anothergol

if you think of it, even with only LEGO parts, we've never really all been doing the same thing: -some are releasing instructions and would only use the current small available subset of all LEGO parts -some allow themselves all parts within the system -some allow themselves anything that LEGO has ever released. But that means shoelaces, bits of packaging or sprues -inside all this, some will bend/cut/paint parts, some won't So adding non-LEGO parts is only adding a rule. Personally, I'm using "the Kiddicraft system" (which, to be fair, we partly owe to LEGO - I believe LEGO came with the metrics for plates & bars?), I probably wouldn't use a shoelace in a MOC, & I'd rather not cut parts (but I have). And IMHO a MOC using Modulex or Galidor (even though Galidor is kinda in-system) parts are less "pure" than a MOC using non-LEGO stud invertors or brackets, even though I can appreciate a NPU. And I don't think any "LEGO purist" still exists in the sense of brown nosing LEGO. Long gone are the days of LEGO approaching bankrupcy and needing support, it's a luxury brand now. Other brands are legitimate competition, not ripoffs (except for LEGO's lawyers), and they do things that LEGO can't or refuses to do. Who'd possibly be against that and why - as a consumer? Even just for LEGO to improve, you need other brands. The day LEGO modulars will be fully lit, you'll have to thank Lumibricks for that (waiting for someone to dare to say that lighting is ruining it all, that LEGO shouldn't take that path and that stupid smartbricks are exactly what they wanted).

not true. LEGO is more busy with minifig-related stuff. Most of the little connectors have origins as minifigs utensils, that's why they often have annoying protruding bits. Other brands don't do that. If you want a bent bar, with LEGO you're gonna have to use guns (quite ironic btw), whereas with other brands you'll just use more versatile bent bars. LEGO doesn't have the best system. not true either. There are non-LEGO parts that are way more easily findable than LEGO parts. For some genuine LEGO parts (either too old or too recent), you're already excluded if you're not rich enough. It's really way more annoying & expensive nowadays to buy genuine LEGO than, say GoBricks. LEGO doesn't seem to want your money that badly, you have to be worthy. There's no such thing as "everyone can build it" unless you specifically designed your MOC for that, using a LIMITED subset of LEGO's historical palette (which is yet another exercise). Kinda. Well I can't imagine anyone posting on Ideas using non-LEGO parts, however think of recolors. They're allowed there, so that's where you need other brands, or paint or Photoshop skills. not true anymore. It depends on the bricks (fewer mould marks, better clutch). Other brands generally have better clutch anyway. Worse for children, but better for MOCers. true, and really annoying. But not even fully true, as it also takes time for LEGO's own new parts to appear digitally (well I still use the LDD, I don't know for Studio) that's so untrue, and quite the opposite. Sure, there are brands with a different philosophy, like Cobi & Mattel. Compared to those, yes LEGO uses much less specialized parts. But compared to other brands, it's LEGO that uses lots of specialized parts, and other brands that manage to do more/better using a better system overall. They have better slopes of all kinds & shapes, but generic. But again, LEGO is slowly catching up with those slope parts in the last few years, FOR A REASON. Think of all of the great parts of the last few years that you OWE to the competition (either straight copies or similar).

yeah, quite some of this & last year's new LEGO parts are in fact copies of other brands (and that's GREAT, now if only LEGO stopped protecting theirs)

that's the one part we can be sure LEGO will never produce. For the simple reason that kids will insert them deep into bricks and cry because they can't get them out. Still the the best part ever.

I'm totally all brands now, but I WOULD personally rate these MOCs differently. For the simple reason that if you're limiting yourself to pure LEGO, it's a different exercise, and there's stuff that's hard or impossible to make. Even just stud inversion is WAY easier when you allow yourself other brands. Or smoothly chained slopes. So I'm for all-brands, but that also means: I'm expecting better results when it's mixed brands. Even the hunt for new parts has been part of the game for me now btw.

and in all modern colors!

