LEGO vs. Held der Steine

[icm]

Oh, so he's the mysterious German store owner on YouTube who is frequently cited but never named by the many European AFOLs who would strongly prefer traditional Castle and Space to present lines and who insist that European children would also prefer traditional Castle and Space.  By saying this, I have no intention of bringing that kind of conversation into this thread; I'm just glad to finally know the name of the channel.

[Peppermint_M]

2 hours ago, kabel said:

Appearently he wanted to register his own HDS logo as a trademark so he can sell some channel based merch (like cups) himself as a little extra.

Oh yeah, that is exactly what any company would do if their trademark is going to be infringed. Whether it is Singhsburys or any number of burger places mimicking that popular franchises without being a franchisee, you'll get a contact from the lawyers.

So someone did something that was going to have problems, but tried to blame something more sensational?

43 minutes ago, icm said:

Oh, so he's the mysterious German store owner on YouTube who is frequently cited but never named by the many European AFOLs

I figured that too.

[kabel]

Nothing mysterious about that man, don't know how you got that impression. BTW, here is a new interview with him. Maybe some online translator helps you to make sense of it.

I actually edited the frist page. Maybe this helps to put the discussion into a more objective light. And yes, I too read a bit too much into the video!

[BrickJagger]

Thank you to @kabel and others for providing context, I was having a hard time figuring out what was going on using Google Translate 

What I gather from this is that Lego is intimidating their critics with thinly veiled lawsuits over frivolous things. If that's truly the case, consider me disappointed, but unsurprised. I will note that I've seen a number of larger youtube channels that used to give honest reviews turn into Lego's biggest fans overnight once TLG started sending them free products and endorsing them. Having a stranglehold over public opinion is seemingly a good business tactic, but I view it as being quite scummy since much of that propaganda is aimed at younger kids.

Unfortunately 2019 is Lego's worst year in over a decade for a lot of us and I'm starting to think that the company is beginning a slow spiral around the drain. This year I only intend to buy Benny's Space Squad and a couple of polybags, and nothing at all in the summer. It's a shame that Lego is losing a lot of us as customers but I don't intend to spend money on a bad product in the interim. Hopefully they can get their act together and their declining sales will push them to make some much-needed changes to their product lineup.

2 hours ago, kabel said:

Actually, his criticism is often grounded on his experience as the owner of a small Lego shop in the middle of Frankfurt. So he basically keeps on relating to what his costumers tell him they'd like to buy (real castle, real space, pirate ships, straight rail track etc.)

I never doubted that this was the case, and I'll have to watch some more of Thomas's videos (Do you have any links to videos where he mentions this?).

There was, is and always will be a market for those themes but Lego seems to be opting for the flashy licenses and Big Bangs to serve as "replacements" for them. It's like trying to put a square peg in a round hole.

[Lyichir]

So he tried to trademark his logo that used a Lego brick-like design to use on merchandise? And then blamed Lego's legal response on trying to censor his opinions? Color me surprised.

There are tons of critical Lego reviewers out there who get by just fine, without a hint of legal trouble from Lego. But Lego's legal team is incredibly vigilant about protecting their trademarks. To turn that into a conspiracy theory about Lego trying to silence their critics strikes me as incredibly slimy, not to mention awfully self-centered.

[leafan]

I really wish I understood German so I could get a grasp of this guy's channel and this particular issue.

Are there any English speaking Youtubers that own toy shops like this?

[TeriXeri]

So many anti-LEGO company comments on the official LEGO youtube channel videos now, basicly in german saying "not buying anything anymore", all related to this.

OT: 501st battlepack comments/memes still ongoing too 

 

Edited January 21, 2019 by TeriXeri

[mon-o-mat]

31 minutes ago, Lyichir said:

So he tried to trademark his logo that used a Lego brick-like design to use on merchandise? And then blamed Lego's legal response on trying to censor his opinions? Color me surprised.

There are tons of critical Lego reviewers out there who get by just fine, without a hint of legal trouble from Lego. But Lego's legal team is incredibly vigilant about protecting their trademarks. To turn that into a conspiracy theory about Lego trying to silence their critics strikes me as incredibly slimy, not to mention awfully self-centered.

