leafan

TLG acquires Bricklink

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, Medzomorak said:

Is there any elaborated information about current stud.io rights things? 

It's funny that you should mention this now because I just received an email from Bricklink to say that I need to review and accept the new T&C's before March or my account will be deactivated.

I've yet to review them though, but even so, I'm probably not the best person to advise on the changes because honestly.... I didn't read the original lol.

I'm good at spotting catches in contracts though as that is a small part of my job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/28/2020 at 6:38 PM, Medzomorak said:

Is there any elaborated information about current stud.io rights things? 

Further to my comment above, I have now read in full the new Terms & Conditions of Bricklink.

Re: Your MOCs. In short, if you upload them to Bricklink, they own the rights, but you can profit from selling instructions etc (which I presume you could do before).

I also found this part interesting:

"BrickLink Commission: As compensation for making the Site available to designers, BrickLink reserves the right in the future to take a percentage of the Design Fee as a commission or transaction fee, including with respect to designs that are already available. In such event, you will have the right to remove Your Designs from the Site or establish a new Design Fee for Your Designs."

Future plans perhaps; I'm not sure. But they're covering themselves well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, leafan said:

Further to my comment above, I have now read in full the new Terms & Conditions of Bricklink.

Re: Your MOCs. In short, if you upload them to Bricklink, they own the rights, but you can profit from selling instructions etc (which I presume you could do before).

I also found this part interesting:

"BrickLink Commission: As compensation for making the Site available to designers, BrickLink reserves the right in the future to take a percentage of the Design Fee as a commission or transaction fee, including with respect to designs that are already available. In such event, you will have the right to remove Your Designs from the Site or establish a new Design Fee for Your Designs."

Future plans perhaps; I'm not sure. But they're covering themselves well.

Thank you for the effort, this is interesting. I'm not sure how are they planning to charge fees if you sell any instruction on other platforms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see the colour "flesh" has been changed to "nougat".  I hope there are few other changes; I'm not a fan of "earth green" for "dark green", "bright reddish violet" for "magenta" etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I received this email the other day. Is this the influence of TLG on bricklink?

Quote

 

Hi Didumos,

It has come to our attention that the following Studio designs have infringed on IP-related designs:

These designs have been set to Display only, which means that only design information will be displayed on the design details page. Parts information will not be shown, and the ability to Easy Buy the design or download the Studio file will be disabled.

We value your creativity and hope that you continue to enjoy the Studio Gallery. To learn more about copyright infringement related to the Studio Gallery, click here.

-The BrickLink Team

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Didumos69 said:

I received this email the other day. Is this the influence of TLG on bricklink?

 

Yes, they are removing any fan designed sets that mention a license, even if LEGO already make / have made something from that license. This also includes LEGO's own IP. They will not allow anyone else to sell sets based on their IP, including BL sellers. So you cannot sel MOCS based on Friends, City, Forestmen, Classic Space, etc and mention the license in the title, description or tags.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

Ah yes, "protecting" a fan resource by stifling it with corporate regulations.

 

For the past couple of days they have been protecting us by having dreadful access speeds, especially for anyone trying to add stock or process orders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to say it; but I wonder what all the people who thought we were being "negative/chicken little/making a deal out" of nothing now think with these changes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A majority of my models have been flagged as infringing on Ineffectual Property (meaning people can't download the Studio file), but it makes no sense at all. Such as this castle, made from a Creator set, or this little ship, an alt build of a Creator space shuttle, or these two little creatures made from a Classic set. It almost seems like their bots are just randomly flagging models - I can't make head or tails of why these were tagged but others of mine weren't. Someone suggested maybe they were flagged because of the set numbers in the titles, but almost all my models are alt builds and I begin the titles with the original set name, yet some were flagged and some weren't.

Since even when flagged, people can view the online steps, I'm not too concerned, but I'm baffled. I've noticed that if I make any change to the model submission (title or description text, etc.) then I can "resubmit" it, and it says "pending review". We'll see if they become unflagged.

Edited by vermontcathy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, MAB said:

Yes, they are removing any fan designed sets that mention a license, even if LEGO already make / have made something from that license. This also includes LEGO's own IP. They will not allow anyone else to sell sets based on their IP, including BL sellers. So you cannot sel MOCS based on Friends, City, Forestmen, Classic Space, etc and mention the license in the title, description or tags.

