LEPIN brings out Monster Fighters HAUNTED HOUSE (16007)

[agrof]

This is getting more strange, new situation with MOC-ers intellectual property... however I have ambivalent feelings. 

LDD file WAS available on ideas for Barnes and Noble / Starbucks, so everybody could download it for a while.

https://ideas.lego.com/projects/36775

LDD's built in instructions maker is not that bad for system MOCs, I wonder if Lepin just used it for the manuals.

 

[Alpinemaps]

4 hours ago, Captain Pirate Man said:

I really don't understand why you and people like you get so worked up over this, unless you are a reseller.

But as long as you are asking for a 500% or MORE increase, than you can keep yours and I'll happily take these Lepin knockoffs.

And I will never understand why people are so willing to ignore how supply and demand works, and how IP works.

On your first point - it has nothing to do with being a reseller, or brand loyalty.  It does have everything to do with IP.  Someone (in this case, LEGO), has spent time and money to develop, market, and bring to market sets.  An then another company comes in, spends very little in time and development, and bam!  They're now making money hand over fist.  Whether it's a current selling set, or a set that's retired, the bottom line is that Lepin is stealing designs without paying the rights owners for the rights.

A 500% increase on a $10 set would be $5,000.  So let's stop being ridiculous about the numbers we're throwing around.

That dovetails nicely into the second point.  Let's be a little more realistic here.  Let's take the Fire Brigade, since that's no longer available.  Current pricing on eBay, if I'm generous, puts it at 250% of the original RRP ($350 vs $150).  And let's say that LEGO took home 50% of the original price ($75) and the other $75 went to the retailer (Amazon, Walmart, etc).  So, on resell, the reseller is making $200 (before fees, shipping, etc).  After 10% eBay fees ($35), 3% Paypal Fees ($10), and shipping ($20), the reseller is taking home $135, about 90% of the original payout for the item.

Lepin steals this item.  They don't invest the time and energy to develop it in-house.  They're total cost per item is probably about 10% of what it's selling for.  Quick search of eBay says the Lepin close of 10197 is trending about $100.  So, about 90% of the money they are earning is free and clear to them.

Supply and demand says if people want to pay $350 for a Fire Brigade, then they will.  No one is forcing anyone to sell at the price or buy at that price.  But there are other people willing to spend the money that you aren't willing to spend, to obtain the good.  That drives the price up.

Meanwhile, we have a company over here that is stealing designs, stealing IP, and paying no restitution to the rights holders.  And you're rather throw your money at them?  At least the reseller bought the item from LEGO and supported the true rights holder.

[agrof]

Agree, it is all about the IP. One thing is the clutch method and piece design (where the LEGO patent is expired), and another, how You combine those, till the result is beautiful, buildable, stable and safe. Not to mention the additional work like graphic design, instruction making, etc...

The Lepin modulars look good, because LEGO's original designs look good. 

IF Lepin would use only own designs, or would buy the designs from MOC-ers (could be the case, but somehow I doubt that this is happening), than there would be some kind of competition with LEGO.

However I find it very useful that there are such topics on Eurobricks, at least we have a look to the "outer world".

Edited October 6, 2016 by agrof
grammar

[Captain Pirate Man]

Alpinemaps,

 

I never ONCE said that I don't know how supply and demand work, as a matter of fact I have a degree in business. So thanks for trying to talk down to me. But on to your point, I don't fault resellers for selling the sets for what they do. Clearly people DO pay those prices for them, so a market exists. I just said that I am unwilling to pay those prices. 

 

As for the rest of your post, companies have been stealing other companies products and ideas for over 100 years, perhaps longer. Does that make it right? No probably not. But I'm not going to sit here and pretend that what's happening to Lego is a horrible crime, all while my home is FULL of generic products, which I'm sure yours is as well. Look in your cupboards, do you have name brand everything? If you do, then good for you, your argument stands. But if you have EVER bought a generic ANYTHING than you are just as guilty as your accusing me of being. 

 

Bottom line, generic brands exist for EVERYTHING. They didn't spend money on research and development, they DIRECTLY copied another companies work and started selling the items. What really seprates what most generics from what Lepin is doing is the box, art, and names. But not the sets themselves, especially the nonlicensed stuff. Themes from Disney for example are more than likely crossing some sort of line im sure. But other sets like the modulars, If Lepin changes the box and names, I don't see how that is ANY different than eating off brand cereal. I have off brand Cheerios in my cupboards as I speak. They are NOT called Cherrios, they are called Toated O's, and the box is clearly different. But what's INSIDE the box is exactly the same. 

