell out to Sony or something). Yes IP is a little bit different which is why it is treated differently, copyright and patents expire and trademarks could be lost. So both you and the song writer own what you create (or build up) and you are given rights to do with what you will. Not that different.

    18. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by ZorinLynx · · Score: 1

      I see this sort of thing at the flea market all the time. Huge crates of "DYNACELL" batteries, for instance, that look EXACTLY like duracells except for the letters URA being changed to YNA. They're incredibly cheap, but they're old-fashioned zinc-carbon batteries with maybe less than half the life of an actual alkaline.

      The fact that I only see this in flea markets makes me think it's in a legal grey area... they're not calling themselves DURACELL but are making the product look so similar it might deceive people with bad eyesight or something...

      -Z

    19. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by dada21 · · Score: 1

      An idea in your head is priceless. An idea mentioned to others could be wort less.

      Don't put any idea in writing if you don't mind losing it. Write a song? Only play it live. Or only let people have "dibs" on seeing you live IF they have an official CD. There are infinite ways to profit from a song without copyright.

      Have a movie? Only show it in theatres with metal detectors. Don't release movies on insecure formats.

      I write articles and books and sell My personal services for the real movie. Just writing a song (1 hour) and recording it (4 hours) shouldn't be worth more than a few grand, tops. Copyright is BS.

      If you give an idea out on paper, film or CD, its no longer yours. If I sold licenses to skateboards, I'd go out of business.

    20. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by danielk1982 · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Have a movie? Only show it in theatres with metal detectors. Don't release movies on insecure for

      So your great idea is to create a state of total paranoia? Metal detectors (and maybe strip searches) to see Harry Potter 7? A writer or artist being absolutely terrified that someone will simply take his work and put his name on it?

      Lock everything down in uncrackable DRM that install rootkits to monitor every usage of software?

      It's bad enough that even WITH copyrights content creators are already eyeing customer suspiciously, what will happen without any IP?

      The question is: is this 'alternative' really better? I don't think so.

      BTW, you do realize that Open Source Software is protected by copyrights.

      If I sold licenses to skateboards, I'd go out of business.

      Usually the design of "real" property is under some form of IP protection. You might be allowed to sell skateboards but if you try to duplicate one you'd be sued. Likewise your customers are allowed to only make use of the board they bought. They are allowed to sell that skateboard but they are not allowed to reproduce it and sell the copy (they can certainly build a skateboard but they cannot build it exactly - ie wheel design might be patented and the kickass graphic might be copyrighted).

      So yeah, in a way you are selling licenses.

    21. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by Monkelectric · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Subway franchises have similar "deals" where, if you have a certain number of stores, then nobody else is allowed to put a store in your area ... frequently store owners get the required number of stores, then build a store 25 miles away from your other stores to cut a swath where nobody else can build a store.

      --

      Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley

    22. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by noidentity · · Score: 1

      "They underprice me, steal some business and then go bankrupt and sell everything at half price. In 3 years I've outlived 7 such competitors."

      Come on, you did so well with the rest of your post; they diverted some of your previous customers, not stole.

    23. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      there is little to nothing wrong with trafemark law as it is. why throw out what works fine

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    24. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      but even in the Disney situation, the Mouse is still in use by them.. so the trademark still stands.. sure you could reprint the older toons, but you still couldn't releas new "Mickey Mouse" works because Disney is still using that character... that's the key difference between trademark and copyright but it's getting lost in the noise.

    25. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by FunFactor100 · · Score: 1

      If your competiton uses your name, then your customers may be confused and purchase the competitors products....and I assume you'd have a problem with that.

    26. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by mrchaotica · · Score: 1
      If you open a restaurant, do you get a monopoly for running a restaurant in your area? Isn't it wrong for someone to open a restaurant in a new community, build a customer base for years and then have some whipper-snapper open a new restaurant across the street and steal your customers?
      Here's a little story for you: There's a restaraunt called Qdoba, that came up with the idea of a "naked burrito" -- a "burrito" that didn't have a shell, but instead just had all the insides piled on a plate. Well, along comes another restaraunt called Moe's Southwest Grill, that starts marketing a "buck naked burrito" that's exactly the same thing.

      I think you can guess what happened: Qdoba sued Moe's and won. Now, there's no references to "buck naked" anything at Moe's; instead, the signs say "be a streaker -- lose the tortilla." Doesn't have quite the same ring to it, eh?

      So, in the eyes of the law at least, the answer to your question is apparently yes.
      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    27. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 1
      But, what if your creation can be reverse engineered somewhat easily, and adding new properties is difficult?

      Then it's not a viable product, at least as far as selling it as a product in a free market is concerned.

    28. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by SpaceJunkie · · Score: 1

      Now neither of these are entirely true, and the Lego vs MegaBloks case highlights it well.
      Both companies are able to manufacture the same product, but now they are competing on Price, Quality and creativeness. By creativeness, I mean the kind of sets they are using the blocks for. If Lego want to get bogged down in what are now becoming repetative movie licenses and sets that integrate badly with the rest of the system while MegaBloks go all out on fun and interchangeable sets then Lego will feel the pinch. If Lego go back to good basic, technic and mindstorms sets, and go more for general themes than movie licenses, we all know the quality of peices are better then MegaBloks, and MegaBloks will feel the pinch instead. What we may then end up with are more of the sets we like, MegaBloks in proper ABS and more reasonable pricing. Lego want to highlight their quality difference over MegaBloks - I am sure some they could go for the "cheap shot" advertising with children crying over half-built generic brand models crumbling while the shining real Lego one shows them up. Lego would do well to have advertising showing interviews with adults who grew up on Technic and Mindstorms who are now engineers (software, mechanical or electrical) and put some of their success/interest down to playing with Lego as a kid- a claim that I am really not sure MegaBloks could compete on. Lego could (and it would be welcomed) exploit the AFOL community a little and ask permission to use a raft of AFOL models in advertising with a slogon about taking their products and creating. http://www.brickshelf.com/ would be a good start there.

      In the realm of software, one brand could come up with a product very similar in fuctionality than someone elses, but then they can compete on quality (bugs/exploits), ease of use (menu design etc), and cost. Not in terms of IP. It takes time to program features, it also takes time for another team to program the same features, even IF they can reverse engineer the new features from yours. And if there code base is fairly different from yours, then it is no trivial matter of integrating the diffs (I admit that this has become a damnsight easier with .Net IL than any other technology - and is one good reason not to use it). It also means it is unlikely that they will be easily able to reverse engineer it. To be fair - they would do better reimplementing their own versions, and if they happen to do it in a more bugfree, or cost effective way, then tough - time to improve your processes.

      What applies to physical manufacture can apply in other areas quite well. Now while I do think an initial cretor should have some very LIMITED time to recoup their investment, like a couple of years, after that, its time they actually compete. This directly benefits consumers and governments. Lets not forget - the concept of time limited government granted monopolies were originally designed on the condition that they benefited people and state eventually.

      --
      OrionRobots.co.uk - Robots From sol
    29. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by SpaceJunkie · · Score: 1
      After all, why pay the development costs yourself if you can just cheat?

      Because you may get an idea that if we do X and Y as well, we will make a killing in the market - which until the other companies cotton on, you could do quite well from. If you already have enough of a manufacturing plant to build items, then its not going to break your back to try out a new design. Competition would become faster and more fierce - and R & D could speed up. It would be more like evolution - you get a momentary edge, but to keep the edge, you must keep going, if you get complacent and stop, you loose the edge. If the companies stagnate, all it takes a new startup to push that edge, and the cycle starts again. Read up about evolutionary arms races - because that is exactly what the scenario would be then.

      --
      OrionRobots.co.uk - Robots From sol
    30. Re:Dump all non-physical property rights. by ClearlyPennsylvania · · Score: 1
      If you already have enough of a manufacturing plant to build items, then its not going to break your back to try out a new design.
      That's not true at all. What if your invention is a medical device? That takes years and years to develop and get approved. It's incredibly risky because you may not be able to do it at all and it may never be approved by the FDA. The upside - the thing that makes it worth it to even try - is that if you *are* able to do it, you have a patent on the technology and that gives you an advantage in the marketplace. If those patents don't exist, the potential benefits wouldn't outweigh the risks.
  6. relevant quote from my rejected submission: by temojen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Trademark law should not be used to perpetuate monopoly rights enjoyed under now-expired patents," the Supreme Court says.

  7. Can we say... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Home court advantage? I wonder what would happen if the Supreme Court ruled the other way. Burning Lego blocks on the court steps... :P

  8. "For a Limited Time" by Concern · · Score: 4, Informative

    Lego's invention is very old, and was patented a long time ago.

    Patents live only so long. This is for a reason. Granting exclusive monopolies on things forever is not a good idea.

    Lego's patent expired, long, long after they had recouped money orders of magnitude beyond what would induce others to attempt to innovate in that industry.

    Other people started to make lego-like bricks.

    Like a lot of monopolists, Lego became addicted to not having and not suffering competitors. They decided that they wanted to play lawyer games and try to keep others from competing with them rather than follow the law, and pretended that the studs on the bricks that make them work are "trademarked" by them...

