Alternative Brands and Shops (investing/building)

[exracer327]

7 hours ago, Frank Brickowski said:

There are new newspaper articles about this being released in Germany daily this week, showing the magnitude of this is even rising and has grown to a degree where not only young people and LEGO fans have gotten to know about it, but more or less the whole population of the country. Germany is a very important market for TLG and also has a special history with LEGO, not only because the first LEGO theme park had been opened here. How's that "nothing new"?

You've already established that there is a brouhaha occurring between LEGO, a German YouTuber, and non-LEGO brick sellers.  The "nothing new" is within this thread and your answer offered nothing new.  So if awareness was your goal, then this thread can probably be closed.

However, you keep pushing, what several people have noted, appears to be an agenda.  That is my question; what is the cause you're trying to champion?  Are you trying to convince us that LEGO is a big bad corporation that everyone needs to stop buying from?  Or that all these non-LEGO brick sellers are better investments than LEGO itself?  Or are you pissed that LEGO's current miff with those they perceive as possibly damaging their reputation is possibly hurting your reselling prospects and you've become a very angry German.  Or all-the-above?

Edited February 24, 2021 by exracer327

[Frank Brickowski]

3 minutes ago, Captain_chaos said:

This is why I think you're just trolling the forum. I cannot believe that anybody could be this obtuse. Are you honestly saying that you don't understand the difference between a brand and a type of object? Do you think that a can of Heineken is equivalent to an Amstel because they're both beer? Do you think that an Audi is equivalent to a BMW because they are both cars? 

The point is not that the Cada set looks like a car. The point is that it clearly IS an unlicensed representation of a specific automobile - The Ferrari 488 Pista. You have been asked to show which specific brand of vehicle the Lego examples represent, and you have failed to do so, either because you don't understand or are deliberately arguing in bad faith.

OK, the "Grand Prix Racer" looks like an F1 Ferrari, just has a different color.

[KShine]

On 2/23/2021 at 1:53 AM, Frank Brickowski said:

How about millions of investors trying to drop their stuff at the same time because they're being caught by surprise by sudden events they could have known about had they just been aware about the ongoings in other markets that might also come to their home territory - instead of claiming these were "problems that don't really exist"?

So don't invest in LEGO if you are living with so much fear.

[Frank Brickowski]

24 minutes ago, Alpinemaps said:

If you’re going to make the claim that all those images are stolen, then show us that they are. Justify why they are stolen, just as we have done in the opposite.

 

Not stolen, simply UNLICENSED.

Crawler Crane:



Race Truck:



Le Mans Car:

 

 

Edited February 24, 2021 by Frank Brickowski

[Frank Brickowski]

6 minutes ago, KShine said:

So don't invest in LEGO if you are living with so much fear.

So you now do acknowledge there are problems that exist (which you did not before), you just switch to another argument now. Alright. I've seen this behaviour dozens of times by different users in this thread now.

[KShine]

7 hours ago, Frank Brickowski said:

There are new newspaper articles about this being released in Germany daily this week, showing the magnitude of this is even rising and has grown to a degree where not only young people and LEGO fans have gotten to know about it, but more or less the whole population of the country. Germany is a very important market for TLG and also has a special history with LEGO, not only because the first LEGO theme park had been opened here. How's that "nothing new"?

Even if the magnitude of rage you claim actually did exist (it actually doesn't), there would be an inevitable backlash of support from generations of LEGO lovers.

These things simply have a way of working themselves out. It's a big world, and even the German market disappearing (which it isn't) wouldn't end LEGO investing.

We went through a period of having far too many resellers, which lead to profits being diminished, which lead to many resellers going away, which lead to worthwhile profits returning.

And if the profits ever went away, so would the practice of investing in LEGO.

[KShine]

7 minutes ago, Frank Brickowski said:

So you now do acknowledge there are problems that exist (which you did not before), you just switch to another argument now. Alright. I've seen this behaviour dozens of times by different users in this thread now.

I acknowledge that you believe there are problems that exist - I am not concerned.

[Frank Brickowski]

1 minute ago, KShine said:

Even if the magnitude of rage you claim actually did exist (it actually doesn't), there would be an inevitable backlash of support from generations of LEGO lovers.

 

The point being: The rage comes from these very LEGO lovers themselves that are now disappointed enough to turn to other brands. Two years ago about 95% of the German bricks fans were exclusively LEGO fans (as no other brands were really available), so there actually is no one else present to be disappointed and in rage other than the very (former) fans of LEGO themselves.