 

Im not trying to defend Lepin, I'm just pointing out that generics exist for almost everything, and most people don't bat an eye at them. I'm also not going to condem one buisiness for lacking certain morals, when most business lack them. Looking for morals in the business world is like looking for a snowball in the desert.

Edited October 6, 2016 by Captain Pirate Man

[Florian_Wayne]

The last weeks I spend nearly 1200€ for LEPIN because it was my chance to get UCS Millennium Falcon, Star Destroyer (presell), Death Star 2, Super Star Destroyer, UCS Batman Tumbler, Haunted House, CREATOR Green Grocer, Cafe Corner, Fire Brigade and all other buildings.

But I spend over 4000€ the last two years for LEGO. 

NOBODY has the right to say I would damage LEGO because I spend money for LEPIN or Decool.

[Captain Pirate Man]

Especially buying retired sets. Lego is losing NOTHING by me buying retired sets. As a matter of fact, resellers are not losing money by me buying these retired sets either, because I had crossed these sets off of my lost of ever owning.

 

[Florian_Wayne]

Thats true Mr. yellow Sparrow, 

But I have no reserbations to buy actual sets too. I'm nearly 28 years old and buy what I want. So I have ALL Creator buldings and Brick Bank from LEPIN too. My friend bought one and the seller send him 2 sets, so I gave him 20€ and the Brick Bank was mine. Same story for Palaca Cinema and Pariser restaraunt. I bought it from friends for 30 - 40€ each building. It's very difficult to say "No! I will pay 170€ ($210) for the LEGO one!" :)

[agrof]

11 hours ago, Captain Pirate Man said:

Im not trying to defend Lepin, I'm just pointing out that generics exist for almost everything, and most people don't bat an eye at them. I'm also not going to condem one buisiness for lacking certain morals, when most business lack them. Looking for morals in the business world is like looking for a snowball in the desert.

The generic brand effect You are refering to is not a common thing in EU, so maybe this makes it harder to understand for us - just my thinking. I do understand what it means, and I know it exists is Europe as well, but not common at all, only on special (mass) markets. If for everything... I doubt. Is there f.e.: a generic Porsche car - same shape, same performance, very same parts built in?

Using a questionable moral of western capitalism to legitimize the theory is just bad in my opinion. It is like You say: breaking/stealing/burning somebody's hard earned property is OK, because we know this happened already before in history. I do not judge anyone, I just think this way of thinking is not logical / right. 

We live in a (hopefully) improving human society, is this correct that we tolerate and feed things and behaviors, which should not belong to our culture?

Sorry for OFF.

Edited October 7, 2016 by agrof
grammar

[Peppermint_M]

Ok guys, this is getting beyond a joke. Bootlegs are not competitor brands, they are not legitimate. You can argue plenty that TLG should forgo good business sense for your convenience and sense of entitlement. You can delude yourselves that the producers of these sets are not criminal, it is not a myth that bootleg producers of all kinds of products are linked to other more serious crimes or criminal operations.

However this is not going to change the fact that this is a LEGO fan forum and Lepin is stealing the hard work of designers from LEGO and making profit illegitimately on the back of others success. If they created their own designs (You'd be surprised how many Bootleg companies rip-off more brands than just LEGO) then they would be a legitimate competitor and fair game. You all know I am one to be happy for a Clone Brand (I just wish my supply line had not collapsed with the recession closing so many discount stores) but bootlegs like this and the huge support shown are a line that you guys are crossing a little too gleefully.

Now they are STEALING the work of fans and MOCers. We who work as fans to build something we wish to share for fun or to grow an idea. Something we spend our time and money on to get just right. Then someone with google and greed steals the instructions and sells sets it to make a profit. This is worse than opportunists trading on AFOL instructions.

So this is a warning, take it elsewhere, share it in a place better suited. 

[Adamskii]

Lepin Now releasing retired Technic kits. 

How long before classic space ? Thats a sacred cow.