If TLC wanted to prevent him from registring the trademark their letter should have gone to the German Patent and Trademark Office. But they probably knew that a German court already denied TLC's tries to get a trademark on the Lego-Brick. And since his Logo has nothing in common with any Lego-Logos other then a stylized brick

[koalayummies]

35 minutes ago, Lyichir said:

So he tried to trademark his logo that used a Lego brick-like design to use on merchandise? And then blamed Lego's legal response on trying to censor his opinions? Color me surprised.

There are tons of critical Lego reviewers out there who get by just fine, without a hint of legal trouble from Lego. But Lego's legal team is incredibly vigilant about protecting their trademarks. To turn that into a conspiracy theory about Lego trying to silence their critics strikes me as incredibly slimy, not to mention awfully self-centered.

Right, that's a great summary that helps keep it factual and in-context.

Most of the first page and original information made it sound like it was the reviewers opinions and logo used on the video site and not an undisclosed trademark filing for a logo so he could sell merchandise that the company found objectionable.

[Lyichir]

Just now, mon-o-mat said:

If TLC wanted to prevent him from registring the trademark their letter should have gone to the German Patent and Trademark Office. But they probably knew that a German court already denied TLC's tries to get a trademark on the Lego-Brick. And since his Logo has nothing in common with any Lego-Logos other then a stylized brick

I'm not an expert on German trademark law but here in the United States it is common for trademark holders to send cease-and-desist letters directly to perceived offenders to attempt to resolve a conflict without having to resort to legal action that could cost both parties significant amounts of money. Receiving a letter like that shouldn't necessitate completely baseless accusations of censorship.

As for the German court case you're referring to, as far as I'm aware that case regarded the three-dimensional shape of the brick (which was held to have a merely technical function that could not be protected), not the two-dimensional image of the brick (which Lego still claims trademark protection of). Whether that claim is legitimate is above my pay grade to decide but in the absence of a court decision claiming otherwise it does not surprise me that Lego's legal team would take action to defend it.

[Vindicare]

12 hours ago, Drunknok said:

Not at all actually. Given the circumstances he acted relaxed and professional.

 

Unless you know the guy and his video already I would refrain from any comments. Most people in here act on third-hand knowledge and jump to (incorrect) conclusions.

@Mylenium As I explained why I believe he’s acting like a child, which you both deleted from my quote...what I gather is he a fan of LEGO & has a store that also sells LEGO. Now that something has happened where his logo is in question, he says he’s going to sell, buy & review competitors. That sounds childish to me. 

I’m not concluding anything nor basing him entirely off of this. Im speaking to this one specific incident. Maybe he said that in frustration or anger, which is understandable...people say dumb things when angry. But unless he had the express permission of TLG to use their logo where he is benefiting from it monetarily, which I’m assuming he does from the YouTube channel, TLG will likely go after that to protect its brand. Any big company would very likely do the same. 

 

Edit...and now we know...well, more. Trying to trademark the logo for money was what perked the ears of TLG’s lawyers. That makes perfect sense. 

Edited January 21, 2019 by Vindicare

[Darnok]

14 minutes ago, Vindicare said:

@Mylenium As I explained why I believe he’s acting like a child, which you both deleted from my quote...what I gather is he a fan of LEGO & has a store that also sells LEGO. Now that something has happened where his logo is in question, he says he’s going to sell, buy & review competitors. That sounds childish to me. 

I’m not concluding anything nor basing him entirely off of this. Im speaking to this one specific incident. Maybe he said that in frustration or anger, which is understandable...people say dumb things when angry. But unless he had the express permission of TLG to use their logo where he is benefiting from it monetarily, which I’m assuming he does from the YouTube channel, TLG will likely go after that to protect its brand. Any big company would very likely do the same.

You can jump to conclusions as you want, but rest assured that you are not getting the situation. At all. Just let it be.

[ReplicaOfLife]

1 hour ago, Vindicare said:

@Mylenium As I explained why I believe he’s acting like a child, which you both deleted from my quote...what I gather is he a fan of LEGO & has a store that also sells LEGO. Now that something has happened where his logo is in question, he says he’s going to sell, buy & review competitors. That sounds childish to me.

He ONLY sold Lego in his store.