    The judge basically said, "Look, don't you even try that stunt in here. Your patent expired. The studs on the blocks are a mechanical feature, not a mark. Go away."

    --
    Tired of Political Trolls? Opt Out!
    1. Re:"For a Limited Time" by Blondie-Wan · · Score: 1
      The studs are a mechanical feature, true, but they're also a mark. People see studs on bricks like those and think "LEGO," not "interlocking stud-&-tube-assembly construction brick toys." They're distinctively characteristic of LEGO's toys.

      Whether that means they should be protected, I don't pretend to know. I'm deeply uncomfortable and sometimes outraged with a lot of the hyperzealousness we see from companies guarding their IP, but I don't know that it means there shouldn't be any protection. I'm biased in this case because I'd really rather see LEGO thrive without having to worry about MB, which has essentially ridden the coattails of LEGO's innovations and designs and hasn't done much original itself, yet does well in the market simply by ditching quality and undercutting LEGO on price, but there you go. I'm willing to entertain the idea the ruling was the correct one as far as principles go, but purely from the selfish POV of someone who likes quality bricks, this ruling kind of sucks.

    2. Re:"For a Limited Time" by ClamIAm · · Score: 1

      Granting exclusive monopolies on things forever is not a good idea.

      Unfortunately, we can't get the FCC, Congress, or courts to agree. (in the US)

    3. Re:"For a Limited Time" by bubkus_jones · · Score: 1

      It's just a case of a specific brand becoming the common name for a category of product, like Kleenex. Kleenex is a brand of facial tissue, however more people say "Hand me a kleenex" than "Hand me a facial tissue". "Lego" become synonimous with "interlocking stud-&-tube-assembly construction brick toys".

      There is a reason, of course. Lego provides the best quality bricks, with the most interesting designs, and the most endorsement tie-ins.

      I've never used Mega-Blocks because I've always believed them to be of lesser quality, because they wern't actual "Lego's". It's kind of interesting to see I was right. I didn't know they were Canadian, though.

    4. Re:"For a Limited Time" by gomel · · Score: 1

      The studs are a mechanical feature, true, but they're also a mark.

      It is internationally accepted that things that are patented cannot be copyrighted. The whole concept of a patent system is about bringing a new idea into the public domain.

      does well in the market simply by ditching quality and undercutting LEGO on price, but there you go.

      dude, not everyone can afford bricks with Lego's price markup. think about the children (heh) who won't get any bricks because of your selfish love of a particular brand.

      purely from the selfish POV of someone who likes quality bricks, this ruling kind of sucks.

      no, it doesn't. you can still buy Legos(tm).

      --
      Fight Frist Psoting!
      Browse Slashdot with 'Newest First'!
    5. Re:"For a Limited Time" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually Lego bricks don't have nearly the markup you'd think. Most of the 'Lego-Compatible' bricks use a single mold for each size of brick. Lego uses a different mold for a blue 1x2, than they use for a red, green, brown, black, grey, white, yellow, etc. 1x2 brick. Why? Because the coloring added to the plastic alters how each brick shrinks as it cools. That's why Lego bricks fit together so well and so consistently when the 'Lego-Compatible' bricks don't.

      Lego also uses a better (and more expensive) mix of plastic than the other brands.

      It all contributes to higher cost, *and* higher quality.

  9. Also: by temojen · · Score: 1

    "purely functional" features, such as the well-known geometrical pattern of raised studs on the top of the bricks, could not be the basis of a trademark.

    1. Re:Also: by cortana · · Score: 1

      If you look closely at the bumps, I believe they have a tiny LEGO logo etched onto them. :)

    2. Re:Also: by temojen · · Score: 2

      Not the Mega Bloks ones.

    3. Re:Also: by idontgno · · Score: 2, Insightful
      If you look closely at the bumps, I believe they have a tiny LEGO logo etched onto them.

      What, even on the MegaBloks? I rather doubt it. Otherwise, simple trademark law would have won the day for Lego.

      Lego has a technically superior product of far greater quality, consistency, and creativity. I mean, this is the company that gave us Space Police, Blacktron, and Mindstorms!

      But attempting to stretch the bounds of trademark law over functional qualities--the domain of patents--is just completely evil and radically asshat. If the parties involved were, say, Microsoft and Suse, I have no doubt how discussion here would go. It'd have nothing to do with the relative technical merits of the product; it's only be about how Company "B" can only seem to win by litigation, not innovation.

      Sheesh. I still like Lego, and I still disdain compatible knockoffs, but DAMMIT I wish good companies would stop indulging their legal departments whenever the legal eagles feel like double-fist-raping the bounds of intellectual-property law.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  10. The question is why you'd want non-lego blocks by Rhys · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The quality of non-lego blocks is seriously sub-par compared to the lego company's brick quality.

    They feel cheap, they don't hook together and stay hooked, and they use way way way more custom peices than lego (and these days, that's saying something!).

    I mean, I'm all for competition, but I can't say that I think the price legos deliver at, around 1c US per brick in the generic bins of bricks is, you know, out of line.

    --
    Slashdot Patriotism: We Support our Dupes!
    1. Re:The question is why you'd want non-lego blocks by temojen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Now that other comanies can go to market without getting sued, there will likely be many new market entrants, hopefully some where the quality is good and with a line like Dacta, not stupid only-builds-one-thing dinosaur/castle/pirate-ship sets.

    2. Re:The question is why you'd want non-lego blocks by CallistoLion · · Score: 1

      Might actually be a valid comment if you've bought and used MegaBloks. The quality is equal to Lego, the blocks stay together just fine. Plus they've got a great line of designs. Seems like the only kits Lego sells these days is Harry Potter and Star Wars.

    3. Re:The question is why you'd want non-lego blocks by just_another_sean · · Score: 1

      Fair enough. Then Lego should have no problem with this ruling. Their patent expired, they already recouped what they should and more on holding the patent. It's time for them to compete on the merit of their product, not try to monopolize plastic brick making by abusing trademark law.

      --
      Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
    4. Re:The question is why you'd want non-lego blocks by CodeMunch · · Score: 1

      You want loose blocks so infants can develop the motor skills necessary to use them without getting frustrated on lego....that and lego is a choking hazard where mega blocks are not.

    5. Re:The question is why you'd want non-lego blocks by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1
      I suspect that the problem is parents who don't play with their children make up the majority of consumers. Such parents will see the cheaper product and buy it, but not ever find out if it was any good.

      When I was very young, my father 'helped' me play with my lego and meccano sets[1]. Because of the extra human interaction, I improved my language skills. Because I was playing with these things with an engineer, I learned the basic principles of gearing at a very young age, as well as the difference between tensile and compressive strength, and how to build shapes that relied on one or other of these properties - I had fun building a suspension bridge with lego and string.

      [1] I think he started his second childhood at about the same time his first one started...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    6. Re:The question is why you'd want non-lego blocks by utexaspunk · · Score: 1

      I mean, I'm all for competition, but I can't say that I think the price legos deliver at, around 1c US per brick in the generic bins of bricks is, you know, out of line.

      I'd like to know where you get a 1000-piece lego set for $10. They seem to be locked at $15.

  11. Mega Blocks by Megane · · Score: 1
    Even though their stuff is generally inferior to Lego, yes Mega Blocks did deserve to win. Quality-wise, the only bricks I've found up to Lego's quality have been Tyco, and Lego probably scared them out of business. The newer BTR sets are of almost as high quality of plastic as Lego, but they have a lot more pre-cast big chunks, like vehicle chassis, and I don't think I've ever seen anything but BTR "kit" sets. I don't recall seeing any BTR sets of just a bunch of bricks.

    The one exception to Mega Blocks being crap is their Dragons sets. Not only are there a lot of cool pieces, they have these nifty gray stone brick pieces that are nice for making castles.

    --
    #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  12. I suggest.... by S.+Ballmer · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...Lego shift the current block format a millimeter or so. That way it can cripple interoperability with mega blocks' products and further lock in customers. They can sell it as an innovation, saving money to their costumers with all the plastic being cut out. But that's just how we do it where I work... :)

    1. Re:I suggest.... by Megane · · Score: 1
      ...Lego shift the current block format a millimeter or so. That way it can cripple interoperability with mega blocks' products and further lock in customers. They can sell it as an innovation, saving money to their costumers with all the plastic being cut out. But that's just how we do it where I work... :)

      What do you think Technic and Bionicle were for? So they could create new pieces and new types of connections which were patented in their own right. That they could do new cool stuff with Technic was nice, too.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    2. Re:I suggest.... by ostehaps · · Score: 1

      That's quite simply wrong. Yes, they'd cripple interoperability with mega blocks, but in the same fell swoop also cripple interoperability with the masses of existing Lego blocks. If anything, that step would reduce lock-in. The issue of whether they could get any rights on a subtly modified product is something you should contemplate as well.

    3. Re:I suggest.... by rainman_bc · · Score: 1

      ...Lego shift the current block format a millimeter or so

      And what would Lego do to itself then?

