Hedgie

Are these Technic builders collaborating with Lepin? Or are they being ripped off?

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, FX6000 said:

Those sets on the picture are not clones of anything. It's Cada's design, they use some unique parts as well. Of all Chinese brands Doubleeagle and their subbrand Cada seems to be more legitimate than others. They have website where you can download the instructions to compare

Nikolay, you missed the main word in my post! Remember, this is written by AMBASSADOR of LEGO!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, howitzer said:

Creative works are always subject to copyright, and it doesn't matter if the medium is Lego or paint and canvas. The problem here arises on the definition of what's creative work and what's not, but MOCs based on real world vehicles cannot be copyrighted by the MOC designer, as the copyright already belongs to the company owning the rights of the real vehicle. Something like Akiyuki's GBC designs, however, could conceivably be protected by copyright laws as a kinetic sculpture, but it's hard to say for sure without an actual court ruling on the matter.

It's not that easy (everything refers to law in germany).

Am I allowed to draw a picture of a car? Yes, I am. I get copyright on that image, not the car company.

Am I allowed to draw a picture of a photography? No, I am not. That counts as an editing of an existing image, that's already protected by copyright.

Is there even a copyright on cars? No, there is not. The names, brands etc. are protected by copyright and the design of visible parts is protected, so no other company can produce them, but not the design as a whole by it self. The copyright of "creative work" cannot be transfered and would even be inherited to the descendants (see grandchild of Porsche designer vs Porsche). ^^

So if you built a MOC from a existing car it can be protected by copyright, but the requirements would be higher(1) than with a self-invented car, because the personal contribution is lower since you use a design that already exists.

(1) nobody knows what the requirements would be, there is no reference =/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gimmick said:

It's not that easy (everything refers to law in germany).

Am I allowed to draw a picture of a car? Yes, I am. I get copyright on that image, not the car company.

Am I allowed to draw a picture of a photography? No, I am not. That counts as an editing of an existing image, that's already protected by copyright.

Is there even a copyright on cars? No, there is not. The names, brands etc. are protected by copyright and the design of visible parts is protected, so no other company can produce them, but not the design as a whole by it self. The copyright of "creative work" cannot be transfered and would even be inherited to the descendants (see grandchild of Porsche designer vs Porsche). ^^

So if you built a MOC from a existing car it can be protected by copyright, but the requirements would be higher(1) than with a self-invented car, because the personal contribution is lower since you use a design that already exists.

(1) nobody knows what the requirements would be, there is no reference =/

Of course it's not that simple, the IP laws are complex and convoluted and details and interpretations vary from country to country. But if you make a MOC based on a real car, I'd say it's quite a hard to argue for any sort of copyright over that MOC, as the design is made and owned by someone else and it's not even a part of a larger creative work (like a photograph of a cityscape with cars in it might be).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, howitzer said:

Of course it's not that simple, the IP laws are complex and convoluted and details and interpretations vary from country to country. But if you make a MOC based on a real car, I'd say it's quite a hard to argue for any sort of copyright over that MOC, as the design is made and owned by someone else and it's not even a part of a larger creative work (like a photograph of a cityscape with cars in it might be).

Let's pay a lawyer and find out! ;D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/19/2020 at 11:03 AM, Hedgie said:

I understand that it's easy to dismiss Lepin as an evil company that steals. However, I'm wondering if at least some MOC Builders are being compensated for their work. The following quote is from a 2017 interview with Crowkillers:

Besides Crowkillers, are there any other MOC builders out here that are willing to admit they were approached by Lepin?

Wow.... I am glad I tuned in here.  This is very interesting.  I had no idea.  Thanks for sending the link....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, howitzer said:

If you make a MOC based on a real car, I'd say it's quite a hard to argue for any sort of copyright over that MOC, as the design is made and owned by someone else and it's not even a part of a larger creative work (like a photograph of a cityscape with cars in it might be).

Nobody "owns" a design. Creative works are free to copy and adapt by anyone. Copyright is only a privilege handed out by the state for a limited period of time in order to promote creativity. It is not a natural right like owning a house.

That being said, I think a MOC definitely counts as a creative work on its own, unless it was largely based on another MOC. If you design a Ferrari MOC, you are the sole copyright holder of that MOC. Ferrari could prevent you from using its name based on trademark law, but it couldn't prevent you from selling the design under a different name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hedgie said:

 a MOC definitely counts as a creative work on its own, unless it was largely based on another MOC. 

Chinabrick maker sembo released an "Andi" sport car. A lot of alternative brick fans hail it as an independent designed: no stolen moc here!

But they're wrong. This is as stolen as any of the more blatant copues. Both axles, the steering, the drive unit, and quite possibly the entire chassis are lifted straight from Madoca's Icarus.

Anyone interested can see around the middle of this video.

https://youtu.be/1Bq126q14LA

Understand if mod wants to remove the link, I've specifically kept it as a text link.

Edited by amorti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, super-jaschka said:

Nikolay, you missed the main word in my post! Remember, this is written by AMBASSADOR of LEGO!

And so what? LEGO ambassadors can't collaborate with others? for example rc4wd... numerous chinese tire manufacturer companies...

It would be also interesting to see a video comparison between two companies / sets

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something -like making a MOC of a known supercar- may take a lot of work, It doesn't necessarily translates into any rights over it.

Kind of going to Yellowstone national park, clearing a path of terrain, planting some apple trees, taking care of them... and after so much efforts, tourists go and steal your apples...  Where those yours in first place?

Even instructions aren't safe. The instructions got copyright, but what those instructions represent -the steps , the model- don't.

If I buy a copy of the instructions I can't scan and print a copy, but  I can create new instructions with those same steps.