...and teacups with the Logo of his store, which may or may not be the cause for all of this. Nobody has enough information to properly judge that. And it should be said that he only started selling those cups after a fan of his channel sent him one, which he then used in his videos, which led to hundreds of people asking if they could buy one. Considering he had already used that logo for 5 years by then, it propably never crossed his mind that Lego would object to it.

In the interview on rp-online someone posted here, he also said that he already received the letter in early January, and actually tried contacting  someone at Lego to talk it over - he has no objections to the actual issue at hand (Lego objecting to his logo), but he objects to the way this whole situation was handled. All he got in response to his attempts to talk to someone was "Yes, that lawfirm is representing Lego".

 

And he is in no way acting childish. It may seem that way if you put it like you're putting it, but in fact, he's the exact opposite. By his nature, Thomas is one of the most positive, cheerful people you'll ever see on youtube. In a lot of his longer videos (e.g. his 'Bauen mit dem Helden'-Videos ('Build with the hero'), where he builds sets in real-time and talks about whatever is on his mind throughout) he often mentioned his general approach to life, which can be roughly summarized with "Have  a great time, do things you enjoy, and if something annoys you, change it!". He is in no way petty or small-minded, he disdains such behaviour and abstains from it, and from people behaving that way.

He already was annoyed with many aspects of Lego's business and managing decisions, both from a general point (set design, focus or lack thereof on specific themes, etc.) and also from his personal experience dealing with them as a knowledgable owner of a toyshop that only sold Lego. So this letter was basically the straw that broke the camels back - dealing with Lego directyl annoys him, and thus he'll now change it.

 

To be perfectly honest, I don't even think he expected the magnitude of reponse this is generating right now.

Edited January 21, 2019 by RogerSmith

[Sjoemie himself]

1 hour ago, Vindicare said:

unless he had the express permission of TLG to use their logo where he is benefiting from it monetarily, which I’m assuming he does from the YouTube channel, TLG will likely go after that to protect its brand. Any big company would very likely do the same

This.. 

He did not use LEGO's logo. He designed one (or had someone do it for him) that indeed had some features of a certain popular brand of building bricks. Might as well have been a Cobi block that served as inspiration for his logo, who knows..

About the monetary benefits.. Did you understand that Thomas is running a store in which he exclusively sells (sold) LEGO? Offcourse he is doing this to make a living, probably invested a large chunk (if not all) of his money into this shop to buy the place and all the products. But in a way he is helping LEGO to sell and distribute LEGO sets under it's customers. And instead of helping him LEGO sends him a threat more or less. Now tell me, does that sound like a smart thing to do marketing wise? 

@RogerSmith you beat me to it, well said.

Edited January 21, 2019 by Sjoemie himself

[kabel]

What I don't understand is why all of the sudden Lego pulls off this one after HDS having registered and used his Logo since 2014, as he claims. Hard to find answers for this one as long as Lego remains mute about this whole issue.

But apart from the entire dispute, what strikes as really odd in this case is how in 2019 Lego doesn't seem to understand how social media/influencer marketing actually works these days. Did they really think that Thomas was not going to talk about this letter in any of videos? Is Germany really such an unimportant market?

[Flieger]

20 minutes ago, Sjoemie himself said:

He did not use LEGO's logo. He designed one (or had someone do it for him) that indeed had some features of a certain popular brand of building bricks. Might as well have been a Cobi block that served as inspiration for his logo, who knows.

In fact, the legal history of the 'critical' studs which (supposedly) caused Lego's reaction is rather convoluted. But to make a long story short, Thomas Panke would have good chances in a legal dispute. Lego's claim is rather weak in that case.

And that makes their decision to go after him suspicious. It's heavy-handed for sure, but we are used to that when it comes to German laywers. They are not subtle. Perhaps they actually did not know what kind of impression their actions make. Of course now Thomas can easily tell a David vs Goliath story, the nice little store owner harrassed by a greedy corporation and their shady lawyers. Of course there is more to it but that's the lasting impression. Lego should have handled that with more care.

You cannot just put legal pressure on the biggest national youtuber, who runs a little shop, and expect everyone to cheer for your high-paid lawyer army. As some articles (there many now, which indicates a not too small interest) pointed out correcly, that's basically how not to handle you social media relations.

[-zenn]

Never heard of him. Can understand TLG's case, they want to protect their intelectual property. For the rest of the dispute; TLDR.