Adam

Edited October 8, 2016 by Adamskii
Clone link may be seen as supporting clone brand

[agrof]

I just scrolled trough the facebook page of Lepin - didn't know that it exists. This is just shameless crime, and advertised worldwide, with the message: there is nothing wrong with stealing, but in fact, it is a respectable performance.    (It would be if we would speak about 1 guy reproducing 1 copy of something, but not about a company and mass production.) Children grow up with this implementation seeing such websites, how ill is that??! Are there mature enough personalities around to explain why is this destructive? I can only hope...

First, in the beginning of the year I thought it is just acceptable phenomenon, like Enlighteen or similar clones were couple of years ago, but seeing the offensive growing product spectrum of Lepin... this is a very different situation. I will for sure not participate in support such people, no matter how good quality bricks they can produce, for what price.

 

Edited October 7, 2016 by agrof

[Robianco]

I think this is probably why Lego have brought a legal action against Lepin specifically. The almost wholesale cloning of existing material is something I don't think has happened before. This also feels different in the fact that these are Lego's own licenses... Modulars, Technics and now Ideas submissions... that it may feel like more of a personal violation of Lego's catalogue over the reproduction of licensed sets.

I'm interested to see where the legal case goes in a year's time and how much of an effect it has on the cloning of these sets and bootlegging on the whole.

As Peppermint_M has said... there is a place for clone brands and some of the people that are producing minifigures are actually expanding into new themes that are unique and don't copy anything existing. I'm also OK with the production of unique licensed characters that can act as a supplement to the many custom minifig producers who expand our minifig collections so having these companies develop their own material is actually something to look forward to.

I can see how enticing it would be to be able to own an entire modular city for around £300 or so but when I think about it is does feel odd... especially on a Lego forum. I didn't think once about buying a Lepin Death Star when going to pick up my 75159 from the Lego Store but I can also see the appeal in picking up a set even out of curiosity... a full modular for less than the price of a small/medium sized licensed set. I must admit a burgeoning Lepin 'Fan Club' on a Lego forum might be something the mods and people who run the board need to make a decision on... especially with EB's good relationship with Lego.

I know I've been active in the Bootleg Minifigures thread since it started around 2 or 3 years ago but even that was started by interest in figures that weren't produced by Lego... since then the quality has become very, very good by some companies and, thankfully, the focus is actually less on cloning existing figures and rather on newer and more unique things now. I actually own only a few unique Bootleg figures as a expansion of my Lego collection and only then when the quality is comparable to Lego's but I don't think I'd look at my collection in the same way if I knew they were all fake.

I just wanted to add that this post isn't a 'shaming' post in any way. I wouldn't consider it my place to tell people what to do outside of here or post what they wanted on here... I'm not staff... After reading the escalation of 'for' and 'against' over the last day or so I just wanted to add how I felt about them.

Edited October 7, 2016 by Robianco

[Mister_Bruce]

Just a comment.... and this is my POV, I'm not telling anyone else what to do.

I look at sets like the "Tower of Orthanc", the "Imperial Flagship" and "Temple of Airjitzu" and they look like a lot of fun. Two of these sets are retired, one is not. The cost for all of these sets is very high (whether via Bricklink or not). All three of these sets have Bootleg copies made but I've not bought any even though I have been very tempted. Why? When it comes down to it, and I have played this out in my head, how do I explain to my kids that it's okay to buy a LEGO copy? What does it teach them if I do? I have a hard enough time trying to explain to kids in a digital age what is right and what is wrong. 

The slippery slope for me is that I really like the minifigures that the KO companies produce. For example, it's possible to get copies of all of the Disney Princess figures for <$10 (or all of the main Star Wars Force Awakens characters) and I hate the fact that LEGO doesn't provide an option to buy an equivalent set. To buy those LEGO figures one would have to buy a multitude of sets or Bricklink the individual minifigures for $10+ each. It's just silly.

I'm quite fascinated by what is happening with Bootleg Lego, but I think I sit in the Robianco camp (from what he has described). I like the figures for MOCs where genuine LEGO parts aren't available (or until they do become available).

