LEGO Ideas. Caswell Point Turned down.

[Piraten]

So sitting here with new e-mail with tears in my eyes... Actually.. Not tears.. I'm crying a little bit.. Lego Pirates means that much to me. 

Turned down finally.. And the draft is removed...  

I think more and more that Lego will make a new series of  Pirates 

Dear Piraten, We are sorry to inform you that your LEGO Ideas project has been removed by our moderation team. Unfortunately, your submission requests the release of a model or concept that overlaps with a concept or licensed property (IP) on which a LEGO Ideas set (Pirates of Barracuda Bay) has already been produced.  Since LEGO Ideas has already produced a set on this concept or property, we have decided not to approve this similar submission as a LEGO Ideas Product Idea. Our Project Guidelines and House Rules state that once we release a licensed product or concept through LEGO Ideas, we won’t accept any more submissions based on that license/concept. We're sorry to be the bearers of this disappointing news. Kind regards, LEGO® Ideas http://ideas.LEGO.com

Edited April 21, 2020 by Piraten
forgot something :)

[CaptainMoore]

I am sorry for you. I like your submissions.

I also hope this will be counter-balanced by a new series.

[Piraten]

Just now, CaptainMoore said:

I am sorry for you. I like your submissions.

I also hope this will be counter-balanced by a new series.

Thanks. I will make a post with all the photo and the story behind the Caswell... But first later on.. Have to be in a good mood. 

[Mister Phes]

3 hours ago, Piraten said:

"Unfortunately, your submission requests the release of a model or concept that overlaps with a concept"

Their definition of "overlap" seems very generous, given your submission (pictured below) does not contain any pirates.

[Piraten]

1 hour ago, Mister Phes said:

Their definition of "overlap" seems very generous, given your submission (pictured below) does not contain any pirates.

 

 

@Mister Phes Exactly. There is no pirate in it... So I will take a deep breath... for a couple of days.. and then I will be proactive.. I will do all that I can to have Lego's attention and figure out what the hell is going on...

[Brickander Brickumnus]

Just now, Piraten said:

@Mister Phes Exactly. There is no pirate in it... So I will take a deep breath... for a couple of days.. and then I will be proactive.. I will do all that I can to have Lego's attention and figure out what the hell is going on...

I believe LEGO releasing IMPERIAL sets in some months, is what's going on.

And I'll make an assumption that your Idea has similarity with a set they plan to release (or at least LEGO believes it has).

Nothing else makes a logical explanation for your situation, in my mind.

Edited April 21, 2020 by Brickander Brickumnus

[icm]

It's a pretty slim hope, but there is precedent, sort of.  They turned down "Luke, I Am Your Father" after review not only because it was Star Wars but also because they had Cloud City in the works, and they turned down the Jaguar Type E after review because it conflicted with the Aston Martin DB5.

[Piraten]

12 minutes ago, Brickander Brickumnus said:

I believe LEGO releasing IMPERIAL sets in some months, is what's going on.

And I'll make an assumption that your Idea has similarity with a set they plan to release (or at least LEGO believes it has).

Nothing else makes a logical explanation for your situation, in my mind.

Not in the next months in my opinion. But it for sure in pipeline. 

[Rijkvv]

5 hours ago, Mister Phes said:

Their definition of "overlap" seems very generous, given your submission (pictured below) does not contain any pirates.

I guess it depends on what mood they are. So far we had multiple sitcom rooms, multiple submarines, multiple sets containing dinosaur skeletons and at least four real-life space-related sets of which three were NASA.

What I still wonder is why they actively removed a James Bond Aston Martin DB5 project while years later they suddenly din't have any issue to release one anyway.

Edited April 21, 2020 by Rijkvv

[Mister Phes]

8 hours ago, Brickander Brickumnus said:

I believe LEGO releasing IMPERIAL sets in some months, is what's going on.

There has been no official confirmation but as per the business plan of releasing a new wave of pirate sets every 5-7 years, a new wave is due around 2021.

4 hours ago, Rijkvv said:

I guess it depends on what mood they are.

I haven't been following LEGO Ideas much due to the absence of pirate releases, so thank you for the overview of their mood changes.

8 hours ago, icm said:

There is precedent, sort of.  They turned down "Luke, I Am Your Father" after review not only because it was Star Wars but also because they had Cloud City in the works, and they turned down the Jaguar Type E after review because it conflicted with the Aston Martin DB5.