[Frank Brickowski]

2 minutes ago, KShine said:

I acknowledge that you believe there are problems that exist - I am not concerned.

I very much get that. Good luck.

[KShine]

4 minutes ago, Frank Brickowski said:

The point being: The rage comes from these very LEGO lovers themselves that are now disappointed enough to turn to other brands. Two years ago about 95% of the German bricks fans were exclusively LEGO fans (as no other brands were really available), so there actually is no one else present to be disappointed and in rage other than the very (former) fans of LEGO themselves.

I don't think you understand how backlash works. People are generally loyal to a fault - I doubt that your perception of the level of rage in Germany is even close to being accurate (as it would defy human nature).

[Frank Brickowski]

Just now, KShine said:

I don't think you understand how backlash works. People are generally loyal to a fault - I doubt that your perception of the level of rage in Germany is even close to being accurate (as it would defy human nature).

You question my perception of a topic you don't know much of anything about in the first place - not speaking the language, not understanding any video or article, not knowing anything about the mindset of Germans. While I have witnessed everything that happened over the last 2 years first hand being a citizen of this country, actually speaking the language. Nice.

[Captain_chaos]

41 minutes ago, Frank Brickowski said:

OK, the "Grand Prix Racer" looks like an F1 Ferrari, just has a different color.

 

31 minutes ago, Frank Brickowski said:

Not stolen, simply UNLICENSED.

The pictures you've posted show that you are wrong. The real vehicles clearly do not match the Lego models. Shapes, headlights, paint schemes, crane winch position, etc. All different. The F1 car looks like a generic representation of an F1 car from about 2010-2013. F1 cars (and LMP1) are designed within narrow regulatory constraints, so of course they look similar. All F1 cars from different manufacturers, using wholly unique chassis and engines, still look similar because of that. However, the Lego model clearly is not of any Ferrari F1 car (or any specific car at all). The colour scheme is obviously different, aero parts are not replicated, and the model looks no more like a Ferrari than any of the other manufacturers on the grid at that time. 

The 2010 Ferrari F1 car:

The 2012 McLaren F1 car:

The Lego model:

The model is clearly no more similar to one or the other, and it clearly is not attempting to appear exactly like either.

By contrast, here is the Ferrari 488 Pista:

And here is the Cada model:

It almost couldn't be more blatant. The fact that they've removed the Ferrari badges is even more incriminating, because it makes it completely obvious that they have not paid Ferrari to use their intellectual property.

[BricksBrotha]

6 hours ago, coelian said:

Ok I'm going on a tangent but here's this story for laughs.

https://nextshark.com/fake-porsche-man-dumped-china/

"She reportedly became so enamored with the man, and his car, that it did not take long for them to become a couple.

In fact, in the two weeks that they were together, they consummated their mutual affection 17 times."  TMI !!! 

1 hour ago, Frank Brickowski said:

 Two years ago about 95% of the German bricks fans were exclusively LEGO fans 

How did you get to this number? 

[Frank Brickowski]

1 hour ago, Captain_chaos said:

 

It almost couldn't be more blatant. The fact that they've removed the Ferrari badges is even more incriminating, because it makes it completely obvious that they have not paid Ferrari to use their intellectual property.

Since Cada neither use the logo nor any protected design, why exactly should they pay anything to Ferrari for using what? The design of the car is not protected, NOT PROTECTED. How many times do I have to repeat this? If something is not protected, anyone can use it. Why don't you just link me to the page that shows the design IS protected if you're so sure about it?

At least you admit the MOCer who has designed the Cada model did a very decent job. How very nice of you.

As for the F1 cars: So since the LEGO car looks "like a generic F1 car", LEGO seems to be copyright-infringing ALL of them instead of neither. How can there even be a "generic F1 car" in the first place? Are there any F1 cars not belonging to any team?...

But now that you said it, yeah: The LEGO "Grand Prix Racer" indeed looks much more like a McLaren from 2012, you're right. So this is the model LEGO went after, just changed the color.

Edited February 24, 2021 by Frank Brickowski

[JoshB]

3 hours ago, Frank Brickowski said:

OK, the "Grand Prix Racer" looks like an F1 Ferrari, just has a different color.

It also looks like an F1 Mercedes, and an F1 Renault, an F1 McLaren, etc. As @Captain_chaos has already clearly pointed out, F1 cars follow a strict set of rules regarding their appearance.  F1 cars look similar, and there is no copyright attached to the appearance of an F1 car. So there is no issue in LEGO designing a car that looks like an F1 car. The same can be said with the crawler crane and race truck, and all of the other sets that you reference above.