      Lego would destroy the standard they created. Why would you buy more Lego if it didn't work with the rest of your Lego?

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    4. Re:I suggest.... by noidentity · · Score: 1

      "I suggest Lego shift the current block format a millimeter or so. That way it can cripple interoperability with mega blocks' products and further lock in customers."

      Yeah, but imagine the awful adaptors to convert between legacy LEGO and the new improved LEGO. It's a good thing that hasn't happened with software. Oh... wait...

    5. Re:I suggest.... by fishermonger · · Score: 1
      ...Lego shift the current block format a millimeter or so. That way it can cripple interoperability with mega blocks' products and further lock in customers. They can sell it as an innovation, saving money to their costumers with all the plastic being cut out. But that's just how we do it where I work... :)

      You heard that, Miguel basher??

      --
      "...normal evolution would have gone Word to Frame to troff, but instead, the computer industry has gone the other way!"
  13. RTFA. It's about what can be used as a trademark. by temojen · · Score: 3, Informative
    "purely functional" features, such as the well-known geometrical pattern of raised studs on the top of the bricks, could not be the basis of a trademark.


    How is this tit-for-tat? Lego is a Danish company.
  14. One of the two indicators of IT affinity by erucsbo · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I used to run a quick poll on people who were wanting to get in to IT (before the dot.com crash) and it ran along the lines of:
    • Put up your hand if you played with Lego (mechano/etc) as a child, and
    • Put up your hand if you can appreciate Monty Python (the Goodies / Red Dwarf / etc) humour.
    If you put up a hand for both questions then you have the right personality to be able to work in IT, otherwise there are now plenty of jobs around the periphery of IT that might suit you.
    I'm yet to find a major exception to the above theory.
    Nice to see that there will continue to be Lego alternatives for those anti-Danish interested in developing IT aptitude skills ;-)
    1. Re:One of the two indicators of IT affinity by RajivSLK · · Score: 1

      Here is an execption. I hate Monty Python, Red Dwarf etc. They just drive me crazy, so boring and so dumb. However, I've been using computers since I was 3 years old or so and, among other technical achievements, I run a software company. I did however, play with Lego, constructs etc.

    2. Re:One of the two indicators of IT affinity by rossz · · Score: 3, Informative
      Put up your hand if you played with Lego (mechano/etc) as a child, and
      What do you mean as a child?
      --
      -- Will program for bandwidth
    3. Re:One of the two indicators of IT affinity by erucsbo · · Score: 1

      You don't have to like it - you just have to "get" it.

    4. Re:One of the two indicators of IT affinity by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Everyone played with Lego as a child. And everyone laughs at some episodes of Red Dwarf (Legion, in particular, has pretty much every type of humor there is.) I think your test sucks.

    5. Re:One of the two indicators of IT affinity by erucsbo · · Score: 1

      As the question was asked in a room full of people that often did not know each other, it was designed to minimize embarrassment. Note that it does not limit the continuation of Lego playing to a maximum age, only that you did not take it up for the first time in life after becoming an adult (whatever that means in your culture).

    6. Re:One of the two indicators of IT affinity by idontgno · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      I have two hands up, so I'm typing with my prehensile...male...appendage.

      OH, yeah, never mind, women have feet too.

      Anyways. Erector sets. Lincoln Logs. Tinkertoys! Legos by the metric assload. 1950s vintage Lionel model train (engines, stock, tracks, trackside accessories, you name it). Electronics. Model rockets. Plastic models.

      Anything by the Pythons. Most BBC SF and comedy. (Fawlty Towers still makes my ROFL, although it seems insanely dated.)

      I guess I'm a stereotypical IT geek.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    7. Re:One of the two indicators of IT affinity by RajivSLK · · Score: 1

      I get it but I certainly don't "appreciate" it.

    8. Re:One of the two indicators of IT affinity by AJWM · · Score: 1

      * Put up your hand if you played with Lego (mechano/etc) as a child, and
              * Put up your hand if you can appreciate Monty Python (the Goodies / Red Dwarf / etc) humour.


      And for those of you with both hands up who haven't seen it yet, check out the "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" special edition DVD. One of the extra features is an animated Lego version of the Camelot song and dance number. (You can also download it from a link here.) Even funnier than the original.

      --
      -- Alastair
    9. Re:One of the two indicators of IT affinity by stalky14 · · Score: 1

      I was (am) a Lego freak, but I never really "got" Monty
      Python... just never thought it was that funny. Red Dwarf,
      yes. Can I substitute MST3K?

  15. Re:about RIM not law. by RobinH · · Score: 4, Insightful

    MegaBlock clearly is in violation. IMHO this has less to do with Canadian law, and more to do with playing a game of tit for tat with the US over the Blackberries. That is not only a dangerous road to go down, but a foolish one.

    I assume you're joking...?

    First of all, LEGO is not a US company.

    Secondly, MegaBlock is not in violation because the patent has expired. LEGO was trying to use trademark law to extend their monopoly.

    --
    "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
  16. Lego didn't invent the brick in the first place by One+Louder · · Score: 5, Informative
    The interconnecting block wasn't even invented by Lego - they were invented by a British inventor named Hillary Page. Lego manufactured them in countries in which Page did not have a license, then purchased the expired patents after he commited suicide.

    However, Lego did have patents on the little tube on the underside, which allow more connection combinations. After the stud-tube patents expired, Lego attempted to use the appearance of the bricks as a trademark - losing in litigationin most countries, including the United States. Lego now attempts to frighten companies with the more nebulous "trade dress".

    More info

    1. Re:Lego didn't invent the brick in the first place by Solder+Fumes · · Score: 2, Interesting

      purchased the expired patents after he committed suicide

      "Suicide" eh? If I think too hard about that one it might throw a dark cloud over all those happy times spent building with Legos as a child. It poses a moral question: are the hours of enjoyment for millions of children worth the death of one man? Granted, he was British and had a girl's name. That alone should be enough to retroactively label him "terrorist" and purify Lego's avarice-driven assassination.

    2. Re:Lego didn't invent the brick in the first place by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      IANAS (... shrink) but as I understand it:

      Suicide from situational depression (alone) is almost unheard of. It normally requires an affective disorder (a biochemical problem, typically endogenous depression, sometimes bipolar disorder) to get to that stage.

      Situational depression might be a last straw. But a person with an affective disorder of suicidal levels will encounter plenty of depressing situations in their lifetime.

      Further, affective disorders and creativity seem strongly connected. So an inventor having an affective disorder is hardly a surprise.

      It's no excuse for illegally peredatory competition. But I wouldn't lay Hillary's death at Lego's door.

      Fortunately, depression is a lot better understood than it was when "psychology" was dominated by a horde of people who believed Freud's cocaine halucinations were a valid description of the inner workings of the (undrugged) human mind. Effective (and non-debilitating) chemical treatments are now available (and usually correctly prescribed) to pull most suicidally or cripplingly depressed people out into much more normal function - or at least enough better that they don't do themselves in when things get tough at the same time they're down.

      (Unfortunately, such drugs sometimes get a bad rep due to another phenomenon: Some people crapped out twice, ending up with both psychopathy and debilitating depression. Treat the depression and you get a fully functional and energetic psychopath - and often one who has never had an opportunity to learn a compensation. B-( )

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  17. yeah, but.... by jshaped · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    but they're still the ghetto blocks that only the ghetto children have,
    nothing changing that fact.

  18. I was reading to see if this article got it right by poobread · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's not there anymore, but http://www.legos.com/ used to open to a personal note (screenshot here: http://jaffejuice.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized /legoslas.jpg) from the muti-million dollar world-reknown company telling you that they did not want their name tainted by calling Lego® Blocks "legos".

  19. W00t...Canada 1- Denmark 0 by Pinkoir · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now let's all go build a Mega-Blok castle on Hans Island and really teach those bastards a lesson.

    As an aside, since they are made in Montreal would they be Mega-Blok Quebecois? And if so is it ironic or paradoxical that separatist cubes would be specifically designed to stick together with things.

    -Pinkoir

    1. Re:W00t...Canada 1- Denmark 0 by IWorkForMorons · · Score: 1

      Actually...I thought they were called Mega-Blocs.

    2. Re:W00t...Canada 1- Denmark 0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >since they are made in Montreal would they be Mega-Blok Quebecois? And if so is it ironic or paradoxical that separatist cubes would be specifically designed to stick together with things.

      ROTFLOL! :D

    3. Re:W00t...Canada 1- Denmark 0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're not the Bloc(k) Quebecois for nothing.

    4. Re:W00t...Canada 1- Denmark 0 by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm out of points, but that was the funniest post I've seen on /. all week.

      It's ironic, not paradoxial. Paradoxial would be if LEGO was suing them for making a similar product while at the same time not suing them.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    5. Re:W00t...Canada 1- Denmark 0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a proud Canadian, I now sleep better at night, safe in the knowledge the Danish Lego Threat has been roundly crushed once and for all.

