TLG Ban Custom Minifig Printing.

[Gimmick]

On 7/5/2022 at 6:07 PM, CP5670 said:

I don't see how they can ban what others do after they buy the product. 

You can do what ever you want. The fun always begins when it's about business and that includes promotional gifts, advertising and the actual printing-job itself.

But you( = you at home) don't have to care about that. 

[Ondra]

Lego slowly becoming nintendo of toy industry... Shame, shame.

[gerkenz]

Yes, very strange behavior but sure can't affect private prints, right? If you're printing all names of wedding guests on minifigures it should be allowed, right?

Meanwhile LEGO do allow printing your own text on minifigures in the future if you're bying them from LEGO directly:

Minifigure Factory

Edited July 22, 2022 by gerkenz

[MAB]

4 hours ago, gerkenz said:

Yes, very strange behavior but sure can't affect private prints, right? If you're printing all names of wedding guests on minifigures it should be allowed, right?

 

Yes, perfectly allowable for private use.

This is more about other companies (including not for profit companies, AFOL conventions, etc) doing it as a commercial activity.

[The Jersey Brick Guy]

On 6/30/2022 at 2:09 PM, danth said:

Anyone can buy a product, modify it, and sell it. Lego asking us to not do that is just a ridiculous overreach with no basis in law (in the US at least)

Exactly! I would love to see them try and bring a case in court about this. Seems moderate like scare tactics than anything else. 
 

As long as the 3rd party printers are not using LEGO trademarks or any other copyrighted material, they can do whatever they want with products they buy in the open market. 
 

Something I can see happening though, is LEGO threatening to pull any type of sponsorship from a convention if they allow the 3rd party printers to be vendors there. That’s the only way I can see this being enforced. 

Edited July 31, 2022 by The Jersey Brick Guy

[MAB]

12 minutes ago, The Jersey Brick Guy said:

Exactly! I would love to see them try and bring a case in court about this. Seems moderate like scare tactics than anything else. 
 

As long as the 3rd party printers are not using LEGO trademarks or any other copyrighted material, they can do whatever they want with products they buy in the open market. 
 

Something I can see happening though, is LEGO threatening to pull any type of sponsorship from a convention if they allow the 3rd party printers to be vendors there. That’s the only way I can see this being enforced. 

It still depends what they are doing with them. If McDonalds prints it's own logo on a LEGO minifigure torso and gives these away without permission from LEGO (even if they don't claim they are LEGO or use LEGO logos) LEGO would likely step in and stop them. The other party (here McD) is implying there is some sort of endorsement or agreement in place if they give away LEGO branded items.

[The Jersey Brick Guy]

21 minutes ago, MAB said:

It still depends what they are doing with them. If McDonalds prints it's own logo on a LEGO minifigure torso and gives these away without permission from LEGO (even if they don't claim they are LEGO or use LEGO logos) LEGO would likely step in and stop them. The other party (here McD) is implying there is some sort of endorsement or agreement in place if they give away LEGO branded items.

What’s the likelihood of that happening though? Companies that large do not do anything unless there are contracts written that outline every inch of what is/isn’t allowed, accepted and so on. 

In regards to smaller companies that may be playing fast and loose, they can give away whatever they want. There’s nothing stopping a company from giving away anything as long as they don’t claim (written or verbal) to have any type of partnership with the company. 
 

The way I read this, is Lego is attempting to eliminate 3rd party competitors now that they are doing custom minifig printing. 

Edited July 31, 2022 by The Jersey Brick Guy

[TeriXeri]

I think the issue LEGO has with printing logos/brands on minifigs is because it directly traces back to LEGO's product (LEGO calls it their Minifigure Trademark specificly) ,whereas something like a shirt, or pen or umbrella or whatever generic object with a logo/company name on it isn't traceable back as easily to the factory/single company and there can be dozens if not hundreds of different manufacturers, even unnamed ones. 

LEGO doesn not have the solo patent on bricks but they are trying to defend their rights on minifigs as long as they can.