But when you create a product that looks like a specific vehicle i.e 488 Pista, then there is problem. If someone looks at the LEGO F1 car they would say it looks like an F1 car. No big deal. But if someone looks at the Cada set, they would think it looks like a Ferrari 488 Pista. Big difference.

However, there is one set that I feel LEGO pushed the limits on and has not been mentioned in here and that is the Blue Power Jet which clearly resembles an F-35. The only difference being the color and the LEGO version being a two-seater. I would think that of all the sets LEGO has produced this one may be one that you could use to back up your argument regarding what does and does not require licensing to produce. I would be interested to know how LEGO justified producing this set. Maybe they communicated with Lockheed Martin and got the OK to produce it without a licensing agreement? IDK.

Edited February 24, 2021 by JoshB

[Shortbus311]

Two years ago about 95% of the German bricks fans were exclusively LEGO fans (as no other brands were really available), so there actually is no one else present to be disappointed and in rage other than the very (former) fans of LEGO themselves.

So now you are saying it is only 93%? Nice to just make up statistics on the fly huh?

[Captain_chaos]

 

1 hour ago, Frank Brickowski said:

Since Cada neither use the logo nor any protected design, why exactly should they pay anything to Ferrari for using what? The design of the car is not protected, NOT PROTECTED. How many times do I have to repeat this? If something is not protected, anyone can use it. Why don't you just link me to the page that shows the design IS protected if you're so sure about it?

This is truly absurd. Of course the design is protected. No matter how many times you may repeat these brainless claims, they continue to be wrong. Why the hell do you think bogus bricks from China got banned if all anybody needs to do is switch logos to be in the clear? I don't need to link you a damn thing; you are the one making outlandish claims. Plenty of evidence exists of knock-off car brands (like Land Wind) being shut down due to trademark infringement. 

[Frank Brickowski]

36 minutes ago, JoshB said:

there is no copyright attached to the appearance of an F1 car. So there is no issue in LEGO designing a car that looks like an F1 car. The same can be said with the crawler crane and race truck, and all of the other sets that you reference above.

Alright, now we've finally gotten to the point where we agree that not all designs are protected. And as long a a certain Ferrari design also is not protected "there is no issue", as you said, if Cada uses it. Finally, thanks!

  

36 minutes ago, JoshB said:

But when you create a product that looks like a specific vehicle i.e 488 Pista, then there is problem. If someone looks at the LEGO F1 car they would say it looks like an F1 car. No big deal. But if someone looks at the Cada set, they would think it looks like a Ferrari 488 Pista. Big difference.

No difference in terms of licensing since the Ferrari design is not protected. If you say otherwise, please link the a page proving the design being protected.

  

36 minutes ago, JoshB said:

However, there is one set that I feel LEGO pushed the limits on and has not been mentioned in here and that is the Blue Power Jet which clearly resembles an F-35. The only difference being the color and the LEGO version being a two-seater. I would think that of all the sets LEGO has produced this one may be one that you could use to back up your argument regarding what does and does not require licensing to produce. I would be interested to know how LEGO justified producing this set. Maybe they communicated with Lockheed Martin and got the OK to produce it without a licensing agreement? IDK.

Then maybe Cada communicated with Ferrari and got the OK to produce it without a licensing agreement, too? Not very probable for LEGO and not very probable for Cada. Much more probable: The plane's design is not protected. Once again.

[Frank Brickowski]

2 minutes ago, Captain_chaos said:

 

This is truly absurd. Of course the design is protected. No matter how many times you may repeat these brainless claims, they continue to be wrong. Why the hell do you think bogus bricks from China got banned if all anybody needs to do is switch logos to be in the clear? I don't need to link you a damn thing; you are the one making outlandish claims. Plenty of evidence exists of knock-off car brands (like Land Wind) being shut down due to trademark infringement. 

Please link to a page proving the design is protected. If you say, "of course", then it should be easy for you to find one. Since I did you the favor of looking up some of the real vehicles, as you had asked for, it would be fair if you would now in return provide me the link proving the design is protected. Thank you.

Bogus Bricks did illegal things. Cada and all the new generation brick brands are 100% legal. That's why they can be sold in Germany.