 

But we're not "selling" a set - we're just posting models. Are you saying if someone makes an alt build of a City set and has the word "City" in the title or description, or the set number, it'll be flagged? See my previous post. Most of my models are alt builds and have the original set number in the title, and I usually say in the description "alt build of ...". 

And even if that's what's causing the flagging, it still doesn't make sense. This one is an alt build of Classic set 11001, it has 11001 in the title, and description is "Two little creatures from the Classic set 11001 Bricks and Ideas" and was flagged. This set is also an alt build of 11001, has 11001 in the title, and description says, "This guy is an alt build for the little classic set 11001" and was NOT flagged.  Oh.... so the first one had the NAME of the set. So it seems like I can have the set number but not the set name in the title and description?

Hmm... it also seems like I can't have "Classic" in the description. This one has the title "10704 Purple Car" and description "An alt build for Classic set 10704". So, no set name, just "Classic" which I guess is prohibited. <facepalm> If I didn't have so many models to compare and contrast (and models that clearly have no IP such as a model of Yoda), I never would have figured this out. 

So, in summary:

  • set number is OK
  • set name is not OK
  • Lego line such as "Classic" is not allowed - including possibly also castle, city, friends, ideas, elves, creator, etc.
  • Looks like you can't use any of (possibly among others) the Friends' names? I have one that got flagged and I don't have the set name or the line (Friends) but I called it "Emma's not-heart-box"

Did they flag every model that has the word classic, city, friends, elves, castle, dots, creator, dots, etc.?

OK here's one that doesn't fit the rules as I thought I had figured them out. I have the original set number, but I don't have the set name... oh wait. The original set name was Trevi Fountain. My set is named Trevi Castle. How can Lego claim IP on "Trevi" when it's the name of an actual place? Oh wait.... it isn't "Trevi" that caused the flagging, but maybe "Castle"? Can we really not use "Castle" in any model name or description? Maybe it's OK if I spell if "Kastle"... :( This is stupid.

Edited by vermontcathy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, vermontcathy said:

Hmm... it also seems like I can't have "Classic" in the description. This one has the title "10704 Purple Car" and description "An alt build for Classic set 10704". So, no set name, just "Classic" which I guess is prohibited. <facepalm> If I didn't have so many models to compare and contrast (and models that clearly have no IP such as a model of Yoda), I never would have figured this out. 

Maybe Theme names are off-limits.

Classic is a line of sets, and so is IDEAS.

And I think that's really silly for obvious cases of no licensed submissions, almost sounds like Algorithm of bots that, in similar situations, used to badly flag YouTube videos wrongly as well.

Edited by TeriXeri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should I start a thread where we can come up with non-infringing names? :grin:

Acquaintances. Large Population Centre. Smaller Population Centre. Archetypal Cosmic. 

Shooting themselves in the foot if they want to maintain a community or any goodwill, TLG will have a lot of work to do if this doesn't improve over time.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can still see the MOC's pictures but not able to download its Stud.io file if it is a MOC with an IP owned by someone else?   Sounds like Lord Business wants you to build by pictures like those alternative builds on old LEGO® set boxes without instructions.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, vermontcathy said:

But we're not "selling" a set - we're just posting models.

You are posting models with parts lists that can be bought through LEGO's bricklink. So if LEGO allow you to post a third party IP MOC with instructions and parts lists, then both LEGO and a BL seller profit from the sale of parts if someone creates it. Similarly if they allow you to post a LEGO IP, then it send the message that it is OK for other third parties to make money from LEGO's IP in a form that LEGO have not approved.

I imagine that is their lawyers' stance, and they are just strong handed when it comes to removing anything that looks like it might infringe. Personally, I don't see why they don't just remove all possibilities to download and let other sites do that.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rebrickable allows sharing MOCS and instructions , so if no intent of selling, that's a better place, especially for it's main intended use : Alternate Builds.

But they also allow selling of instructions as well.

Edited by TeriXeri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TeriXeri said:

Rebrickable allows sharing MOCS and instructions , so if no intent of selling, that's a better place, especially for it's main intended use : Alternate Builds.