As the original posts says, they'll still allow custom prints, even outside of the Minifigure Factory, it's just set within boundaries.

 

Edited July 31, 2022 by TeriXeri

[MAB]

19 hours ago, The Jersey Brick Guy said:

What’s the likelihood of that happening though? Companies that large do not do anything unless there are contracts written that outline every inch of what is/isn’t allowed, accepted and so on. 

In regards to smaller companies that may be playing fast and loose, they can give away whatever they want. There’s nothing stopping a company from giving away anything as long as they don’t claim (written or verbal) to have any type of partnership with the company. 
 

That is pretty much the point. Big companies know they cannot do it. But the same rules apply to all. And this is LEGO reinforcing it. To me, it is about endorsement. If Eurobricks (or a LUG) advertise they are giving away Eurobricks branded LEGO minifigures it implies that LEGO has endorsed them. The same applies whether it is a fan group, a huge gambling website or a small, craft beer company. 

[Weil]

I have some comments on this.

As people may be aware, TLG's designs and patents that cover the bricks and minifigures themselves have expired.  Trademarks don't expire (if they are continuously used and recognised as being trademarks).  Therefore, TLG is very keen on keeping their trademarks.

In at least some jurisdictions, TLG has a trademark for the shape of a minifigure.  It is unusual to be able to trademark a shape of goods - and requires the shape itself to be distinctive as a sign of commercial origin.

Where TLG do have a trademark for a minifigure shape, the law currently considers that if goods have that shape, people will recognise those goods commercial origin as being from TLG _because_ of that shape.  If this stops being the case, TLG lose the trademark.  TLG don't want this because it will allow other companies to make products in the shape of minifigures.

A trademark does not protect non-commercial activity.  So you can do whatever you want in this regard in personal/private activities.

You are allowed to re-sell products that are protected by trademarks as a second hand sale of those products.  Trademarks generally only cover the initial sale of a product to the consumer.  However, if you modify a product and re-sell it, that might be a new initial sale of a (new) product.  This is a problem if the modified product still has the original trademark (in this case, the registered shape of a minifigure).

What other lego products may or may not be considered a minifigure is irrelevant to this.  What counts is the shape that is registered as a trademark (the classic minifigure shape).

Selling products with only part of that shape is less risky than selling products exactly with that shape.  However, if the shape of what you're selling is still distinctive and associated with the registered shape then you're still in trouble.  This is analogous to labelling products with a recognisable part of a protected logo but trying to say you're in the clear because you didn't use the full logo as it is registered.  Therefore, selling e.g. only a torso of a minifigure does not necessarily mean you're in the clear.

[Mylenium]

1 hour ago, Weil said:

people will recognise those goods commercial origin as being from TLG _because_ of that shape. If this stops being the case, TLG lose the trademark.

Well, not meaning to be all that cynical, but LEGO are their own biggest enemy on that already. Following your argument, every custom head or the shorter/ longer leg pieces introduced with Harry Potter and Avatar, respectively, diminish the recognizability of the original minifigure 3D trademark. LEGO are diluting the pool in a manner of speaking. Likewise, and I've mentioned this many times already, since the company does not offer a way of officially licensing their stuff in a transparent manner, it's all a muddied mess of fair use rules and their goodwill that can change at any point. What's true today may no longer be true tomorrow. Therefore they'll always run into these situations even if the current conundrum can be resolved somehow... 

Mylenium

[Johnny1360]

Catch 22

[Weil]

1 hour ago, Mylenium said:

Following your argument, every custom head or the shorter/ longer leg pieces introduced with Harry Potter and Avatar, respectively, diminish the recognizability of the original minifigure 3D trademark. LEGO are diluting the pool in a manner of speaking.

Hi, I'm sorry but I don't think this follows from anything I have said. TLG don't need it to be the case that all of their products have the registered shape, they just need to keep it the case that if it has the registered shape, people will recognise it is a TLG product.

1 hour ago, Mylenium said:

What's true today may no longer be true tomorrow.

That's why TLG will go to great lengths to keep it true tomorrow, if they think that this preserves the value of its brand.