    6. Re:W00t...Canada 1- Denmark 0 by antiMStroll · · Score: 1

      Explaining perhaps why they had difficulty integrating with "the Others"? (props to Levesque)

    7. Re:W00t...Canada 1- Denmark 0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      <br><i> Now let's all go build a Mega-Blok castle on Hans Island and really teach those bastards a lesson. </i><br><br>

      You build a castle of Mega-Bloks and we build a castle of Legos and let see who wins... :-)

  20. Yeah! by jfengel · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    We should also dump domain name registration. Just because that nerd Bezos pays a bunch of jerks eleven bucks a year, what gives him the right to the name Amazon? He gets the name amazon.com as his intellectual property, and I get squat. He should open it up to competition.

  21. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  22. Re:about RIM not law. by SoSueMe · · Score: 2, Informative

    "Hunh?"
    Blackberry was a patent infringement case.
    This was a Trademark issue.
    The correlation is not analogous.
    Please understand the dispute before inflaming arguments.

  23. Lego by Universal+Indicator · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Looks like Lego will have to take their toys and go home.

  24. Re:about RIM not law. by LordKazan · · Score: 1

    I think you're nuts... but that's just me.

    This has nothing to do with the US or any tit-for-tat. I think you're seeing leftist monsters in the closet.

    go ahead.. mod me troll .. i got karma to burn - but if you mod me troll you must mod him troll too.

    --
    If you cannot keep politics out of your moderation remove yourself from the Mod Lottery.. NOW!
  25. Re:about RIM not law. by Experiment+626 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    MegaBlock clearly is in violation. IMHO this has less to do with Canadian law, and more to do with playing a game of tit for tat with the US over the Blackberries. That is not only a dangerous road to go down, but a foolish one.

    And how exactly would ruling against a Denmark company like Lego help Canada get back at the USA?

  26. Your building a name by everphilski · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But your selling other people's products. Your 'product' is 'joe's sports equiptment store' or whatever. Now if another store comes in town called 'joe's sports equiptment store', then you've got a case. Again, the difference is, you are not creating you are reselling. Very distinct from this case where you have MegaBlocks making bricks with bumps, and Legos making bricks with bumps, and the question being if the bumps infringe on the image. (go back to my second sentance, your parallel would be another company called joe's...)

    -everphilski-

    1. Re:Your building a name by Berserk+CEO · · Score: 1

      Again, the difference is, you are not creating you are reselling.

      But with slight modifications the restaurant analogy works, because they have a product. So should a receipe for a pizza be allowed to be patented? What would a pizza cost if the restaurant needed to pay royalties to the inventor? What if the inventor decided that his pizza receipts would only be allowed to be used in a certain chain of restaurants? Would that benefit the society? Which is what the patents are supposed to do: promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts.

      I'm personally not totally opposing the idea of patents. But I'm critical towards them. They might be useful to the society in some rare cases, but definitely not in the software business.

      --
      Not every CEO is a psychopath.
    2. Re:Your building a name by FunFactor100 · · Score: 1

      How about car tires? Goodyear and Michelin make tires that fit my car, they even look almost identical untill you get really close. Unless Mega Bloks puts the words LEGO or something similar on it I see no problem. There are lots of products that look the same because that's the technology. The original patent owner got their chance to do what they could with it. The patent ran out, LEGO needs to get over it.

    3. Re:Your building a name by Berserk+CEO · · Score: 1

      Any invention that requires a large amount of upfront investment simply wouldn't happen if there wasn't some way to prevent competitors leeching off your R&D effort. This is so different from a new pizza topping that "order of magnitude" doesn't even begin to cover it.

      Maybe, but most of the patents we see filed these days are comparable in their complexity to the new pizza topping. I could start listing them by thousands from Amazon's one click shopping patent to these, but I'm not going waste my time on it. What I'm saying, is that there a are some huge flaws in the patent system that unless they get fixed, they make the whole idea of patents stink.

      --
      Not every CEO is a psychopath.
    4. Re:Your building a name by Moderatbastard · · Score: 0
      Your building a name
      No, my building not a name. My building a street and number.
      --
      1/3 of jokes get modded OT. If you get the joke, mod 1 in 3 insightful/interesting/underrated to restore karma balance.
    5. Re:Your building a name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jesus H. Christ, take an english class... I don't think you even qualify as literate to most of the western world.

    6. Re:Your building a name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The RI/MPAA isn't "creating" jack shit, either.

  27. Finally... by Indy+Media+Watch · · Score: 1

    We can look forward to taking our kids to Lego ^H^H^H^H Blocko Land...

    --

    Indy Media Watch-Proctologist of the Internet

  28. Anyone should be able to sell blocks by external400kdiskette · · Score: 1

    Especially after such a long time of existence. Having said that it's hard to imagine Lego being replaced because competitors cant outdo them on features or it'd ruin the simplicity of the thing and they can copy it but basic Lego isn't to expensive and Lego has the advantage of being Lego with an image created over decades that a competitor cant match. But they should be allowed to try compete, good for everyone.

    1. Re:Anyone should be able to sell blocks by interstellar_donkey · · Score: 1

      Lego isn't to [sic] expensive

      I suppose it all depends on your definition of expensive. A quick search for bulk discount Lego blocks puts them at about $0.05 each; not high until you consider the block is nothing more then a tiny colored bit of molded plastic that probably cost a quarter of a penny to manufacture. If you go with one of their boxed kits, the price jumps up significantly on the price-per-block scale.

      Sell Lego blocks at 1 or 2 cents each, and I'd probably get back into the hobby in a big way. Until then, it's just too pricey for me. As it stands, to start out with enough Legos to build anything significant, you're talking around $100 for something that cost them ~$5 to make.

      I know that eventually I'll have to bite the bullet and lay out a few C notes for Lego blocks when the kids get old enough to play with them without trying to eat them. Yes, I did it when I was a kid, yes I was stupid (still am), and yes it hurts something awful. I wonder if there isn't a few bits of plastic still inside my stomach or intestines that have lasted 25 years. How long does it take for plastic to degrade when surrounded by stomach acid?. Regardless of the cost, it'd be cruel and a mark of an unfit parent if I denied my children one of the coolest toys out there.

      --
      The Internet is generally stupid
    2. Re:Anyone should be able to sell blocks by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1
      Just wondering, what happened to your Lego sets? I still have a large box full of them from when I was a child somewhere. If you've kept it safe, then this would be a good thing to start your children off with.

      The lego I had as a child was all bought for, or by, me - neither of my parents had it as a child, since it was brought to market when they were too old for it. On the other hand, I had a large box of meccano to play with that belonged to my father as a child (a few of the pieces were rusted, but in general they were of higher quality than the new stuff. He even had a steam engine that could drive meccano machines). The same was true of my electric trainset - I got some new bits, but the majority of it belonged to my father.

      Construction kit style toys are ideal for passing down generations - each generation can add some new bits, and the next one ends up with even more to play with.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  29. In other news... by Dragoonmac · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Barbie reports that she will not drop her divorce litigation against Ken. As many of you know Ken ran off with Mitch over 3 years ago, Barbie also commented she is very happy with her new boyfriend, G.I. Joe who is currently overseas fighting COBRA in Afghanastan.

    --
    Shots: A Populist Parable
    1. Re:In other news... by marsperson · · Score: 1

      Surely that relation won't last, G.I. Joe is a closeted homosexual.

    2. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Barbies are also on stike becuase they say the plastic industry sucks! They say that sexual harrasment problems have been going up due to the fact that the don't have all of their undergarments, Barbies are still fighting the US supreme court for this one. This also leads to more STD's found in more Barbies. To find out more, tune in to news at 11.

  30. This might set a precedent... by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

    on software depending on "purely functional features" similar to those of that commercial software.

    Then again, that was Canada's, not US' Supreme Court.
    And of course, there's the issue of software patents... :(

  31. LegoDeath.com is apropos! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OK, it's no longer called "LegoDeath.com", probably for legal reasons*:

    BlockDeath.com. :-)

    * - What's the difference between a dead skunk in the road and a dead lawyer in the road? There are skid marks in front of the skunk.

    What do you call 10,000 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean? A good start.

  32. Re:about RIM not law. by saskboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You might be onto something since I read that Lego is Danish, and Denmark and Canada were recently in a spat about who owns a worthless island in the high arctic, because it might one day determine trade routes through the opening NorthWest Passage.

    --
    Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
  33. Great news! by shimmerkid · · Score: 1

    This is a great thing, as Legos (whoops! I meant "Models built of Lego bricks") have, as of late, descended into lame branding excercises in order to shift product. Other than the wonderful Technic kits, Legos (whoops!) have become crappy toys that happen to snap together.

    Hopefully, now that Lego has been forced to allow interoperation, other more innovative building brick companies can fill the void.

    Or maybe not.

    1. Re:Great news! by sp5 · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      Hopefully, now that Lego has been forced to allow interoperation, other more innovative building brick companies can fill the void.

      Yes, yes, there really should be an open community based building brick standard.

      I suggest the formation of the Building Brick Committee to oversee all matters of the brick, and to appease all nations it would be affiliated with the UN.