Though, I gotta say I despise all these so-called 'Influencers' who gotta cry online when something happens to them; tough luck snowflake.

Edited January 22, 2019 by -zenn

[Sjoemie himself]

Just now, -zenn said:

TLDR.

Just now, -zenn said:

Though, I gotta say I despise all these so-called 'Influencers' who gotta cry online when something happens to them; tough luck snowflake.

Very well constructed arguments 

If you would have watched his videos you would know that he's quite the opposite of a snowflake 

 

[Cumulonimbus]

I hesitate to join this discussion since I don’t have an overview of all the information, but I would like to share the following:

All I can say for sure is that Thomas Panke often formulated the same criticisms I felt in his reviews of (Technic) sets. Without wanting to bash TLG, I get the feeling that the direction being taken recently, wonders away from what I like in sets as an AFOL. I felt reassured that independent reviewer like Thomas spoke out and I hoped TLG was taking notes on how it could improve sets to appeal more to this (small?) part of its market. I think his voice represents an important part of the AFOL community, seemingly confirmed by the huge commotion created at the moment. To me, his reviews gave balance to the often overly positive reviews or inflated expectations elsewhere on the internet in these times where (Technic) sets are ever increasing in cost and size while losing functionality and realism in shape and proportion.

Having worked for a manufacturing company which produced and distributed products all over the world, I have experienced the weight of the responsibility, the difficulty in catering for all those different desires and the challenge to keep the quality high. In this respect, I admire TLG as a company and wish them all the best. But as an AFOL and a customer, I often feel ignored by that same company when seeing another line-up of a new release where so few sets really speak to me (and the 12-year old boy inside me). Seeing TLG acting this way is a wake-up call to the fact that it is a global cooperation with commercial rights to protect, but it feels a bit too aggressive and even a bit arrogant to me.

At some level I’m curious about the sets of other brands and the quality of their creations. But at this point I’m not sure I will ever be convinced in buying one of those sets.  However, I imagine that Thomas giving an audience for these largely unknown brands can be quite damaging for TLG in the long run, something I’m not thrilled about. We’ll see how this one will pan out ...

Happy building to all.

[ReplicaOfLife]

5 hours ago, Cumulonimbus said:

All I can say for sure is that Thomas Panke often formulated the same criticisms I felt in his reviews of (Technic) sets. Without wanting to bash TLG, I get the feeling that the direction being taken recently, wonders away from what I like in sets as an AFOL. I felt reassured that independent reviewer like Thomas spoke out and I hoped TLG was taking notes on how it could improve sets to appeal more to this (small?) part of its market. I think his voice represents an important part of the AFOL community, seemingly confirmed by the huge commotion created at the moment. To me, his reviews gave balance to the often overly positive reviews or inflated expectations elsewhere on the internet in these times where (Technic) sets are ever increasing in cost and size while losing functionality and realism in shape and proportion.

Not just the AFOLs - he often relates experiences he often has with his customers, which of course include many 'regular' parents and kids, and relays the questions they ask him, all of which point to blatant holes in Lego's product strategy. Stuff that - from the requests he got in his store - would be very solid selling sets, if only they were available.

Examples are:

• Why is there no way to purchase just straight railway track pieces? Why do they no longer offer individual train cars people can buy to expand their trains? Why don't we have a proper train station? etcpp.
• Why didn't Lego have Light & Sound in the City line for many years? Apparently, kids love a police/fire vehicle with flashing lights and a siren, who would've thought?
• Why are there so few Friends sets that include horses? OK, no one ever heard of small girls liking horses (apparently, they all want racing themed sets ), but still, it might be worth a try...
• Why are they so few basic boxes avaiable nowadays that contain a good (!!!) selection of bricks? Turns out, parents want to buy boxes full of standard Lego pieces for their kid who loves to build with Lego. Again, totally surprising, kids wanting to use a construction toy to construct something... he actually mentioned repeatedly that he recommended Minecraft sets as the best source for traditional 1*x and 2*x bricks...
• Why don't we have a generic Castle or Pirates theme anymore?
• and many, many more...

