The LEGO Group takes civil actions against LEPIN

[MAB]

It also doesn't seem to stop them copying designs, just the artwork, logos etc.

[Robert8]

Lepin Factories Raided and Boss Arrested

Quote

The Shanghai Police has announced on their Weibo that they have successfully raided a few Lepin factories and the boss, surnamed Li, has been arrested. If you didn’t know, LEGO has been taking legal action against the company for almost three years and even though they supposedly won an infringement case against them last year, Lepin was still producing counterfeit sets.

https://www.thebrickfan.com/lepin-factories-raided-and-boss-arrested/

 

Edited April 26, 2019 by Robert8

[Graupensuppe]

This just in: First pictures of the Lepin boss getting arrested

 

[Faefrost]

The raid, arrest and shutdown of Lepin probably needs its own thread. Quite a remarkable turn of events. 

How soon until Bootleg Lego Lepin sets become rare aftermarket collectors items? 

Edited April 26, 2019 by Faefrost

[Robert8]

"LEPINLAND STOP SELLING LEPIN ITEMS FROM NOW. WE STILL SELL MOC AND LED LIGHT"

https://lepinland.com/

 

[9v system]

lepin is now under a new name

http://www.brickfinder.net/2019/04/29/lepin-not-gone/?fbclid=IwAR0cpwLMzOKx0EmZx2FxMLRg5AB9-djniXJeo9MCPKb1VZwszyW5CuI9j8I

[ks6349]

IMO, Lepin is an option for the family who cannot afford the authentic one.

The existence of Lepin would also keep the price of LEGO not going too crazy.

I am poor, but I personally still never consider purchasing Lepin at any time. The smell of origin is something Lepin cannot compete with 

[Chiaroscuro]

4 minutes ago, ks6349 said:

IMO, Lepin is an option for the family who cannot afford the authentic one.

The existence of Lepin would also keep the price of LEGO not going too crazy.

I am poor, but I personally still never consider purchasing Lepin at any time. The smell of origin is something Lepin cannot compete with 

This kind of argument is long overdue.

 

I cannot afford x, so I can stole it. Like I can’t afford a Lamborghini, but I will not do something illegal to get it. I have plenty of other options, cheaper alternatives. You are not entitled to an expensive hobby. If you cannot afford Lego, there are other legal options without resorting to buying stolen designs.

[ks6349]

2 minutes ago, Chiaroscuro said:

This kind of argument is long overdue.

 

I cannot afford x, so I can stole it. Like I can’t afford a Lamborghini, but I will not do something illegal to get it. I have plenty of other options, cheaper alternatives. You are not entitled to an expensive hobby. If you cannot afford Lego, there are other legal options without resorting to buying stolen designs.

haha

If you are talking with this attitude, I can only remind you that the patent of Lego has expired long long time and there is NO reason to say who is stealing who. Any non Chinese who cook Chinese food is then a steal under your logic

[Chiaroscuro]

49 minutes ago, ks6349 said:

haha

If you are talking with this attitude, I can only remind you that the patent of Lego has expired long long time and there is NO reason to say who is stealing who. Any non Chinese who cook Chinese food is then a steal under your logic

No I said there are legal alternatives. Brick patent had expired yes, so there are plenty of companies doing legal sets with bricks. You can have MegaBloks, Nanoblock, and plenty of others to compete with lego (and keep a fair competition).

 

Now what IS stealing, what Lepin does and you are falling to acknowledge is:

- copy designs, ideas, package and marketing materials from other companies. Like copying the exactly Lego set. Those things take valuable time and effort to do. Of course then Lepin can be cheaper, they did not spend a thing to create the sets.

- ignore current patents like the minifig design.

- no paying royalties to the original IP holders, like Marvel, DC, Disney, Star Wars, etc. Again that is why there are cheaper.

 

There are Chinese companies that do not do that and are legal. You can buy those brands, even if you ignore the quality issues.

 

But Lepin is not one of them. There are thieves, simple as that. If you buy from them it isn’t different than buying stolen goods.

 

Your logic with Chinese food is complete non-sense.

[KotZ]

On 6/26/2019 at 6:15 AM, Chiaroscuro said:

No I said there are legal alternatives. Brick patent had expired yes, so there are plenty of companies doing legal sets with bricks. You can have MegaBloks, Nanoblock, and plenty of others to compete with lego (and keep a fair competition).

 

Now what IS stealing, what Lepin does and you are falling to acknowledge is:

- copy designs, ideas, package and marketing materials from other companies. Like copying the exactly Lego set. Those things take valuable time and effort to do. Of course then Lepin can be cheaper, they did not spend a thing to create the sets.

- ignore current patents like the minifig design.

- no paying royalties to the original IP holders, like Marvel, DC, Disney, Star Wars, etc. Again that is why there are cheaper.

 

There are Chinese companies that do not do that and are legal. You can buy those brands, even if you ignore the quality issues.

 

But Lepin is not one of them. There are thieves, simple as that. If you buy from them it isn’t different than buying stolen goods.

 

Your logic with Chinese food is complete non-sense.

You're spot on here. Lepin products like that are blatant IP and copyright issues, and it's utterly insane that some of the larger companies like Disney have not gone after Lepin for their own properties being ripped off. Although I'm sure money and legal issues with China are some reasons why they might not.

[Lyichir]

49 minutes ago, KotZ said:

You're spot on here. Lepin products like that are blatant IP and copyright issues, and it's utterly insane that some of the larger companies like Disney have not gone after Lepin for their own properties being ripped off. Although I'm sure money and legal issues with China are some reasons why they might not.

I would guess that the licensors in question aren't intervening in these cases because doing so is primarily Lego's role as the manufacturer of the legitimate product. Disney has a lot of licensing agreements with a lot of companies and I imagine their primary interest in foreign copyright cases focuses more on their core business of movies and TV. And in fact, part of Lego's impetus to combat knockoffs like this is to ensure a good working relationship with those licensors—allowing knockoffs of licensed Lego products to thrive could weaken their bargaining position when those licenses are periodically renegotiated.

Edited June 27, 2019 by Lyichir