      -sp-

    2. Re:Great news! by Hognoxious · · Score: 1
      The LEGO Trademark cannot be used in an Internet Address
      The LEGO trademark should not be incorporated into an Internet address. Internet addresses have become useful tools for people to identify the source of a homepage. Using "LEGO" in the domain name would be creating the misleading impression that the LEGO Group sponsored the homepage.
      I'd like to see them make that stick. I could make a site about the Romans in West Yorkshire[1] and the there's diddly squat they could do if I named it www.legolium.com (from the Roman name for Castleford - not that I have to justify it anyway).

      [1] England. The North, where you don't find tourists.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re:Great news! by typical · · Score: 1

      This is a great thing, as Legos (whoops! I meant "Models built of Lego bricks") have, as of late, descended into lame branding excercises in order to shift product

      The problem is that Lego used to be a geek toy, and has since become a mass market toy.

      You just need more geek toys.

      --
      Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
  34. Mega Bloks are crap though. by sbaker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Any serious or even semi-serious Lego builder will tell you that MegaBloks are *AWFUL* compared to the genuine article.

    They are made of a much harder plastic and after being snapped together and pulled apart just a couple of times, they wear out to the point where they hardly stick together at all.

    Lego parts are of a slightly more 'rubbery' plastic - they feel almost oily to the touch. I have Lego bricks from 40 years ago that still work just as well as they day they were first used.

    When my son was given a bunch of MegaBloks as a present, they 'polluted' our vast Lego collection. Every time I find one, I toss it straight into the trash.

    About the only use for MegaBloks is in making large sculptural pieces that you want to glue together to make permenant. The hard polystyrene in MegaBloks can be glued together with polystyrene cement - and the issue of wear becomes irrelevent!

    Yet other Lego clones exist - but they tend to have poorer tolerances than either Lego or MegaBloks and can actually damage your real Lego if you mix them.

    --
    www.sjbaker.org
    1. Re:Mega Bloks are crap though. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quote:
      "Any serious or even semi-serious Lego builder will tell you that MegaBloks are *AWFUL* compared to the genuine article."

      Unfortunately, most LEGO-like bricks are purchased for children by adults, 42% of whom think MegaBloks is a subbrand of LEGO (As stated by LEGO CEO at BrickFest. Transcript here:http://news.lugnet.com/events/?n=1658). They just see the price difference between LEGO and MB and buy MB instead.

      The LEGO Group has a serious brand problem, which is part of why the previously mentioned legos.com was set up, as discussed by the LEGO community rep here: http://www.bricksonthebrain.com/blog/index.cfm?com mentID=373

    2. Re:Mega Bloks are crap though. by teknomage1 · · Score: 1

      When my son was given a bunch of MegaBloks as a present, they 'polluted' our vast Lego collection. Every time I find one, I toss it straight into the trash.

      That seems a little harsh. As a kid I'd have hated it if stuff just went missing, especially if it was one of those unique pieces that I had plans for.

      --
      Stop intellectual property from infringing on me
  35. Re:about RIM not law. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Right... because this case, which goes back several years, and to at least one lower court, has all been a prop used by the Supreme Court of Canada to make a point. Of course, the Supreme Court has such a vested interest in what happens to RIM in the US.

    I'm actually kind of offended that you would accuse our Supreme Court judges (who don't have to worry about reelection, and hence popularity) of issuing a ruling as some sort of "revenge" against a third party.

  36. Cripple interoperability? by Pichu0102 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Is Sony entering the building block business?

    1. Re:Cripple interoperability? by GumphMaster · · Score: 1

      You can tell for yourself... have any of your blocks suddenly become invisible?

      --
      Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
  37. Re:1/2 versus 1/3 by Yartrebo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yeah, but at least having some competition has reigned in the price. I was surprised when I was shopping this year to see that the nominal prices of LEGO blocks are cheaper than when I was a kid (that's not counting for inflation) and the Mega Blocks are even cheaper.

    This seems to be the trend with all toys. Generic or interchangable toys (like building blocks) are cheaper, while branded or IP-based toys (video games, action figures from TV shows, etc) keep getting pricier. My guess is that it's based to more effective marketing (improved advertisements and more extensive use of class-based marketing and pricing are the main changes I've noticed).

  38. Good for them by ApuD2 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm surprised Mega Bloks won against Lego. I figured the odds were stacked against them.

    1. Re:Good for them by nemik · · Score: 1

      if you were following the story, you could just connect the dots to come to the conclusion that the case wasn't as solid as they'd have you believe.

    2. Re:Good for them by Woldry · · Score: 1

      You guys just crack me up! Really, I'm falling to pieces here ...

      --
      How can a post be modded "overrated" or "underrated" when it hasn't been rated yet?
  39. Re:about RIM not law. by Fractal+Dice · · Score: 1

    And how exactly would ruling against a Denmark company like Lego help Canada get back at the USA?

    I recognize that logic ... omg! Bush has a slashdot account!

    ( but seriously, except when it comes to enforcing the (relatively young) Charter of Rights, the courts in Canada do a very adept job of staying out of politics )

  40. Home Court Advantage? by dakirw · · Score: 1

    Sounds like Montreal-based Mega Blocks had home court advantage in this particular case.

  41. You can't trademark an invention by Darius+Jedburgh · · Score: 1

    You can only patent inventions. Why does it need lawyers and courts to figure this out?

    1. Re:You can't trademark an invention by damsa · · Score: 1

      You can have a trade dress on an invention. Even color, UPS has a trade mark on the color brown.

    2. Re:You can't trademark an invention by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      UPS has a trade mark on the color brown.

      Which is interesting, since they cloned it from Pullman (maker of railroad cars). The color is actually named "Pullman brown".

      It was chosen by Pullman (after a lot of research) because it can get dirtier than any other color before it LOOKS dirty and needs to be washed. So using that color lets you increase the intervals between washings and thus lower your costs.

      UPS, like Lego, is using trademark to assert a monopoly on a technical innovation (somebody else's, to boot), long past the point where a patent would have expired.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  42. Lego evil? Say it ain't so! by Traa · · Score: 1

    It seems fairly obvious that the Lego Corporation tried something pretty amoral (using money/lawyers/trademarks to try to maintain their monopoly after their patents had expired). If this was any of a number of known big name companies we would be happy to scream foul and claim evil...but we are talking about Lego...I grew up with that stuff. I have been dreaming of buying it for my son. And now they went evil??!!

    Man, that hurts.

  43. Well, ok but there's still only one lego by NoMercy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I always hated it when I found other non lego blocks in my bin full of blocks, espically if they fitted with other lego blocks, but not quite perfectly, I'd be happyly looking for the right piece, think Ive found it, and then have it pop off every time I play with my creation, only to find out it's a fake that's slipped under the radar!

    Though if megablocks don't fit into lego blocks I'd be happy with it :)

  44. Lego was hoping to win...in canada... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tell me about optimism.

    LEGO you got served, pwned and owned.

  45. Too bad... by Jmcconn110 · · Score: 1

    Mega Bloks are crap, as anyone who has used Legos knows that. But it is unfortunate that they are allowed to reproduce legos design, Lego did have their chance though, and Mega Bloks will probably be shot down anyways...

  46. Sorry for the rant... by Txiasaeia · · Score: 2, Insightful
    ...but what the hell is Lego thinking as of late? Okay, so you've got a lawsuit against a competitor because their product is similar. I can see that. But why in the world did they move from terrific, wonderful, *creative* designs to essentially marketing Harry Potter and Star Wars sets? Blacktron (new and old), Space Police, M-Tron... Lego used to put out extremely interesting sets 10-15 years ago, and then all of a sudden they decided that creativity was no longer necessary and sold their soul to IP.

    I'm glad that Mega Bloks won the suit - they, at least, put out more creative sets than Lego (not to mention they're Canadian). Lego, if you're listening, I've got lots of disposable income and a fondness towards your brand, but if all you're going to is brand other people's IP, you're not going to have me as a customer.

    --
    Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
    1. Re:Sorry for the rant... by Frogbert · · Score: 1

      Yeah megabloks would never sell out like that.

    2. Re:Sorry for the rant... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reason for the merchadising is that the Lego Group is hemorrhaging money, nobody buys Lego bricks anymore.

      The demographic that used to play with Lego up until the early 90s play with computers these days. Lego tried to seize that market with Lego Mindstorms but it only did well in the educational sector.

      Things have gotten so bad that Lego is shifting production of Lego bricks to China so even the quality of bricks may drop.

    3. Re:Sorry for the rant... by Txiasaeia · · Score: 1

      Bloody hell... well, I stand corrected. (Doesn't change the fact about Lego, though ;) )

      --
      Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
  47. Having ruled that there are limits to IP rights... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    "Trademark law should not be used to perpetuate monopoly rights enjoyed under now-expired patents," the Supreme Court says.

    The last of Lego's Canadian patents on its blocks expired in 1988.

    "The fact is ... that the monopoly on the bricks is over, and Mega Bloks and Lego bricks may be interchangeable in the bins of the playrooms of the nation - dragons, castles and knights may be designed with them, without any distinction," the high court ruled.