These submissions you mention... these all reached 10K supporters and rejected during the final review?  And not rejected as soon as they were submitted?

[icm]

Yes.  Those projects reached 10K supporters and were rejected in the final review.  They were not rejected as soon as they were submitted.  I'm not holding out hope for an in-house Pirates/Imperials wave based on the rejection of Imperials Ideas projects upon submission.

[Mister Phes]

6 minutes ago, icm said:

Yes.  Those projects reached 10K supporters and were rejected in the final review.

Thank you for the clarification.

7 minutes ago, icm said:

  I'm not holding out hope for an in-house Pirates/Imperials wave based on the rejection of Imperials Ideas projects upon submission.

Legally they cannot use LEGO Ideas submissions for their in-house sets. Under the Intellectual Property agreement, LEGO Ideas submissions can only be used for LEGO Ideas release  (someone with a legal background correct me if I'm wrong about that).

But if a new wave of pirate set is released, I also wouldn't hold out hope for any grandiose Imperial/Soldier sets. It's just going to be a rehash of what we saw in the past two waves.  I.e. a small fort and medium size fort.  Nothing like Eldorado Fortress or the Imperial Trading Post (someone with a background in the LEGO Group correct if I'm wrong).

 

 

[Piraten]

8 hours ago, Rijkvv said:

I guess it depends on what mood they are. So far we had multiple sitcom rooms, multiple submarines, multiple sets containing dinosaur skeletons and at least four real-life space-related sets of which three were NASA.

What I still wonder is why they actively removed a James Bond Aston Martin DB5 project while years later they suddenly din't have any issue to release one anyway.

Seriuos.. Did they just remove a project ? 

[TheDeeGee]

Lego Ideas... more like Lego Space.

It started off pretty good with the first 10 or so sets, which actually looked like the idea that was send in.

They change it up way too much nowadays.

[Rijkvv]

40 minutes ago, Piraten said:

Seriuos.. Did they just remove a project ? 

Yes. Here is the topic. Even if they changed their opinion about James Bond afterwards (the designer thought it was perhaps too violent): by that time they already released Indiana Jones and Star Wars, including a planet-destroying space station.

Just now, TheDeeGee said:

They change it up way too much nowadays.

Sometimes for the better. I think Steamboat Willie would never have been approved if they had to stick close to the original design.

Don't get me wrong, I do see the appeal of those dino skeletons in the last set. I do like some space ideas. The Apollo is a great set and I did support a Soyuz idea (which failed the deadline) and the Gemini which has yet to be reviewed. But if they do want to live up to their own guidelines, then the chances for the latter are slim, as are the chances for yet another sitcom room currently in review. I just don't hope Ideas becomes an "Help us to decide which licence to pick next". There are great ideas that were overlooked because of the licence saturation and thus didn't make the deadline, and I still haven't forgiven Lego about the refusal of the western town.

Pirates is one of those themes that I always liked, but never really gotten into that much (certainly not in terms of making MOC's). In fact I hadn't visited this subforum in years, but I see that I should come here more often. Supported your fortress

[LegoFjotten]

16 minutes ago, TheDeeGee said:

It started off pretty good with the first 10 or so sets, which actually looked like the idea that was send in.

They change it up way too much nowadays.

I think LEGO Ideas is actually better than ever. I think it is more fair to evaluate LEGO Ideas by the quality of the released sets rather than how similar they are to the original submission. There have been a lot of great sets of late: Treehouse, Barracuda Bay, Old fishing store, Friends...

As for the rejection of Caswell Point, I understand the disappointment of the having the project turned down after putting in all the work, but I do see where LEGO is coming from. Even though there are no actual pirates in that submission, the imperials were part of the LEGO's pirates theme - and they just released Barracuda Bay. We are talking about it in the pirates forum... it clearly belongs in the pirates theme.

 

[Mister Phes]

23 minutes ago, LegoFjotten said:

Even though there are no actual pirates in that submission, the imperials were part of the LEGO's pirates theme - and they just released Barracuda Bay. We are talking about it in the pirates forum... it clearly belongs in the pirates theme.

The issue is they haven't clearly defined what constitutes as a "Barracuda Bay (and ship concept)".  If they said "any concept relating to the LEGO Pirates theme" we'd have a much better understanding, but at current we're just making assumptions.

