Jump to content

~Shockwave~

Premier Outstanding BZP Citizens
  • Posts

    1,937
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by ~Shockwave~

  1. Those correspond with your post count, they show up on premier members posts, so not everyone has them.

     

    They progress based on how much you post, but I don't know the actual numbers for any of them.

  2. Advertising their products as "off-brand Lego" is certainly something they shouldn't be doing. LEGO is a trademark, so advertising something that isn't part of the LEGO brand in those terms would infringe on that trademark.

     

    Whether the products themselves are illegal depends on whether the stuff they carry is brands like Kre-O and Mega Bloks that mostly only copy basic bricks (for which any patents or other protections are long expired) and otherwise stick mostly to original set, part, and figure designs, or actual knock-off brands like Lepin and Decool that copy entire set designs, minifigures, and even recent, specialized part designs.

     

    It certainly looks like they are. One of them appears to be a Rouge One set copy. But I haven't been keeping the best eye on that stuff so I don't know about that.

     

    Okay, wow, no, these are straight up lifted off the current Lego sets. And they are also more expensive? Weird... 

     

    Any part introduced prior to 1997 has an expired patent, assuming Lego always renews patents for the full 20 years.

     

    I believe duplicating a set design would fall under copyright and copyrights have the completely unreasonable lifespan of life + 70 years, and I don't think Lego was around back when copyrights had to be manually renewed.

     

    As for using the Lego name, that's a bit murkier. If Lego has become a generic term(which I'd argue it should), than anything goes. If the trademark on the name is still active, an off brand claiming to be Lego would certainly be a violation, but I'm not sure how far claims along the line of "like Lego" or "compatible with Lego" can go without being violations. Now, even if the name has been legally declared a generic term, it's quite possible current Lego logos are still under Trademark. Sadly, generification isn't a well-defined process and it almost always comes down to court decisions as to when a term becomes generic, but the idea is that a term becomes generic when the population starts using a brand name as a catch all term for a type of product(examples include dumpster for large trash bins, zipper for meshed teeth fasteners, velcro for hook and loop fasteners, Hoover for vacuum cleaner(though I confess I've never heard anyone call a Vacuum Cleaner a hoover). And yes, I'd argue that, colloquially, people use the term lego as a catch all for any building toy that uses studded bricks as their core component, and that it would've been declared a generic term years ago in a world where IP law wasn't broken.

     

    I'm gonna have to disagree with that. What this site appears to be doing (Siphoning off another companies work and selling it) should not be tolerated. Lego may be used as a generic term, but even if it's become one, opening that floodgate would be the exact opposite of a solution. I think a brand saying it's "off brand _____" is a good sign. Carbon copying a well known entities work usually isn't a good idea.

  3. So, I was browsing facebook and came across an ad for a site called connectbloks.com. they apparently have been in business since 2016 (!) And claim to offer discounted off brand Lego sets. I'm guessing this isn't legal, and they seem awfully excited about it. Just curious what you all think.

  4. Currently, the list at the bottom says there are ten times as many guests as active users, that seems awfully low. Granted, it's 9:30 at night where I'm at, so that might be part of it.

     

    I also haven't made many posts lately just do to being more interested in things that aren't Lego. I usually stay in the blogs just due to the community. 

  5. I really like Gali's 2015 mask. it looks enough like something I could see her wearing and it also looks different from her old ones.

     

    The mask of creation is also a pretty neat design, it looks nice and regal and works well with the set it was included in.

  6.  

    Can we like, you know, stop giving this new storyline almost ten years of baggage before it's even really started? 

     

    I like the old stuff just as much as the next guy, but we know almost nothing about the new stuff.

     

    There where a lot of shortfallings in the old storyline, and if this new one is forced to carry those as well as it's own we'll just end up with a worse one.

    Surely it's a bit extreme to assume that any connection to the old story will straddle Gen2 with "ten years of baggage?" If LEGO decides to include some sort of link between the two stories, it doesn't have to necessitate the importance of everything that happened in Gen1. Take the Star Trek-Abramsverse. It features not only new iterations of characters from the original television series, but the original version of one those characters. And yet your enjoyment of the film won't be dampened if you've never heard of Harry Mudd or Tribbles or the Gamesters of Triskelion.