    ...following the courts' final verdict, Canada is certainly on high alert - expecting an invasion Real Soon Now, from some southern neighbor who vows not to tolerate such heresy against the creed in ever-expanding unlimited IP.
  48. mega bloks suck by cwalk · · Score: 1, Insightful

    As an owner of both lego and mega bloks, I feel that this is a bad decision. Mega bloks themselves are of poor quality, and as a younger child, they used to piss me off because they wouldn't 'stick' properly to other lego pieces. I don't understand why mega bloks can't make their own blocks that are just slightly bigger/smaller than lego blocks. They are obviously trying to piggy back off of lego's hard earned success. In case you are ever thinking about picking up a mega bloks set for a child, here's a warning, don't! IMHO mega bloks take away from the 'lego' experience. You get what you pay for.

    1. Re:mega bloks suck by Bushido+Hacks · · Score: 0

      I concur with your statement. Lego has has always been the better building toy. I wish they would bring back the Technic Legos so I can start building robots again. (Note to the guys at the bookstore: Why they heck do you sell a book about Lego Mindstorm robots when I don't have the Legos I need for such a project?)

      --
      The Rapture is NOT an exit strategy.
    2. Re:mega bloks suck by Eponymous+Powder · · Score: 1

      Why didn't Lego just have a huge advertising campaign:

            MEGA BLOCKS SUCK DOG'S BALLS

      It'd have to be cheaper than Supreme Court action...

  49. two flats stuck by No+Such+Agency · · Score: 1

    The secret is to flex them. And be gentle. Take your time. Also, don't stick two of the same size together like that - leave yourself a handle.

    --
    Freedom: "I won't!"
  50. Re:about RIM not law. by ja · · Score: 1
    You might be onto something since I read that Lego is Danish, and Denmark and Canada were recently in a spat about who owns a worthless island in the high arctic, because it might one day determine trade routes through the opening NorthWest Passage.

    ... but Denmark would then, as the nice and gentle lapdog it is, just give the ball back to hussy, the US of A, who would surely love to put a lighthouse up there.

    mvh // Jens M Andreasen

    --

    send + more == money? ...
  51. Re:No kidding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ahh, yes. Another buy-an-SUV-to-show-up-the-neighbors, warmongering, environmentally-unaware capitalist pig is born.

    Why would a bicycle riding, "peace at any cost", tree hugger socialist care? If you had your choice, everyone would be just as broke and miserable as you are. Why must you ecofanatics be so consumed with rage because someone can be more successful than you and wants a truck?

    I got news for you: Spend less time bitching about pollution, and try investing in technologies that improve pollution. If you think we are all going to live like you, you are insane.

    Even my big ass truck uses less gas and creates less pollution than the average car just two decades ago. My portfolio looks good investing in responsible companies that are working on energy efficient systems, and I design products that use half the power of my competitors, and I get to rake it in for doing it.

    I compete AGAINST communist and socialist countries, and whip their asses because they have no incentive to innovate. Your socialist dream is all smoke and mirrors. Capitalism isn't the disease, it is the cure.

    So go hug someone elses tree. We know your real agenda isn't about the environment, it is about making every one OBEY your narrow minded set of life rules that you think we should follow. Like most environmental freaks, you have a control disorder that can only be satisfied when we are all as miserable as you. No thanks.

  52. I applaud by theendlessnow · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I'm a big Lego fan. And when you had to get your Lego bricks from overseas (I'm in the states) it made sense that 20 pieces would cost $10+. But I think they are produced locally now... and so I don't understand why Lego has not reduced their prices. ????

    I use Mega Blocks (the small kind) in a class room setting of about 25 children and have never had any problems. They stil stick hard... so hard that they have a tough time pulling them apart (just like I remember with Lego bricks). I can buy 600-900 pieces for $10 with Mega Blocks. Even if they were of lesser quality (which I have not found to be true), they're still a good deal IMHO. Sure.. they don't have all the trashy Neo Lego (non creative) designs... but I just want bricks... like the good ole days when you had to have some imagination to play with Lego bricks. Nowadays, there are tons of pre formed speciality parts that just take the fun out of Lego bricks. The beauty was in the design using the primitive parts. Mega Blocks still gives you that. There are a few generic kits for Lego bricks.. but the price is 4-10x the price of Mega Blocks.

    Lego is not the company I grew up with (even then, it was worth the money to buy their stuff... but not anymore).

    1. Re:I applaud by Bombcar · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Lego is actually not produced in the US anymore. Current production of bricks is in Denmark and Switzerland, with packaging occurring in Denmark, Switzerland, U.S., South Korea and the Czech Republic.

      The moulding machines are very expensive, and they mould their bricks to tolerances so high that you can use them in scientific optical experiments to hold lenses. This results in a high manufacturing cost; even with the high current cost of Lego, they're having a hard time turning a profit. In 2005, the LEGO Group reported a 2004 net loss of DKK 1.9 billion on a total turnover, including LEGO's amusement parks, of DKK 7,934 billion.

  53. Fuck Canada by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I love Southpark... We will soon start producing our own marble sirup and flags with marple leaves on!!! Dane

  54. Your Rights Online: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I'm so glad that this ruling will protect my rights as I surf the 'Net.

  55. Branding without monopoly by Julian+Morrison · · Score: 1

    Branding can be "protected" without official recognition of trademarks. Basically, copying a brand mark is fraud if a person doing so is trying to present their business as one company when in reality it's another. Customers could validly sue.

    I suspect that even with no monopolistic IP, brand marks would be sacrosanct and socially enforced. If I made a computer and tried to sell it as "IBM", people would laugh and call me a liar. However, product trademarks might not be - they could quickly become new generic nouns, like hoover or kleenex. Lego, for example, would become a generic name and spec for interlocking bricks from various competing brands.

    1. Re:Branding without monopoly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I agree with the first paragraph, the second is a bit dodgy. I feel Lego is as much a brand as IBM. I think there would be little harm in marketing my computer under my own brand, but with a feature of being "IBM Compatible", or "Lego compatible". This signals that the brands could be used interchangeably, but I am not trying to pass off my product as someone elses.

      Actually allowing other companies to create an identical product, but with their own brand does create real competition, after all, if an idea is that obvious and easy to copy then it is only fair to compete on quality and costs. But a complete Lego set is actually not that easy to make a quality copy of. You would need to create representations of all the peices (with your brand not theirs on the Studs), and you would need to then have a factory in place to create them. Now given Lego have the experience with plastic moulding processes, you would have to have a very good process to undercut Lego's costs wuth the same quality. However - Lego's own markup is so high, that in the current market you would easily undercut them. As they began to compete in that marketplace, it would get very interesting indeed, and processes would evolve furthar.

  56. Before Lego by HermanAB · · Score: 2, Funny

    there was a UK company with a product called Montini.

    Lego copied the idea and was better at marketing. Sorta the Microsoft of building blocks.

    See, it IS possible to slam Microsoft even with something as simple as kiddie blocks... :)

    --
    Oh well, what the hell...
    1. Re:Before Lego by Fraser · · Score: 1

      None of that is true.

      Montini bricks came after Lego by a long way.

      The Lego Automatic Binding brick first appeared in 1949. Montini, a Dutch company, not from the UK, began selling compatible bricks in the early 60s.

      F

    2. Re:Before Lego by HermanAB · · Score: 1

      Hmm, looks like I got things mixed up - it was a while before my mother was born, nevermind me...

      Apparently, the first interlocking bricks were made from rubber and those were available around 1930 in the UK. The first plastic bricks were patented by Kiddiekraft in the UK and they sold their patent to Lego after WW2.

      So, Lego was not the first maker of interlocking bricks and they did not invent plastic bricks either. It is a British invention. They bought the patent and marketed the hell out of it, about 20 years after - just like MS would have done.

      See, like a good Sloshdatter, I managed to drag MS into the argument again! :)

      --
      Oh well, what the hell...
  57. They do have some cooler products though by technopinion · · Score: 1

    While the small-sized mega-bloks may not be quite as good as lego in terms of quality, they do have some nice products for younger kids, like the castle I bought my son for Christmas last year *that he can actually go inside*

  58. Re:No kidding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Spend less time bitching about pollution, and try investing in technologies that improve pollution.


    Yes! We need better pollution!
  59. /. watch out The Lego Group is coming after you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From your first link...

    "The LEGO Logo may not be used on an Unofficial Web Site
    The bright red LEGO logo has become one of the most recognized trademarks in the world. We have worked hard to make this logo a symbol of high quality creative products for children. The logo stands for the LEGO Group and we cannot risk allowing the distinctiveness of this symbol to be diluted. We must, therefore, insist that the LEGO logo NEVER be used on an unofficial web site."

    Is it just me or am I the only one the sees the irony in having a company a court battle over trademarks on a site that "violates the companys trademarks" (according to the company not me) ;)

  60. Nice try, but ... by oneiros27 · · Score: 1

    I have used MegaBloks. I even have some of the sets that were kinda X-Files ish.