My 2 cents: I totally understand a ban on non-LEGO stuff when the website/company has ties with LEGO, or wishes to in the future - which is probably why Rebrickable took that path (I'd suspect the owner's dream is simply to end up being bought by LEGO), even though it went way too far with a banned words list lol. Fortunately eurobricks has never been much censored. But when you don't have ties (anymore), then where's the prob? I'm sure fans of the brand don't want news about other brands releases in their fav forums, but when it comes to MOCs, why bother separating? Also always remember: LEGO is not the OG. And even if you liked the system/parts of the 80's, there's stuff that has been abandonned by LEGO, that has been kept alive outside LEGO.

true but you really gotta like red then

Define rare though. An injection-moulded part is never rare. When you make a mould it's not to produce less than 50-100k parts, & that would be a small run. If you want rare, better hunt a 3D-printed prototype or something. well things have changed a lot. Even cheap brands have good quality parts nowadays. Mattel still slightly inferior IMHO, because they produce themselves. Still some brands with inferior parts, but also brands/parts better than LEGO. -metalized parts are much more abundant in chinese sets, and of a very high quality -often they have less mould marks, or better-placed ones. There are parts I only order as off-brand because the LEGO ones suck. The LEGO ingot part (which is almost always used as a detail part nowadays) looks dirty with its injection mark & the LEGO logo. I want the pristine ones LEGO sometimes shows on their packagings, and some chinese ones look like that lol (some also have worse injection marks. Lots of moulds for that part!). -they love LEGO's past more than LEGO. Want a good old 2-3 prong hinge? LEGO has abandoned them a long time ago, but other brands embraced them, and expanded on them! You'll find them in all colors and there are new mould variants. Now the color compatibility, that's where the problem generally is. But hey, even LEGO is often incompatible with itself, color-speaking. Some brands have similar but totally incompatible palettes, some have lots of custom (often pastel) colors. Also, Technic parts. On one hand, if you want classic motors & stuff, LEGO has abandoned those, so your only choice is china now. But off-brand Technic parts often suck/work less well, have too much/not enough friction, not all brands suck but if the part has an important function, better buy LEGO.

yeah it's actually perfectly depicting the Sembo one lol. And it's not me defining it as octagonal (I'd say it's rounded octagonal), it's LEGO in some legal-ish document found on EUIPO:

Also about the apollo stud, the design protection for the plain stud version has expired a long time ago. That might even be the main reason why the apollo stud was made, possibly more for protection rather than utility. Can't say for sure, it appeared in 2009, I believe the plain stud version expired around 2011 along with the normal plates & stuff. IMHO LEGO shouldn't even have been allowed to protect the same part with just a hole in it. And that design protection has been challenged more than once, but somehow LEGO is still very protected in Europe. Meanwhile when LEGO claims that another brand's part is a counterfeit, they don't seem to care about little differences (there are always subtle differences, even just the LEGO logo obviously). Sembo's apollo stud is actually not exactly the same. Sembo's hole is perfectly round, LEGO's is octagonal. And LEGO doesn't mind copying non-LEGO parts. It's fine if it's legal! I was told this the last time I got a packaged seized. They seemed very proud of it. It's to discourage you from fighting it (well, apparently someone did, & lost): The Court of Justice of the European Union recently confirmed in its judgment of 4 September 2025 that the fact that an infringement relates only to some of the pieces of a modular system (building set), the number of which is small in relation to the total number of that system, does not exempt the infringer from injunctive relief and enforcement measures (CJEU 4 September 2025, C-211/24, LEGO / Pozitiv EnergiaForras, para. 66). So that's it. One single part and LEGO owns your entire set. The question is why they can't just seize the problematic parts, instead of destroying the whole set. I have no way of getting the nice Sembo parts outside their sets. I don't even know if I've been blacklisted, if Sembo sets generally pass and they scan my packages more, or if that applies to everyone. Well, we now pay an extra 3€ to fund the customs, so they have even more time to inspect everything now.