You can sketch an amazing drawing of a new concept car and I can't make copies of that sketch but unless you got design patents for the ornamental details of that concept car I can build it for real.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/21/2020 at 11:33 AM, super-jaschka said:

Nikolay, you missed the main word in my post! Remember, this is written by AMBASSADOR of LEGO!

Being a LEGO Ambassador means that the person is the representative of a Club/Online community/Fan Media towards LEGO. It comes with a few commitments and obligations but does not mean any exclusivity for the brand. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kbalage said:

Being a LEGO Ambassador means that the person is the representative of a Club/Online community/Fan Media towards LEGO. It comes with a few commitments and obligations but does not mean any exclusivity for the brand. 

Care to share what kind of commitments and obligations ? Just curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, aol000xw said:

Care to share what kind of commitments and obligations ? Just curious.

You can have a look here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Noticed my Dump-Truck MOC on their site.... never gave permission to do so and would never do.

What I tend to see: once in a while I do sell 1 Building Instructions plan of a MOC via my website in the China region. After a couple of months, that MOC is on Aliexpress with photo's just ripped of my website.

They just copy and clone. And although the IP of the MOC resides by me, it is hardly impossible to fight in terms of effort and money.

So, I live with it, and take it as a compliment :wink:

However, if MOCing was my core job, I would have thought differently.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I take a photo of a lambo, I own the copyright to the photo, not lambo. Why shouldn't I own the copyright to a MOC of a lambo if I make one? Now selling a MOC with the lambo name on it however, that I couldn't due without permission to use the name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, S.I said:

If I take a photo of a lambo, I own the copyright to the photo, not lambo. Why shouldn't I own the copyright to a MOC of a lambo if I make one? Now selling a MOC with the lambo name on it however, that I couldn't due without permission to use the name.

Photographing a car == creative work

Photographing a photo of a car == copying

Designing a MOC == creative work

Following build instructions == copying

Building a real car that looks and works exactly like a Lambo == copying

Building a car from toothpicks/sodacans/Lego that looks exactly like a Lambo == creative work

Building a MOC that looks like an existing MOC without having seen the building instructions == creative work by clean-room reverse engineering

Building a MOC that is in some ways identical to another MOC, and unique in other ways == derivative work, which is copyrightable on its own

Edited by Hedgie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hedgie said:

Designing a MOC == creative work 

That isn't necessarily true.

2 hours ago, Hedgie said:

Building a car from toothpicks/sodacans/Lego that looks exactly like a Lambo == creative work 

Building a MOC that looks like an existing MOC without having seen the building instructions == creative work by clean-room reverse engineering

Building a MOC that is in some ways identical to another MOC, and unique in other ways == derivative work, which is copyrightable on its own

And those aren't true, because a MOC isn't by definition a creative work or a form of art.

 

A MOC could be a creative work, but most times it isn't. A Lego sculpture is a creative work, a Lego car isn't a creative work. And a Lego Lambo not only isn't a creative work, it is a rip off.

 

BTW you can't take a photo of anything you want and claim copyright, beacuse you might be infringing on someone else copyright in first place.

For example you can take a picture of the Eiffel tower and sell copies as long as it wasn't at night because the illumination added a few years ago is an art work still covered by copyright.

 

 

Edited by aol000xw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/22/2020 at 1:42 PM, kbalage said:

Being a LEGO Ambassador means that the person is the representative of a Club/Online community/Fan Media towards LEGO. It comes with a few commitments and obligations but does not mean any exclusivity for the brand. 

Seriously?:laugh:

  • Comply with TLG Fair Play Policy and TLG Brand Values - this must be understood correctly!  Tomorrow the boy will look at his review and go buy an analogue, because it is cheaper. The guys do not listen to what the conversation is about in the review, they read the video captions*huh*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite several my MOCs are selling bythis shitty lepin, I do not have any agreement with them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Aleh said:

Despite several my MOCs are selling bythis shitty lepin, I do not have any agreement with them!

They are sold as MOCs, you are even credited, no? That doesn't mean it's right, my several MOCs are also sold (they all have free instructions) but at least I'm credited.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Lipko said:

They are sold as MOCs, you are even credited, no? That doesn't mean it's right, my several MOCs are also sold (they all have free instructions) but at least I'm credited.

I don't care about crediting - they are selling without my permission. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Aleh said:

I don't care about crediting - they are selling without my permission. 

Yes, that's right. I just wanted to say that these MOCs aren't ripped off in the same way as some others, I would treat it separately. It's like MOCHUB without giving any money to the original designers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Lipko said:

Yes, that's right. I just wanted to say that these MOCs aren't ripped off in the same way as some others, I would treat it separately. It's like MOCHUB without giving any money to the original designers.

Yeah, here I totally agree mate! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Aleh : you should have linked the examples to make clear what we are talking about (I know of course). As @Lipko pointed out, nowadays we must differentiate more between the fifty shades of grey between white and black. You have to make a decision whether you wanna keep putting instructions on rebrickable and go 99% risk of being ripped-off or not sharing your instructions at all. As long as the rebrickable company(!) can´t afford a lawyer in China to protect the designs they are selling, you can´t do anything but only raise buyers´ awareness so they at least compensate your work by buying your instructions after the purchase at aliexpress. 

My advice: share only pictures / videos of your MOCs and if you are playing in the upper league, you will get the deserved attention from the manufacturers in consequence to get it done legally - with your signature on the box and some of their money in your pockets. Win-win situation for everybody (except Lego purists).

45 minutes ago, Lipko said:

... It's like MOCHUB without giving any money to the original designers.

I didn´t know that´s the case, shame on them if true! At least they advertise otherwise

I joined this new website instead where you get a 10% comission as designer for every set sold: https://buildamoc.com/

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.