TLG take-down of custom 3D printed parts for infringement

[Tommy Styrvoky]

I was greeted by this today, it appears TLG took legal action against people uploading Lego related models to Thingiverse, a 3D printing file hosting site. Not sure if the same will happen to Shapeways in the future. I am posting this here, as I know that 3D printed solutions offer more creative options for many builders in the Technic community. I am presuming that it was just a mass ban of anything with Lego involved in the description or title, and my design got caught up in that. However there are still parts on that site that contain direct copies of Lego bricks available. This still effects custom models designed to fill gaps in Lego's lineup of bricks, not just direct copies. I understand the reason behind this, to protect TLG, but I also fail to see how someone 3D printing Lego copies would have little to no effect on TLG, additive manufacturing is so slow and costly compared to injection molding. Maybe this moderation is just in wake of the Lepin/3rd party copies earlier this summer. 

This article appears to cover the news in more detail

Edited October 1, 2019 by Tommy Styrvoky

[Bartybum]

In my books this is a hell of a dick move by TLG.

[Mechbuilds]

Lego has went down the drain lately.. I wonder if they have hired the wrong people..

[agrof]

Wait, are we in 2019 or in 1939? I am not sure now... Why to stop here LEGO, those people must be collected and re-educated in camps to follow the ideology properly.
Meanwhile I understand the intention of this move (but don't agree necessarily), I do belive they went way too far from common sense and human values... very disappointing. Is really 3D printing that far, that it is competitive with mass production moulding? Did these sites made reasonable hurt on LEGO's profit? Did I miss something?

One thing is fighting for clear competition on the market, but as a person, who believes in shared knowledge, education and innovation, I find this very offensive.

Edited October 1, 2019 by agrof

[nicjasno]

If lego wants to curtail all this, they should start designing better products. Models lately (last 10 years at least) are getting worse and worse. No innovation, sloppy designs that don't work well.. and the copyers show that there's a huge demand for good models (and some parts).

 

 

[efferman]

I had a similar notification but there was only one part affected

Quote

Hi Michael,

Your Shapeways listing was the target of an allegation of trademark infringement by Lego, who own the trademark in Lego.

In order to resolve the complaint, the rightsholder has requested modifications to the title, description, and/or tags of your model. We have automatically made those changes to your listing and posted it in your shop.

If these changes are acceptable to you, no additional action is required on your part and we will consider this dispute resolved. If the changes are not acceptable, you must remove the listing entirely. Do not make additional changes to your listing without consulting with Shapeways. Doing so may result in the termination of your Shapeways account.

 

it was this part https://www.shapeways.com/product/AXHHV4NWR/steering-set-for-ingmar-spijkhoven-trucks?key=7cd8ad6c11edacbe993b5dbf5b54708d

it was simple to fix

 

[xsysiek]

I had similar notification from shapeways. It only affected parts with LEGO name in their title and description. Others were unaffected.

[agrof]

30 minutes ago, efferman said:

it was simple to fix

So the issue is the use of the word: LEGO. This solution is much friendlier, rather than complete ban, what @Tommy Styrvoky described. Good, that it was not cleared by TLG in the quoted article:

"When asked why the Lego Group has issued takedown notices, the company was less forthcoming. Ida Rosendahl, Associate Manager Corporate Communications at the Lego Group explained they have a high volume of queries. Rosendahl says it could be weeks before LEGO provides an explanation as to why it has issued trademark and copyright takedown notices against platforms and individuals sharing fan art."

https://3dprintingindustry.com/news/3d-printing-community-hit-by-lego-takedown-notices-162451/

Actually, I don't really see how people, who go directly to 3D printing page to buy custom 3D printed parts, would mistake that parts as LEGO official products... This action and the foggy (better to say: no) explanation still feels like a cheap shot.

Call me idealist, but this is the complete misuse and misunderstanding the abilities and possibilities we have nowadays for sake of IDIOCRACY.

Edited October 1, 2019 by agrof
added source

[nicjasno]

There's simmilar issues on youtube. Misuse of copyright.

 

[agrof]

I see, but that doesn't apply 1:1 at 3D printing community. Very different product, environment and conditions. They could use these websites and the designs as free bench-marking / brainstorming platforms, also even maybe as market mapping tool. It is just question of attitude, and having right eyes for finding the opportunities, instead of looking for enemies all the time.