     

     

    Except any connection to Gen1 means they are effectively the same universe, and I can accept that and move on, I doubt the vast majority of S&T can. It will immediately start raising ridiculous questions that aren't reasonably answered, and drive the discussion away from purely G2 topics, since there's more of G1 to discuss.

     

    I see no reasonable way they can be linked without G2 gaining G1's baggage.

     

    BTW, I don't know anything about startrek, so that example probably doesn't make the point you'd like it to.

  7.  

    I don't know that it is stated in the rules anywhere, but I can tell you with confidence that it is a bad idea and you shouldn't do it. If you start identifying yourself as another entity/website, you can quickly create problems for the website(s) you are functionally posing as. Anything you say, any opinion you give, or any view you express could easily be misconstrued by someone else to be representative of the views/opinions of the entity your namesake is copying.

     

    tl;dr: If you take on the name "BZPower" and then go somewhere and say "lol ninjago sux", people reading it could think that BZPower hates Ninjago instead of you individually. That's a no-no.

    Takuma Nuva

    So I CAN do it, but I SHOULDN'T because of moral/representative problems? Hmm, sounds about right. Thanks.

     

     

    I think that was a nice way of saying don't do it. I really don't think any good can come from it.

    • Upvote 1
  8.  

    It is not a codpiece, it is not supposed to LOOK like a codpiece, and in my opinion it DOESN'T look like a codpiece. It is supposed to be more like a loincloth, and the idea of it looking masculine never once crossed my mind. If anything, it's supposed to be gender-neutral, though my goal has always been to make Akamai the more masculine of the Toa Kaita and Wairuha the more feminine, and I tried to reflect that here.

     

    If you're reading any kind of masculinity into that aspect of the design then you are not at all comprehending my intent. And I can't say that's the fault of my design not being clear enough. If I wanted there to be a crotch bulge, the model would have a crotch bulge, but I didn't, and it doesn't.

     

     

     

    I'm sorry you're getting so rumbled over this, but that's what it looks like here. It's a giant articulated metal plate jutting down between its legs, for crying out loud. 

     

    As far as intent goes, the second someone produces something and put it out for critique, their "intent" doesn't mean a thing. That's not my personal opinion, that's just how art works. The interpretations of the viewers supersede the intentions of the creator.

     

    Anyway, I wasn't saying "Get rid of it, it disgusts me," I was just suggesting you downplay that part a bit. As it stands, the bright white shells on the sides combined with the larger center shell form an arrow that leads the eye directly to the groin. It's the peril you run when putting white over darker colors :/

     

    Just because you are criticizing, does not mean you are right, though. It's easy to misinterpret something, and I honestly don't see what you're trying to point out. I see more what Aanchir Said it was. It looks more like it's trying to extend the torso, as otherwise it would look rather spindly.

     

    @Aainchir: Hm. I'll take your word on the flipper things, as I don't have my own to see what they look like, I suppose looking like flippers isn't bad, since 1/3 of the sets that make it up have those. It just makes the feet look rather aquatic and the rest of the body makes it look like it would sink like a rock.

     

    Oh. I also like the weapon. Since I didn't mention that.

  9. I'm a bit late, but I saw you where concerned about lack of interest, and I just want to let you know that I am still very interested. I just haven't been keeping a close eye lately. But I've downloaded every version as soon as I knew about it, which is usually pretty quickly, there tends to be a noticeably higher amount of notifications when an update drops.

    • Upvote 3
  10. You should still have a username and password. Maybe if you click the "Forgot password" button on sign in?

    Hold on. I also have my google account linked, I'll see what I can find out and edit it in if someone doesn't reply an actual answer.

     

    Hm. Well, you should have your Gmail address attached, meaning you might be able to retrieve the password, try that and post what happens, if you don't mind.

×
×
  • Create New...