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.'"
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.
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).
☠
...Microsoft and Amazon race to patent 'bumps on blocks.'
Dark Reflection
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.
"Trademark law should not be used to perpetuate monopoly rights enjoyed under now-expired patents," the Supreme Court says.
Home court advantage? I wonder what would happen if the Supreme Court ruled the other way. Burning Lego blocks on the court steps... :P
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!
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!
...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... :)
How is this tit-for-tat? Lego is a Danish company.
- 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
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
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
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
Comment removed based on user account deletion
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?
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-
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.
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
I'm surprised Mega Bloks won against Lego. I figured the odds were stacked against them.