    Maybe MegaBloks have gotten better recently, but I find that they are much less 'tight' of a connection than Legos. They seem to be made of a softer plastic, so it may just be from many, many, hours of use. (Most of the MegaBloks I play with are at my neighbor's house, where they have a 5 year old, and the majority of the blocks were hand-me-downs, and they are significantly looser than my vintage (20-25 yr old) Legos.

    However, for small children, who might not have a firm grip and not know the tricks on how to split the little tiny ones when they're stuck together, I'd say they're probably better.

    If you're making large scale, detailed structures, especially if it has any delicate parts, I'd go exclusively Lego. (unless I needed a specific color that was available in MegaBlok, and not Lego)

    --
    Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
  61. Legos only build one thing if *you're* stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just because they package parts to build one pirate ship, that doesn't mean that's the only thing you can build with all those parts.

    Although, if you do get the big pirate ship and build it, you're never going to want to take it apart...

  62. did anyone else read this as... by t35t0r · · Score: 1

    Mega blokes wins supreme court battle... ..those bloody blokes!

  63. The sad thing is, you took that seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was really hoping some overly-sheltered "progressive" /. basement-dwellers would read that ajd have some spark of electricity flash between their underused brain cells that would cause their fingers to reflexively mod that communstic tripe "+5 Insightful", as they are wont to do around these addle-brained parts. I guess I forgot to call "BusHitler" stupid in one sentence, and an evil genius in the next. Live and learn. Next time it will be better.

    Heck, I might actually research how left-wing twits use the word "progressive" to mask their anti-American moonbattery, and troll with something totally indistinguishable from what some baby in a red diaper sucking on the tit of North Korean Stalinism would write. Or maybe what some plagiarist and forger falsely claiming to be a Native American would, anyway. I could throw in a few anti-semitic epithets like "little Eichmanns", or maybe show some actual racism by saying a black man is a "traitor to his race" because he "doesn't think like a black man". Or maybe I'll emulate St. Rachel the Pancaked, make ugly faces while screaming anti-American curses while burning a US flag and then dive under a fully operational and operating Caterpillar (calling Mr. "Do you know how much damage this bulldozer would sustain if it ran over your?" Prosser... :-D).

    That'll get modded up for sure.

    My troll got the wrong person. :-)

    And no, I don't own an SUV. They're too damn hard to control when weaving at 120MPH through all the Volvos and tortoise-like hybrids the envirowhackos drive. As if buying a 3,000-lb car full of dangerous, toxic chemicals that we have no experience whatsoever in disposing of is signficantly less damaging to the environment than a 3,500-lb SUV. Dumbasses. But I guess it's too much to expect them to actually think about and understand the consequences of their actions.

  64. Denmark?? by Nerdposeur · · Score: 1

    Legos are from Denmark??? I thought all my childhood toys came from the good ol' U.S. of A.

    What's next, action figures made in Tiawan?

    1. Re:Denmark?? by klang · · Score: 1

      Everybody thinks that Lego is from their own country even me and I'm from Denmark .. waitaminute...

  65. Mega Blocks Trademark is Bogus by Stopher2475 · · Score: 1

    I saw an add once where there was a car made of megablocks. I think it was Toyota or something and it had 'Trademark of Megabloks' which I though was funny because anyone who looked at the add would first think Lego. Megabloks doesn't come to your mind when you seen the thing and it's not like you can tell from a non close up picture what kind of blocks they are.

  66. Mega Blocks are not as good but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Their goth Dragon Fire line of products looks so good, my six years old totally fell for it (to my despair). I have been a long standing Lego fan and I really hate the plastic Mega Bloks are made of, but I have to give it to them, the visual design of some of their products is superior to Lego to the point that the original is starting to copy the fake... Just compare http://www.lego.com/eng/vikings/Default.aspx compared to http://www.megablock.com/en/products/description.p hp?level=2&level2=1&level2=1&lId=0&iID=166&subCat= 3 (sorry for the long link). I started noticing the Dragon Fire line of products when it came out and at that time, Lego didn't have a comparable products, now they do ...

  67. Re:about RIM not law. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lighthouse? Nah, we'll just put some model rockets up there. For recreational purposes.

  68. Fuck Canada by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I love Southpark...

    We will soon start producing our own marble syrup

    Why does Canadians always have to carry their stupid _north American_ flags around?
    If they don't like people from the south should shut the border or shut up!

    Separating Quebec is a joke.. stop it! All the French people in France think it is a joke anyway. What can Quebec do will only polar bears and ice?

    I love Canada and Canadians have been there more times on holiday... just kidding.

    A Dane

  69. Neutral Ground by TheStonepedo · · Score: 1

    No matter how canadian Mega-Bloks may be, I'm fairly sure Legos originated in some European country. I'm not sure if it's one where the folks say "oui" or "yaaaaah" or "bork bork bork" but it's definitely not from Canadia where every question ends in "...'ey, Wallo?" or the US where every sentence ends in "...so let's go to the mall in our SUVs and be consumer whores."

    --
    I'll be your candy shop of infinite deliciousity if you'll be my discotheque of endless rump-shaking.
  70. 1 hour to write a song? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Just writing a song (1 hour) and recording it (4 hours) shouldn't
    > be worth more than a few grand, tops. Copyright is BS.

    Well, considering how utterly nonsensical your guesses are about the time it takes to write or record a song, I think it's pretty clear that not only do you have no clue what you're talking about, you haven't even bothered to think about it.

    If you want to understand why (limited!) IP protection can be in the public's interest, consider how many new life-saving drugs we'd get a year if the cost to develop them remained more than $500 million and the time and cost to reverse-engineer them and start cranking out copies remained a few weeks and a few million. IP is protected because doing so is a public good.

    IP is also protected because it's the guy's own creation; if he works and creates a song and you work and create a house, what makes your creation more worthy of protection than his?

    1. Re:1 hour to write a song? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      while I agree, being a songwriter that it takes time to write a song, I still dont think Metallica should carry on bitching about 15 year old songs anymore - you've had your fun, now work for a living again.. Copyright should be time limited, and whats more the time limits should be less. Most movies, unless they are pathetically bad, more than make their money back in the cinema screenings, rental and first raft of DVDs. This process is about 2-3 years, after 5 years - they are now merely profiteering, and should be getting off their backsides to do something new. In terms of drug company copyright, while there is a huge investment going in there, I wish they wouldnt use their copyrights to charge more for drugs in South America than they do in affluent North America, and I do think excessive profiteering like that should be clamped down upon by governments. Of course those who make life saving drugs should be rewarded for their efforts, but those life saving drugs should become Public domain as soon as possible - something which would benefit world health, and allow drug companies to draw upon the experiences of each other, thus reducing costs of later drugs. Research which was expensive should be rewarded, and remunerated, but should also be PD'd so not everyone has to duplicate the expense.

  71. My kids love Lego (and Mega Bloks too). by pmagsa · · Score: 1

    Although I prefer Lego, the good thing about Lego and Mega Bloks is that you may mix them, keeping in mind that Mega Bloks only fit on top of Lego blocks.
    A month ago, Jaime (my three and a half years old son) built what he called a train (don't look for wheels though), using almost every block available at home. The train was almost 2 meters long. I took some pictures of the train.

  72. Exactly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Like a lot of monopolists, [Lego | Disney ] became addicted to not having and not suffering competitors.

    It's the same situation like with Disney lobbying to prolong the copyright duration. Senator Disney, anyone? Senator Bono?

  73. Lego Contest by Stoned4Life · · Score: 1

    When I was 11 or something, I built a hospital out of legos. It had at least 9-11 floors (around 5ft tall), had an elevator that was built off the ropes from the lego-fire engines (you'd use a piece to roll the string to pull the elevator up/down), and had everything inside that a real hospital would have (cafeteria, x-ray, hospital rooms, bathrooms, offices, reception at the bottom, etc). It was cut such that it had 3 walls, so the back was open (the elevator stuck out at the back), and you could see the front, of the hospital. In 2000, 2001, not sure anymore, (It's been over 5 years) a lego contest was held in Indiannapolis, Indiana. I went. I was, literally, guranteed the win- according to a judge. Unfortunately for me, a parent of some child who had some lame out of the box directions entry that was guranteed to lose, noticed I had megablocks at the top of my hospital. (The top was built like the empire state building.) I didn't know, my parents bought megablocks, legos, they all looked the same. Who was to know right? Well, the judges were forced to disqualify me from the $10,000 grand prize, and instead, gave me runner up with a couple hats, a nice t-shirt that now no longer fits, and a pat on the back for an excellant job well done. Story of my life. I think megablocks should be shutdown. If a 11 year old kid can't tell the difference, what proof do you need?

    --
    Stoned4Life
    gen = new Random
  74. Their own problems though by GeckoX · · Score: 1

    Lego's problems are of their own making, and there are a few of them.

    First, average price of a piece of lego: Typically between 20 and 30 cents EACH. Finding sets on sale near 10 cents a piece is a freaking steal now. It's expensive stuff.