[AFOLguy1970]

I can understand the temptation to purchase a clone at a low price, especially when it is something no longer in production and off the charts expensive in the aftermarket.  In the "Shameful Confessions" thread, I even stated as much.  I gave some serious thought to acquiring every modular that I missed out on in my dark ages.  However, something about the thievery of AFOL designs and MOCs really has rubbed me the wrong way.  Now I would not buy even a Galaxy Explorer from them if they made one.  When someone purchases a set from Lepin, they are supporting a company that is stealing designs from others, whether it is Lego or an individual designer.  I would plead that no one purchase a Lepin set from this moment forward.  Every profit they make can be reinvested into stealing yet another design from somewhere.  Even if Lego loses the lawsuit in China, Lepin could still be defeated by not supporting them.  Again, I understand the appeal of having a chance to own a replica of something that has long been considered to be out of reach.  In this case, doing the right thing will not be easy.  

[Ltfalcon]

My 2 cents, Lego was first and foremost a toy line for children. Now here we are today and over time the Lego AFOL Community has evolved the toy line into a investment portfolio.

Now copying Lego box art needs to stop, but there is a market for affordable brick toys.

I also read on another board where some of these Moc'ers were flattered to see that their creations had made it to retail shelves.

Edited October 8, 2016 by Ltfalcon

[strangely]

2 hours ago, Ltfalcon said:

I also read on another board where some of these Moc'ers were flattered to see that their creations had made it to retail shelves.

That's an interesting thought. I mean, yes, this is a company profiting from somebody else's designs, but the trade off is that the designers do get to see their creation fully realized in the flesh. It sucks they aren't getting paid for them, but if the stolen set was a rejected Ideas project, than they weren't getting paid anyways. Granted, not all designers will feel that way, after all it was their hard work and creativity staked in that project, so not getting the credit or the profit is undoubtedly frustrating. Ethics and legalities aside, I can see both sides of the argument as being valid.

As for the clones of officially released Lego sets, that's a bit more black and white for me. But I can see why people buy them, especially the older sets. I can't really say I blame them or judge them for it. It's the company I hold responsible.

As for whether we should discuss clones on this forum, I'm not exactly seeing a reason why not. We are in the community section after all and that offers a pretty wide latitude for discussion. However, I do think that perhaps linking to the sites that sell these may be something that the mods might consider not allowing. I think at that point it strays into endorsing it, which is probably not good for our forums, if anything at an appearance level. I could see Lego not liking that long-term. Discussion of counterfeit products is one thing, helping ease the purchase of said products through linking is another.

Edited October 8, 2016 by strangely

[Captain Pirate Man]

1 hour ago, strangely said:

 

As for the clones of officially released Lego sets, that's a bit more black and white for me. But I can see why people buy them, especially the older sets. I can't really say I blame them or judge them for it. It's the company I hold responsible.

This is how I feel as well. Except for the fact that I have decided to buy some of the retired sets. For me, it's not different than knowingly buying a fake Rolex. If I fully realize I'm buying a fake, who cares? Sure Rolex might have a problem with the people selling them, but I doubt they are worried about the saps that buy them. That's why I don't understand some of the opinions here, to some, we are just as bad as Lepin because we bought sets. 

I personally don't see the problem with discussing them in this section of the forum is, but I don't make the rules either. I have been hesitant to say anything in this thread since the MOD made that warning. 

 

IMO, I do feel that a lot of the animosity that exists towards Lepin is based out of fear. Why? Because it universally recognized that they are indeed making quality products. Lego clones are nothing new, I've seen them get talked about in this forum since I joined. Enlighten makes a pretty decent BSB knockoff, as well as other sets. Sure then box is different, etc. But what's one of the biggest reasons why Enlighten can be dissicused while Lepin is being "watched"? Mostly due to quality imo. Sure other factors might exist as well, such as the AMOUNT of sets they are cloning, as well as stealing a forum members designs. But still, I do believe the biggest reason is because Lepin is making quality products. Enlighten is ok, but not in the same league as Lego, so it's easy to Mock them and call it "junk" or "garbage". Harder to do that with Lepin.

[joopsta]

I would definitly be honoured if my MOC was being mass produced. Rather would have Lego doing it, but still.

Anyway, got my Lepin Cafe Corner yesterday and finished it last night.

My thoughts:

(This is NOT to promote Lepin in any kind, but to warn people that might be getting tricked)

- There is no 'LEGO' stamp on the stud circles, the're flat.

- The qualtiy is amazing, it's one on one. ( I might be taking a stud to my laboratory to investigate plastic structure and possible metals and compare to real Lego)

- Birds are different, as well as front door.

- I was missing a brown 1x1 slope, and a light grey 1x2 brick. Also I had 2 4x12 dark grey plates io 4x10.