 

[Piraten]

24 minutes ago, LegoFjotten said:

I think LEGO Ideas is actually better than ever. I think it is more fair to evaluate LEGO Ideas by the quality of the released sets rather than how similar they are to the original submission. There have been a lot of great sets of late: Treehouse, Barracuda Bay, Old fishing store, Friends...

As for the rejection of Caswell Point, I understand the disappointment of the having the project turned down after putting in all the work, but I do see where LEGO is coming from. Even though there are no actual pirates in that submission, the imperials were part of the LEGO's pirates theme - and they just released Barracuda Bay. We are talking about it in the pirates forum... it clearly belongs in the pirates theme.

 

Off course it belongs in the pirates theme. No discussion. But they just need to clairfy it. I changed the story to POTC.. wich they have accepted so far.. but yeah... Thats the game.. and it's their rules.. Just think they should use their fan-base more than they do today when we talk classic sets,, Castle, space ,pirates.. The most of the buyers are adults... Just see the barracuda bay, dont see any 14 year old kid  posting pictures of his new set.  Its mostly adult.. and a lot want to give the love for the old series to their kids... including me.. 

So when i get the Barracuda bay... i will play with with my son on the floor.. And off course we will play with the Fortress to :) 

[Weil]

5 hours ago, Mister Phes said:

Legally they cannot use LEGO Ideas submissions for their in-house sets. Under the Intellectual Property agreement, LEGO Ideas submissions can only be used for LEGO Ideas release  (someone with a legal background correct me if I'm wrong about that).

I'm not sure if there's a different agreement you're referring to but if the terms of service agreement for the ideas platform is to be taken at face value then you assign (transfer/sell) all of your IP rights in your idea to LEGO simply in exchange for using the ideas platform.  They decide more or less what they want to do with it.

I guess if LEGO decided to use an idea for an in-house theme set rather than an ideas set and the idea contributer felt they weren't getting the proper recognition and had been misled about what could come from their use of the ideas platform then that could be problematic.

However, I think LEGO choose to use ideas submissions for ideas sets and not for in-house theme sets more for marketing, PR and internal organisational/creative reasons than for legal reasons.

Whilst LEGO may well have a particular policy regarding this, I don't see why the law couldn't accommodate LEGO using an idea submission for a set in one somewhat arbitrary theme instead of another if there was a desire to do that.

I imagine a separate assignment is signed that is more specific to the contributer and the product that incorporates their idea when an idea is decided to be commercialised anyway, rather than relying only on the terms of service agreement.

[Mister Phes]

2 minutes ago, Weil said:

if the terms of service agreement for the ideas platform is to be taken at face value then you assign (transfer/sell) all of your IP rights in your idea to LEGO simply in exchange for using the ideas platform.  They decide more or less what they want to do with it.

Ok, let's assume submitting a concept to LEGO Ideas provides the LEGO Group with free reign over the concept to do as they please.

Have they ever released an "in-house" set which is remarkably similar to a LEGO Ideas submission?

[Rijkvv]

Please delete

Edited April 22, 2020 by Rijkvv
useless post

[Weil]

Just now, Mister Phes said:

Ok, let's assume submitting a concept to LEGO Ideas provides the LEGO Group with free reign over the concept to do as they please.

Have they ever released an "in-house" set which is remarkably similar to a LEGO Ideas submission?

I don't know but you previously invited critique of a statement you made about legality, not about policy or historical actions.

I think there was also a situation with the Ghostbusters fire station that even if not part of an "in-house" theme might be relevant. 

[Mister Phes]

Just now, Weil said:

I don't know but you previously invited critique of a statement you made about legality, not about policy or historical actions.

That is correct, however I wasn't challenging your response. I was attempting to improve my understanding by broadening my line of questioning.

[Weil]

Okay, sorry.

I thought you were trying to use your first paragraph as a strawman for the question you asked in the second. I.e. you were saying a lack of relevant facts was an indication of a lack of legal possibility.  I just misunderstood, my bad.

Edited April 22, 2020 by Weil
More clarification

[Mister Phes]

40 minutes ago, Weil said:

I just misunderstood, my bad.

No worries! Very easy to do when communicating via text.

Thank you for providing the insightful response.