 

 

Edited January 22, 2019 by RogerSmith

[MAB]

Would they be solid selling sets though? As those are the types of things often discussed here. Everyone always seem to think if only LEGO did what I want, they'd improve the World's No. 1 toy company.

 

Why is there no way to purchase just straight railway track pieces? Why do they no longer offer individual train cars people can buy to expand their trains? Why sell just straights when they can sell straight and flexible in one box? They used to sell individual train cars and presumably they have data to say that they don't sell as well as expected.

Why are there so few Friends sets that include horses? OK, no one ever heard of small girls liking horses (apparently, they all want racing themed sets ), but still, it might be worth a try...  Is this actually true though? There are already 18 different Friends style horses, although some of these will be in Elves and Disney type sets. https://www.bricklink.com/v2/search.page?q=93083*#T=A

However, my daughter has a stable, a horse box, the riding camp and the horse show set. Together they are massive.

Why don't we have a generic Castle or Pirates theme anymore? Because they compete with current sets or LEGO wants a break from them for a while / poor sales in past? Would you expect a company to say why they are not currently doing something? They may well have plans to bring it back in the future, so cannot say anything negative about it.

 

[x105Black]

19 hours ago, MAB said:

Would they be solid selling sets though? As those are the types of things often discussed here. Everyone always seem to think if only LEGO did what I want, they'd improve the World's No. 1 toy company.

 

Why is there no way to purchase just straight railway track pieces? Why do they no longer offer individual train cars people can buy to expand their trains? Why sell just straights when they can sell straight and flexible in one box? They used to sell individual train cars and presumably they have data to say that they don't sell as well as expected.

Why are there so few Friends sets that include horses? OK, no one ever heard of small girls liking horses (apparently, they all want racing themed sets ), but still, it might be worth a try...  Is this actually true though? There are already 18 different Friends style horses, although some of these will be in Elves and Disney type sets. https://www.bricklink.com/v2/search.page?q=93083*#T=A

However, my daughter has a stable, a horse box, the riding camp and the horse show set. Together they are massive.

Why don't we have a generic Castle or Pirates theme anymore? Because they compete with current sets or LEGO wants a break from them for a while / poor sales in past? Would you expect a company to say why they are not currently doing something? They may well have plans to bring it back in the future, so cannot say anything negative about it.

 

While all of this may be true, there is clearly a market for these things.  If there wasn't, these kinds of complaints / questions wouldn't keep coming up.

Still, LEGO probably has a strategy and we will just have to see what happens.

[MAB]

34 minutes ago, x105Black said:

While all of this may be true, there is clearly a market for these things.  If there wasn't, these kinds of complaints / questions wouldn't keep coming up.

Still, LEGO probably has a strategy and we will just have to see what happens.

Sure, there is a market for a lot of things that are never produced. And as consumers, we think the company is missing out on sales to people like us that want such and such, without really considering how this affects their current line-up, strategy, etc. One example is adult related items, that is items that would be 18+ not for build techniques but due to content. Some people think LEGO is missing out the adult market by not doing Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, The Walking Dead, etc, without really considering the impact that this would have on the image of the company.

[Captain Dee]

On 1/23/2019 at 8:00 AM, MAB said:

Everyone always seem to think if only LEGO did what I want, they'd improve the World's No. 1 toy company.

Yeah. Kinda funny, sometimes. "I have alllllll the answers." Except... usually not really.

3 hours ago, MAB said:

Sure, there is a market for a lot of things that are never produced. And as consumers, we think the company is missing out on sales to people like us that want such and such, without really considering how this affects their current line-up, strategy, etc. One example is adult related items, that is items that would be 18+ not for build techniques but due to content. Some people think LEGO is missing out the adult market by not doing Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, The Walking Dead, etc, without really considering the impact that this would have on the image of the company.

Forget GoT. I just want them to do "Game of Zones." I specifically want a set of Burner Ravens. 

Edited January 24, 2019 by Captain Dee

[danth]

On 1/23/2019 at 5:00 AM, MAB said:

Everyone always seem to think if only LEGO did what I want, they'd improve the World's No. 1 toy company.

I love this. 

If I ran LEGO, I would probably run it into the ground, but we'd get some awesome Neo Classic Space and Castle themes for a few glorious years.

Hey, speaking of this, why does Lego have a "Classics" line that has nothing to do with their classic themes?