    Second, lost focus. A few years ago, all they were making was specialty sets. Now they've expanded to many many more specialty sets, and re-introduced some more traditional sets, but not quite traditional like. Basically, they sell one off models, not re-configurable packages of parts.

    Third, they've even ruined it for collectors. When they started releasing starwars lego sets a few years ago around episode 1, I started buying them. I love lego, and love (though not as much anymore) starward too. Thought it'd be great to collect them.

    5 years or so later, at least 100 sets later, approx $10000 later, I HAVE MAYBE HALF OF THE GOD DAMNED THINGS! Most of them are crap. There are many many multiple models of the same ships, for no good reason at all.

    The end result of all of this is that it's too expensive, collectors can't collect it and a huge part of the inherant creativity has been stifled.

    I love and hate lego about as much as I love and hate George Lucas.

    --
    No Comment.
  75. Yeah, I did that. On purpose. Whaddya gonna do?!! by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Just what we need, a revolution by the grammar NAZI's! Then they can implenent their final solution against bad spelers.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  76. Re:Yeah, I did that. On purpose. Whaddya gonna do? by Mr.+Shiny+And+New · · Score: 1

    You know, if the grammar Nazis DO revolt, they'll certainly get YOU for pluralizing Nazi as "NAZI's" :)

  77. Re:Yeah, I did that. On purpose. Whaddya gonna do? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    You know, if the grammar Nazis DO revolt, they'll certainly get YOU for pluralizing Nazi as "NAZI's" :)
    whoosh
  78. that sucks by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

    I used to make cars of various sizes and shapes out of Legos.. and nothing gave me more satisfaction than ramming them into each other, sending them off the highest available table, putting them into the wall at highspeed...

    AFAIK they never fell apart.

    I can't imagine not being able to put something together because it kept falling apart. Sounds like a Mega Rip Off.

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
  79. Same mistake as Ford? by bezuwork's+friend · · Score: 1
    Something I haven't seen in the comments is discussion of the colors. For me, I liked Mega Blocks for their intersting colors I used to find in Walmart. Light blue, vivid green, orange. Too cool.

    Lego is great in quality, but to me, lacking in a lot of variety in colors and block shapes. (The lure of building amazing things with lego, I think, is the inherent difficulty of working totally within the lego block hierarchy - i.e. that many things are so difficult that it becomes a real challange.)

    Same thing Ford did with his "they can have any color they want so long as it's black" hurts lego as well. That and their unreasonable expense. I would probably buy more if Lego sold blocks in bulk - like 100 2x4s or the like (they don't do they?).

    1. Re:Same mistake as Ford? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      50 2x4 legos for US$6.00 (Lego Shop) 14 cents a piece. Enjoy.

  80. Why not play with some? by Richard+Steiner · · Score: 1

    Just as with operating systems, the look and feel of different types/brands of toy bricks is something you have to experience firsthand before you can really appreciate the differences.

    We had Lego-brand bricks while I was growing up in the 60's/70's, and I have a fairly sizable collection that I've added to over the years, but perhaps five years ago I grabbed a couple of sets of MegaBlocks out of curiosity. I found them to be better than I expected, and they seem to work just fine for the types of things I tend to build (structures for RPGs and that sort of thing). Now I have 30-40k pieces of the things in addition to my 20k pieces of Legos. :-)

    Try them. Your initial impression might be confirmed, but you might be pleasantly surprised as well.

    --
    Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
    The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
  81. The problem with Tinkertoys... by Richard+Steiner · · Score: 1

    ...is that the slotted ends of the sticks kept on snapping off when we made swords and daggers out of Tinkertoy sticks and wheels. :-)

    We probably went through a half-dozen sets doing that...

    --
    Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
    The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
  82. Legos and Megablocks by Smiths+Guy · · Score: 1

    Hey all, Though I do find, as most do, Legos to be better quality. I do like some of the variety with Mega-Blocks. The Mega-Blocks Nimitz is pretty cool for a big model and was fairly reasonable. I may get the Lego Maersk container ship to compare. Mega-Blocks does seem to do more real-life (ships/planes/cars) than Lego does. However, I do really like the Lego Viking sets (ToysRUs only?). Ciao, Smithsguy

  83. My personally integrated Lego separator... by helfom · · Score: 1

    My mother used to yell at me for biting them off, but I never listened. Now all my legos have teeth marks... Gives 'em character!

  84. Re:1/2 versus 1/3 by jonbryce · · Score: 1

    It's based on outsourcing manufacturing to China, which is much cheaper than making them in Denmark.

  85. Yet another reason I'm glad . . . by jhylkema · · Score: 1
  86. Here's one. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    I probably WOULD have played with Lego if I'd had any.

    So I made do with tinkertoy and erector set.

    (But I DID monopolize a small amount of a slide-together brick system in Kindergarten. Much competition for it so I'd snag enough to make a portable toy to play with while the bullies monopolized the rest of the pile.)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  87. It's just you. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    Is it just me or am I the only one the sees the irony in having a company a court battle over trademarks on a site that "violates the companys trademarks" (according to the company not me) ;)

    Of COURSE a news site that is willing to mark stories about a company with the company's trademarked logo, regardless of the company's wishes, and does stories about both so-called "intellectual property" disputes (especially attempts to use copyright or trademark as patent and trademark to make trouble for technical competition) and other things interesting to nerds, will run a story about developments a trademark dispte where a company making a toy nerds like is using trademark to extend their monopoly beyond the expiration of the patent on their functional features and hang the company's trademarked logo on it. Nothing ironic about it.

    So it's just you. B-)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:It's just you. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      Make that: "It's just you(tm)."

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  88. So now they can compete... by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    So now they can compete solely on technical merits and price.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  89. Exactly, else the basis of patent law crumbles... by msauve · · Score: 1
    Patents provide exclusive, limited time rights to inventors in exchange for disclosing the details for future public use. By patenting an invention, you are binding yourself to that social contract. At the end of the patent, the use of the invention necessarily becomes public. That's simply part of the overall bargain.

    Lego exhibited a lack of good faith in the matter - I would argue that they should be penalized by revocation of any/all still outstanding patents, to compensate the public for lost opportunity and the costs of fighting their illegitimate attempts at maintaining exclusive control over this invention. (Although I recognize that there's likely no legal basis for revoking patents as punishment).

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
  90. I remember when Lego didn't stick properly either. by Ambient+Sheep · · Score: 1

    Although "only" 40 now, I remember the OLD Lego that didn't stick together properly, especially not to the newer bricks (the ones we now all know and love). Some older relative gave me a hand-me-down box of old Lego which was a mixture of modern bricks and this weird stuff. Also the colour was slightly off, they were a creamy colour rather than white. As children in the early 70s my friends and I used to call it "mouldy Lego" - but Lego it was, it still had the logo on every brick, although in a slightly-different typeface. Looking at the Wikipedia page it seems that this was probably pre-1963 Lego (made of cellulose(!) acetate), so it was probably at least eight or nine years old by the time I was playing with it.

  91. Mega Bloks Rock! by HyperBear · · Score: 1

    I prefer Mega Bloks because of the types of sets they put out. I picked up a number of the Dragons sets cheap. Generic fantasy guys in armour and orcs. Orcs! The ship sets are awesome (managed to get 3 of those for $5 a pop), with fabric sales. I saw the Mega Bloks pirate ship and it's much better than the Legos set. I use Dragons figures in fantasy skirmish gaming, and I use the Alien Legacy figures in place of miniatures in our Delta Green games. Mega Bloks just seems to be more interesting. My 6 year old is certainly more attracted to Mega Bloks than Lego, so Mega Bloks is tapping into something the Danish company is missing.

    1. Re:Mega Bloks Rock! by HyperBear · · Score: 1

      D'oh! Alien Agency, not Alien Legacy...

  92. Doesn't work. by Foerstner · · Score: 1

    The brick separator doesn't work effectively on smaller pieces. (For example, separating two 1x2 flat pieces.)

    And it's always the smallest ones that are the hardest to get apart with your hands.

    --
    The US free market: two halves of a government-granted duopoly are free to set the market price.
  93. Re:Yeah, I did that. On purpose. Whaddya gonna do? by Anarcho-Goth · · Score: 1

    You know, if the grammar Nazis DO revolt, they'll certainly get YOU for pluralizing Nazi as "NAZI's" :)

    No, I think the AAAAA will get to him first.

    (The American Association for the Appropriate Application Apostrophes)

    --
    I hate Liberals and Conservatives.
    If you are a Liberal or a Conservative, then HAVE A NICE DAY!
    Courage.
  94. Late, but set #4679 by Rhys · · Score: 1

    is the set you're looking for. Red plastic tub full of a bunch of bricks plus cardboard box full of more bricks on top of it plastic-shipping-corded on top. No directions on it, but if you just want lots of random brickage, it's great.

    $19.99 at T-r-U, 2k bricks in it. You even get some fun colors. (in my world, lego bricks come in black, grey, white, blue, red, and yellow. Plus some transparent parts in other colors (green, notibly). Base plates come in grey, green, or black.)

    --
    Slashdot Patriotism: We Support our Dupes!