Whatever, I rather focus on positive things, than eating nerves on the work of law / marketing / communication departments, who proved their objectivity, constructiveness and loyalty towards AFOL community already in the past (nope).

Edited October 1, 2019 by agrof

[Maaboo the Witch]

9 hours ago, nicjasno said:

they should start designing better products.

Amen to that. 

Edited October 1, 2019 by Maaboo35
Emphasizing the bit I agree with

[aol000xw]

Perhaps changing  the description to "Whatever compatible with Lego System" Instead of "Lego Whatever" may be enough.

 

But still... Lego, WTF

 

Edited October 1, 2019 by aol000xw

[nerdsforprez]

4 hours ago, nicjasno said:

If lego wants to curtail all this, they should start designing better products. Models lately (last 10 years at least) are getting worse and worse. No innovation, sloppy designs that don't work well.. and the copyers show that there's a huge demand for good models (and some parts).

 

 

This has nothing to do with the original post, and frankly, I think it detracts from Tommy's initial purpose.  Lego is designed for kids, not adults with engineering degrees or special expertise.  It's models will always fall short in the eyes of experts.  As we see on this forum, there never has been, and there never will be, a model put out by TLG (or ANY company for that matter) that will meet the expectations of all buyers.  If one takes this comment to heart, copying parts will always be justified.  I can even hear, as we speak, Lepin enthusiests and other copy-cats saying under their breath "if TLG wants us to stop producing these models they need to offer sets at a more affordable price".....

But, far worse IMO is that this comment is lacks sound reasoning and is just plain false.  It implies that if things are built well enough, no one will copy it.  We all know nothing could be further from the truth in Lego building.  The world at large teaches the same lesson.  Things that are done with high quality and care are not immune to the negative aspects of humanity (such as taking advantage of others).  If anything, they attract it.  

Also, it implies a dangerous, albeit abstract, idea which is "things that are stupid, wrong, built poorly, blah blah blah..... deserve to be taken advantage by others".  This argument has been packaged in so many ways (ex: women who dress provocatively deserve to be taken advantage of) and is flat-out wrong. 

 

No, the real argument here, that has been discussed by others, is if there is true infringement going on here.  For the record, I do not think it is and I agree with others, I think this is a very bad move for TLG.  I feel, just as some AFOLs need to, that they really need to take stock and have some self-awareness of who they are.  They are a company that produces a product to the masses.  Their products will hit a main target, but will miss with experts.  The experts will still buy their products, because they provide the basis of something they want to build, but they will want to modify, change it.  No different than buying a stock car and modifying it.  They should be grateful for these experts, and fully accept that with their money might come a slew of innovative products to enhance the original.  Again, no different than in the car industry.  They get free exposure and the expert's original money.  Its like a perfect marriage if they can be willing to allow bright minds to expand their product. But moves like this really sour the relationship.....

 

[Aerolight]

Unfortunately in cases like this lego really has no choice, if lego let people (don't at least try to stop)  'sell' items as lego not lego compatible their competitors can use this to 'downgrade' the trademark allowing them to do the same which is obviously bad. Every time you here about a brand doing this kind of thing for this purpose - not just a new employee having a bad idea but a requirement for protecting your brand not in the eyes of the people but in the eyes of the law. Precedence is everything in law.

[suffocation]

TLG states that it doesn't want the name "Lego" and other bits and bobs used without permission. You use them without permission, you've had your fair warning, you get taken down, end of story.

[Ivan_M]

10 minutes ago, Aerolight said:

Unfortunately in cases like this lego really has no choice, if lego let people (don't at least try to stop)  'sell' items as lego not lego compatible their competitors can use this to 'downgrade' the trademark allowing them to do the same which is obviously bad. Every time you here about a brand doing this kind of thing for this purpose - not just a new employee having a bad idea but a requirement for protecting your brand not in the eyes of the people but in the eyes of the law. Precedence is everything in law.

The problem here is that TLG is behaving in matters like this like elephant in porcelain. The same was cause with one of the german reviewer who got sued for selling mug with brick picture. I'm sure all designers would rename all their 3D models when a polite letter would be delivered first, EXPLAINING and asking for removal of "LEGO" words, giving everyone enough time, then followed by 2nd letter and only THEN asking for takedown. But unfortunately, this is not how corporates works

[Tommy Styrvoky]

The thing that upsets me is that this model and others will be stuck in moderation purgatory, with no way to see why the model was taken down in the first place, or get confirmation that we resolved IP infringements by removing anything Lego related in the description. I presume the reason is any use of the word Lego to describe the model. One easy solution would be to re upload the model without the use of Lego anywhere, something that I should have done in the first place.

