Lego is on the verge of its worst nightmare. Its signature brick design is being pirated by a Canadian company and a European judge says that’s just fine with him. According to the European Department of Justice, Lego does not have exclusive rights to the Lego building block anymore after the Danish toy company sued a Canadian firm for making blocks so similar to theirs, they fit perfectly with the real McCoy.
In its decision, the EDoJ stated that in spite of the fact that Lego design was created by founded Ole Kirk Christiansen in 1932, and has remained in production since then, that the design of Lego is not protected by the Lego trademark! Huh? Memo to the EDoJ. See the word “Lego” on every tip on the block? See how they all look the same? Fit the same? How can they NOT be covered under the Lego Trademark?
Now, to be fair, the patent for the Lego design did lapse in 1988. And according to copyright lawyers, the Lego brick design wasn’t conceived as a specific design, but to address the issue of being able to build without using glue. So therefore, it wasn’t a design, so much as a solution.
But come on. This is like telling Polaroid they have no copyright over instant print film, or that Apple has no copyright over the OSX software, or that George Lucas has no right to protect others from making Star Wars movies and make a profit from them.
To quote my 8 year old’s opinion … “Sorry, Europe is wrong! Legos are made by Lego!”
And while more Lego like toy companies means cheaper Legos and better quality production due to competition, to take the 5th largest toy companies Golden egg and just say “sorry, it’s not yours anymore” amounts to legal theft of a very Cool Toy.
Hat Tip – Slashdot
{ 1 trackback }
{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }
where i can buy lego in indonesia
where i can buy lego toy in indonesia
“But come on. This is like telling Polaroid they have no copyright over instant print film, or that Apple has no copyright over the OSX software, or that George Lucas has no right to protect others from making Star Wars movies and make a profit from them.”
You’re conflating patents, copyrights, and trade marks, which are three somewhat related, but very different things. The only thing that *should* protect Lego’s brick design is patent law and, as you point out, the patent expired some time ago. This is entirely consistent with the purpose of patents, which are only meant to be granted for a relatively short period of time, in order to stimulate invention, before reverting to the public domain for all of us to use however we see fit. That’s the whole point.
None of your analogies above are relevant because this was about a trade mark issue: Lego argued that trade mark law protected their brick design, an argument that was entirely correctly shot down by the courts. Trade Marks protect against someone trading on your product name and logo. Lego’s brick design is not and has never been a trade mark.
“to take the 5th largest toy companies Golden egg and just say “sorry, it’s not yours anymore” amounts to legal theft of a very Cool Toy”
Was the second person to market and sell a baseball bat guilt of “theft”? How about the second person to sell a water pistol, or a die-cast toy car, or a model airplane? Your argument is ridiculous. Designers and manufacturers should get a *limited* amount of time to invent a new product and be able to exclusively attempt to profit from it. After that, it should be free for anyone to make use of. That’s how the system works and it’s worked great for 300 years. What possible public benefit could there be in granted such exclusive rights in perpetuity?