My genuine Cafe Corner is at my sisters house, so I will compare thoroughly in the next days.

But be warned, as a long time Lego builder I can say, If you didn't know it, you'd think it' s real Lego.

The easiest way knowing you buy a real set, is just to look if the studs have the LEGO stamp.

Edited October 8, 2016 by joopsta
Typo

[Peppermint_M]

We are working on clarifying the issue. 

I will say though, it is not fear, more prevalence and increased discussion that is turning a novelty into an issue.

[Adamskii]

2 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

We are working on clarifying the issue. 

I will say though, it is not fear, more prevalence and increased discussion that is turning a novelty into an issue.

Censoring discussion of clone brands is something I find rather distressing. It is unfortunate I suppose that educated and reasoned discussion on this matter is so easily derailed by passion for the hobby and brand loyalty. It is one of the few times that the discussion is more about the person and their circumstances/opinion, than about the bricks. The worry I have is censoring clones is like putting head in the sand and pretending it isnt there if we can't see it. Lego Is the Number 1 toy company in the world. We should trust that they have this situation well under control. Surely they recognise the risk of clone brands, as someone said earlier, when Enlighten was tinkering some years back it was really just a novelty and well no serious notice was taken. But what Lepin is doing is simply breathtaking in it's audacity of testing international copyright law. It is almost a massive slap in the face throw down - Lepin is spoiling for a fight. Lego has to be ready to counter the arguements  that validate Clone brands (cost, accesibility and so on). Alas is Lego chooses to pretend the problem is not there, the problem of clone brands giving some people what Lego won't, then Lego won't remain number 1 for long. The only thing stopping that at the moment is Lepin hasn't marketed itself as an alternative - the average person just does not know it exists - yet. Lego has shown time and again it can be steadfast in its self belief and stay on course despite almost failing once. I hope it can counter the clones. 

I also worry how you censor clone brands but not the aftermarket ones / 3d printed ones. I am certain if Lepin made it's own modular's and designs, no one would be so offended at the "theft" of intellectual property. But some executive is sitting there at Lepin HQ saying we have these moulds, they have the designs, why shouldn't we give it a crack. How do they get the designs so quick I also wonder? The Lepin version of the Minecraft village and fortress were available online at the same time or before the Lego one was in the stores? Who is giving them this information? Doesn't Lego manufacture in China now? But what if I source all the bricks needed to build a Cafe Corner, and sell it on Ebay. I am not Lego or an Authorised reseller, Have I not used their intellectual property (design) to assemble bricks of any origin (including clone bricks - or how long before I can 3d print bricks of equal quality) to make profit? Lepin does just that but on  an offensively big scale. How would a censor differentiate between the two? I see in Australia there are Facebook clubs dedicated to group purchases of modulars in weekly installments. Would they fall under the umbrella of "censorship"  for using the Lego intellectual property and then profiteering from it? 

I would argue that a clone category be made in the forums, where they can be moderated, and all clone discussion can be redirected and moderated. When the discussion is rubbishing the clones it seems to be ok anywhere, but lately the discussion has been in support and suddenly we have an issue? I note that I brought up in the Star wars forum the Millenium Falcon clone and was shut down and removed, having caused some kind of offence, yet the Nemerald Night discussion is still rolling along in the train forums.  Could the site be consistent in its moderation? Linking to clone pages, ok I admit that may be seen as communicating an illegal operation and therefore moderated, but surely it has to be accepted that there will be 2 sides to any discussion and if the site is mature enough to handle pro clone discussion I would say it empowers it and shows it is more than capable of dealing with it in a responsible manner. Censoring discussion is admitting there is a clone problem. One which cannot be discussed when it is not allowed. 

[Captain Pirate Man]

My personal feelings are, if you want to forbid posting of links to BUY Lepin products, I can understand that. But regulating the actual discussion feels a little harsh.