[Bartybum]

46 minutes ago, suffocation said:

TLG states that it doesn't want the name "Lego" and other bits and bobs used without permission. You use them without permission, you've had your fair warning, you get taken down, end of story.

Does that apply to works that aren't sold?

[suffocation]

4 minutes ago, Bartybum said:

Does that apply to works that aren't sold?

Keine Ahnung, but I'd wager that their disclaimer is worded in a way that gives them the right to take down pretty much anything and everything, not out of douchebaggery but because when it comes to protecting IP a company is always going to err on the side of excess, especially with all the copycats and similar scum that have emerged in recent years.

Edited October 1, 2019 by suffocation

[Bartybum]

From their Fair Play Policy (https://www.lego.com/en-gb/legal/notices-and-policies/fair-play):

"The LEGO Trademarks may be used under certain Limited Circumstances on an Unofficial Web Site
The LEGO trademarks (but not the logo) may be used in a non-commercial manner to refer to LEGO products or elements which are shown or discussed on a web site, as long as the trademark is not unduly emphasized or used in a way that can lead an observer to mistakenly believe that the site is sponsored or authorized by the LEGO Group."

There's other stuff there that could be relevant too so don't take the above paragraph without reading the other stuff. It's just late and I'm tired so I cbf going through it all lol

Edited October 1, 2019 by Bartybum

[agrof]

This is clear, the parts in the 3D printing libraries are not LEGO products, so strictly read: they can hurt the brand reputation in case.

Still, I stand my points, but the worst part in the story is the communication, again. Let me to re-quote:

"When asked why the Lego Group has issued takedown notices, the company was less forthcoming. Ida Rosendahl, Associate Manager Corporate Communications at the Lego Group explained they have a high volume of queries. Rosendahl says it could be weeks before LEGO provides an explanation as to why it has issued trademark and copyright takedown notices against platforms and individuals sharing fan art."

https://3dprintingindustry.com/news/3d-printing-community-hit-by-lego-takedown-notices-162451/

So, IF the above mentioned LEGO brand usage is the main issue, what takes for weeks for TLG to give a clear statement? Why they leave space for random conspiracy theories? I believe it is equally bad for brand reputation as the "THING" they are trying to fighting with. I wonder if they even realize this...

Edited October 1, 2019 by agrof

[Tommy Styrvoky]

Here is a post on the 3D printing subreddit that I made. It has some traction, and maybe if we get enough feedback, Lego could give us some sort of official word on the take-down and if it is something to do with using Lego in the description/title, and what should be done in the future to avoid this. As even saying Lego compatible could still be an issue.

Edited October 1, 2019 by Tommy Styrvoky

[nerdsforprez]

8 minutes ago, agrof said:

This is clear, the parts in the 3D printing libraries are not LEGO products, so strictly read: they can hurt the brand reputation in case.

Still, I stand my points, but the worst part in the story is the communication, again. Let me to re-quote:

"When asked why the Lego Group has issued takedown notices, the company was less forthcoming. Ida Rosendahl, Associate Manager Corporate Communications at the Lego Group explained they have a high volume of queries. Rosendahl says it could be weeks before LEGO provides an explanation as to why it has issued trademark and copyright takedown notices against platforms and individuals sharing fan art."

https://3dprintingindustry.com/news/3d-printing-community-hit-by-lego-takedown-notices-162451/

So, IF the above mentioned LEGO brand usage is the main issue, what takes for weeks for TLG to give a clear statement? Why they leave space for random conspiracy theories? I believe it is equally bad for brand reputation as the "THING" they are trying to fighting with. I wonder if they even realize this...

Indeed. It seems as though they used reverse rationale. Typically one would first have a reason prior to action.  An action without a reason is well......you know......

[suffocation]

3 minutes ago, Tommy Styrvoky said:

 As even saying Lego compatible could still be an issue.

And rightly so. Legally speaking, "Lego compatible" can be interpreted to mean so much more than just "mechanically fits with Lego bricks".

[doug72]

There’s nothing on the Train Tech forum about this and they use lots of 3D printed parts, such as wheels, side frames etc.