But they also allow selling of instructions as well.

I post on Rebrickable, but Bricklink (via Studio upload) is the only place I know of to post 3D rotatable steps. I can upload a PDF of steps to Rebrickable, but I like also providing the 3D online steps (and I like using them for building, as well). So in my Rebrickable MOCs' descriptions, I include a link to the online steps. Luckily, even if a set is "flagged", those online steps are still available, so it's not as big a deal to me as if they disallowed the online steps. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, GREG998 said:

My 2 piece of advice:

- Never use IP name on a moc you put on Bricklink.

Well, Lego Group seems to think that "classic" and "castle" are their own IP....

17 hours ago, GREG998 said:

- Use Brickowl instead of Bricklink. Sorry TLG but i don't like the "Attila" way of doing. When you come to a place, adopt the manners and way of life of the place. Do not push by force yours, it's called then invasion.

Brickowl is fine for ordering pieces, but it's not a place to post and share MOCs, and online 3D steps for those MOCs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

Should I start a thread where we can come up with non-infringing names? :grin:

Acquaintances. Large Population Centre. Smaller Population Centre. Archetypal Cosmic. 

I would totally go for an "Acquaintances" theme.  This reminded me of bad translations of English movie titles on bootleg videos (and to a lesser extent to a cement mixer I bought from China once that had, shall we say a colorful, metaphorical mistranslation for the word "screw" throughout the assembly directions).  

Can we also have a Velocity Victors theme?  

Buccaneers might sell.

I wonder what TLG would have to say about non-Architecture,  Edifice Erections?

17 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

Shooting themselves in the foot if they want to maintain a community or any goodwill, TLG will have a lot of work to do if this doesn't improve over time.

The way things are going I think SOMEBODY'S going to have a lot of work to do - recreating a viable alternative to BL.  If I decide to rage-quit my current job, perhaps I start my own company - I know a lot about software engineering, databases and web app design (and have a contact list of very smart people who know lots of things I don't) but I don't have the time right now and don't really want to be in the business of running and maintaining something on that scale.  Still, the more TLG "honors" their pledge not to change anything, the more I think the community needs a new alternative.  

It was really a strategic blunder for TLG to buy BL directly.  Invest in, partner with, okay - maybe - but assuming a controlling interest puts them in an impossible position.  They can't turn a blind eye to the actions of a wholly owned subsidiary and they can't bring BL in-line with the rest of the corporation without fundamentally changing what BL is to the community.  They lost their buffer of deniability in buying BL and I don't really see what they are getting out of fostering all this ill-will and anger. It's not like BL was a multi-billion dollar cash cow in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, I have no F'ING clue how to post a build that isn't flagged for IP. I thought I had it figured out. I was wrong. I posted a build yesterday, title is 11001 Flower Tree, description is "just a silly little alt build from set 11001." Flagged. I thought the set number was ok since ALL my models' titles include the set number, and some of them haven't been flagged. I just... whatever. I give up trying to figure it out. People can still see the online steps, and that's the only reason I use Bricklink's Studio Gallery.

 

my flower tree.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/24/2020 at 3:03 PM, Peppermint_M said:

Should I start a thread where we can come up with non-infringing names? :grin:

Acquaintances. Large Population Centre. Smaller Population Centre. Archetypal Cosmic. 

Shooting themselves in the foot if they want to maintain a community or any goodwill, TLG will have a lot of work to do if this doesn't improve over time.

More theme euphamisms:

Pre-Reniassance Western Europe

Scientific and Engineering

Imagination Building

Learned

Concealed Part

Hairy Plodder (I swear, it's about a slow, shaggy horse!)

Fusing astral body conflict

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ninja-went
Ninja-comeback

Filesharers of the Brick seas

Noir-Tron I-II
Magnets in SPAAaaace
Extra-terrestrial Law enforcement I-III
Frozen Planet Explorers

Coneheads in Stone houses
Coneheads on crusade
Blue Falcons (huehue..)
Bushmen in tights
Pack of non-were wolves
Lizardknights

Should copy the enlighten/lepin/etc euphemism names to really steam their admins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.