[Mark Twain]

Shockingly, those criminals in Australia actually do things like hear trademark and design challenges and even more shockingly rule in favor of  Ferrari, who's 488 Spider design is unique even compared to its previous 488 models. https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=bd7018b8-6b44-457a-8340-30eaf8baca10

[BrickLover80]

17 minutes ago, Mark Twain said:

Shockingly, those criminals in Australia actually do things like hear trademark and design challenges and even more shockingly rule in favor of  Ferrari, who's 488 Spider design is unique even compared to its previous 488 models. https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=bd7018b8-6b44-457a-8340-30eaf8baca10

To be fair, that just establishes that the design is protected in some form. For sure, no other car maker can built a replica. Most likely, it means you can't build a 1:25 model either. But it once you get to Lego, it gets legally dicey. Yes, those models are clearly recognized as that Ferrari. But the design also doesn't match exactly. So then it will be up to the courts to decide. 

My guess: the non-Lego Ferrari is legal, at least under EU law. It's been sold long enough. It doesn't mean it's not ethically questionable. 

Of course, there is the broader question whether design patents are a good idea. Most economists would probably say no. Differently from parents on drugs or other genuine inventions, they don't promote societal beneficial R&D but mostly help to protect monopolies. 

[Mark Twain]

1 hour ago, BrickLover80 said:

To be fair, that just establishes that the design is protected in some form. For sure, no other car maker can built a replica. Most likely, it means you can't build a 1:25 model either. But it once you get to Lego, it gets legally dicey. Yes, those models are clearly recognized as that Ferrari. But the design also doesn't match exactly. So then it will be up to the courts to decide. 

My guess: the non-Lego Ferrari is legal, at least under EU law. It's been sold long enough. It doesn't mean it's not ethically questionable. 

Of course, there is the broader question whether design patents are a good idea. Most economists would probably say no. Differently from parents on drugs or other genuine inventions, they don't promote societal beneficial R&D but mostly help to protect monopolies. 

Yes, the design itself is protected as a whole. And no, it is not "legally dicey" if the design is somehow magically not protected when it comes to Lego or any other brick built project. The registration is for the "car and toy-car" design and the actual filing goes into great detail about what make the design itself unique: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/ADO/2020/3.html

[BrickLover80]

44 minutes ago, Mark Twain said:

Yes, the design itself is protected as a whole. And no, it is not "legally dicey" if the design is somehow magically not protected when it comes to Lego or any other brick built project. The registration is for the "car and toy-car" design and the actual filing goes into great detail about what make the design itself unique: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/ADO/2020/3.html

I'm not a lawyer or an IP expert. And I'm guessing that's true for most if not everyone posting here. So we should all take it a bit easier with our definitive statements on the legality of these sets. 

I know that when you build with bricks, many of the design features that make the model protected are not exactly replicated. I also know that the model has been for sale in Germany for a while and if it were as clear cut as you make it out to be, the item would no longer be for sale. In fact, differently from the Lego minifigures knock-offs, there doesn't even be an attempt to get the car off the shelves. So most likely, it is a bit of grey area, which is why Ferrari is not going after Cada.

But as others have said, I don't think there is much to be gained from continuing to argue over this issue. I'm more worried about more people watching YouTube videos and buying Lego as investment than a Lego competitor taking a significant market share in the US.

 

 

[roxio]

16 hours ago, Frank Brickowski said:

Please link to a page proving the design is protected. If you say, "of course", then it should be easy for you to find one. Since I did you the favor of looking up some of the real vehicles, as you had asked for, it would be fair if you would now in return provide me the link proving the design is protected. Thank you.

Bogus Bricks did illegal things. Cada and all the new generation brick brands are 100% legal. That's why they can be sold in Germany.

Apart from Bluebrixx 101474 Ghostbusters Ecto rip off they labelled as classic NY Ambulance. Taken down as not 100% legal 

[Frank Brickowski]

13 hours ago, Mark Twain said:

Shockingly, those criminals in Australia actually do things like hear trademark and design challenges and even more shockingly rule in favor of  Ferrari, who's 488 Spider design is unique even compared to its previous 488 models. https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=bd7018b8-6b44-457a-8340-30eaf8baca10

So as far as I understand, the 488 Pista might not be allowed to be sold in Australia as a car model. I don't really get what actual products the article relates to but I cannot find the word "brick" anywhere - so it doesn't seem to go for brick models since, as you know, there also are different kinds of toys getting different licensing agreements (action figures, brick models etc.) and I only see "toy cars" being mentioned there, while as we all know, LEGO for AFOLs are no toys. Thanks for the link anyway, I just don't see the relevance for a) all territories outside Australia and b) brick models overall. What actual products does this go for and what is allowed and what not in Australia?

Edited February 25, 2021 by Frank Brickowski