[Big G]

Have finished building the Haunted House I received.  I ended up with 2 deformed bricks, a brown 1x6 tile and a black modified 1x2 plate, both of which I replaced with pieces I had at hand.  While I would have liked to have an original version, there was absolutely no way I'd ever entertain paying some scalping reseller (and, believe me, that is the polite version of how I refer to them) $400+, just because they think it's worth that much

 

I don't know how other people deal with building the sets that don't have numbered bags but I've found that what works best for me is to have several sandwich sized Ziploc (although they could be Hefty, or Target's own clone brand or whatever) bags.  In one I put all the 1x1 plate and tile sized pieces, another has all the 1x2 sized plates and tiles, another has all the 1x1 sized bricks.  Then I take 2 gallon sized bags and use one to store all the plates above a 4x6,the other I use for all the remaining black pieces.  Then everything else is put in a clear 8" deep Rubbermaid clone container.  I don't need to separate any other colors, just the blacks, I can see the different parts easily when they're brightly colored, but when I leave the black pieces in with them it plays havoc with trying to find anything as it seems too dark in the tub.

[Captain Pirate Man]

Big G,

 

Are you happy? Pleasant experience all around for you?

[Big G]

59 minutes ago, Captain Pirate Man said:

Big G,

 

Are you happy? Pleasant experience all around for you?

yes, my wife thinks it's a nice addition to the Halloween decorations she has on one of the cupboard units in our living room, BUT as she is now 'labeling' it as a Halloween Decoration, I'm going to catch Hell if I don't take it apart and put it away the first week of November.  At least when I take it apart, I can bag it up a floor at a time so next year will be quicker to rebuild.

 

I'm actually even happier because I just finished my VW Camper, I just made one minor change to it by leaving out the center black piece of each axle so the wheels all turn independantly of each other in the hope that it might be easier to negotiate a curve than with a solid axle.  The camper and the Mini don't get taken apart but are kept on a shelf unless our son wants to play with them.  He's broken the Mini a few times, but they're Legos, they can be put back together again easily enough

[Alpinemaps]

12 hours ago, Captain Pirate Man said:

This is how I feel as well. Except for the fact that I have decided to buy some of the retired sets. For me, it's not different than knowingly buying a fake Rolex. If I fully realize I'm buying a fake, who cares? Sure Rolex might have a problem with the people selling them, but I doubt they are worried about the saps that buy them. That's why I don't understand some of the opinions here, to some, we are just as bad as Lepin because we bought sets. 

I personally don't see the problem with discussing them in this section of the forum is, but I don't make the rules either. I have been hesitant to say anything in this thread since the MOD made that warning. 

 

IMO, I do feel that a lot of the animosity that exists towards Lepin is based out of fear. Why? Because it universally recognized that they are indeed making quality products. Lego clones are nothing new, I've seen them get talked about in this forum since I joined. Enlighten makes a pretty decent BSB knockoff, as well as other sets. Sure then box is different, etc. But what's one of the biggest reasons why Enlighten can be dissicused while Lepin is being "watched"? Mostly due to quality imo. Sure other factors might exist as well, such as the AMOUNT of sets they are cloning, as well as stealing a forum members designs. But still, I do believe the biggest reason is because Lepin is making quality products. Enlighten is ok, but not in the same league as Lego, so it's easy to Mock them and call it "junk" or "garbage". Harder to do that with Lepin.

You and I couldn't be any further away on our feelings on this subject.  I accept that and will move one, but will continue to argue some points with you.

It's not out of fear.  If that were the case, people would be "fearful" of MegaBloks, K'NEX, Lite Brix, etc.

I don't have a problem with Lepin (or any other brand) creating their own product.  That's not the issue.  Having bricks isn't an issue.  It's the design.  That's why you and I disagree on this topic.  You have no problem with a fake Rolex.  I do.  Someone is profiting over someone else's effort.

In this country, we have laws that stop people and other companies from doing that sort of thing. If it wasn't a thing, why would Disney fight so hard to defend their ownership of Mickey Mouse?  To prevent people from copying it?  From using it illegally?  From profiting from their efforts?  To extending their copyright on the Mouse?  Because it has value to them.

It's flat out illegal to profit from someone else's intellectual property without their permission; whether it's a zero cost or at a great cost.  This holds true for photographs, artwork, anything that is designed (and not built).

It seems like people that are okay with Lepin's practices can't separate bricks from design.  (That's how it appears to be, if you can, I haven't anyone do it).  Lego's copyright on building bricks is over, and companies are free to use that design to sell competing products.  What is not kosher is copying the design work of someone else and selling it as their own, without an agreement with the rights holder.

Now, if Lepin wanted to go to a MOC designer, and buy the design so they could produce it themselves; that's fine.  Great for them.  And great for the designer.  And great for the community, too.