yeah it's all about rules, even your own. I used to be a purist too, and it's not at all because I liked LEGO, I'm not married to a company, and certainly not LEGO who has itself stole the brick. It was just my unwritten rule to limit myself to parts that LEGO has released, because that was the name of the game. Like, you don't use paint and then pretend it's a pencil drawing. ...but then I changed my rules, because life's too short, I don't wanna wait 10 years for LEGO to possibly release a part in a specific color. Even when they announce one, China will be willing to sell it to me before the part even appears on PAB (which will be 6 months later minimum) anyway. And then China has SO MUCH MORE to offer as for parts. Some that LEGO is slowly copying to catch on, some that LEGO will never produce because they're not kids-friendly. So that's my palette today, ALL BRANDS. While LEGO is slowly bringing 2x2 wedge tiles, I've been using them for years, as well as 2x3, 2x4 and even 2x5 now. And if there's something LEGO is never gonna produce, it's a 2x5 anything.

"counterfeit" might not be where you believe it is. I mean, legally-speaking. I would agree that morally, those headsculpts would be considered IP (well, a SW IP before a LEGO IP). But if you take a look at what LEGO actually protects, through EUIPO (could be different in the US though), it's not such sculps no, it's mostly very generic parts. They most likely do this to ensure they can catch most of the competition through them, whereas through a very specific headsculpt, they would only be protecting one single set. I used to think that it was fine to buy any set out there, that the problem was only Lepin & sets that have minifigs looking too much like LEGO's. But I was so wrong! For years, about 30% of my purchases on Ali were seized/destroyed by customs (although they often don't tell you, the package just appears to be lost/not moving). I eventually managed to reach the lawfirm representing LEGO with customs, and yeah, most of the time they just use the apollo stud in order to claim a set is counterfeit. They don't have to look further, that part is in about every competitor's set. They (LEGO) do however have brands they're fine with, like Sluban for some reason. But they don't disclose the list. So, legally speaking, there's not much out there that looks like LEGO and isn't counterfeit. Except for the one or two brands that went as far as redesigning the apollo stud, and even there, you can't even be sure that they did enough (there's so much you can modify in an apollo stud) for that. Considering that when you buy a set -you can't know if LEGO is ok with the brand because they don't disclose a list -you can't know if any part in the set is counterfeit, simply because you can't know which parts are in the set (plenty of databases & part lists for LEGO sets, but that doesn't exist for other brands) ...you just can't know when you buy a (legal) counterfeit. Worse, you're kinda responsible when you buy counterfeit. In Europe you're not really gonna get prosecuted for that, but the customs can totally pass costs to you (they never have for me though). As for an officious list, here's what I know so far -Sluban's ok -Sembo/AreaX: LEGO HATES them. If one passes customs, it's mostly luck. It's sad because Sembo really has the best non-LEGO parts out there. But in order to get those parts you have to buy sets and there's generally an apollo stud in them. -QuanGuan: no idea. I don't remember having any QG set seized yet, but I could be wrong -Mattel: I can't imagine LEGO having the balls to seize their sets, besides they're probably friends after so much time in court. And Mattel sells everywhere directly in Europe. So Mattel 100% safe. -Lumibricks: hard to say, they do sell directly in Europe so it's probably ok. But they've been changing some of their moulds recently, so it's most likely to avoid problems with LEGO in Europe -Pantasy: same as for Lumibricks, I think that today's Pantasy is ok, and sold directly in Europe too. And I believe they're the only ones to have drasticly modified the apollo stud? (I've think I've seen that in a review, I don't have any recent Pantasy set) -Cobi is obviously ok or it would already not exist anymore -Mould King, Cada, Xingbao, Panlos & the miriad of other chinese brands: I have no idea. But LEGO can probably catch them all with just the almightly apollo stud, if they want to (so that's the only question, do they want to) So you should be pretty safe with your SW headsculpt, probably more a problem with Disney than with LEGO. Providing you can buy it alone and not in a set that contains protected designs.

I don't quite get it. Even though you have to squint in order to know, I find LEGO pretty transparent about what's a sticker and what's a print, even on 3D renders they show a little bump so that you know what's a sticker and what's a print. But that's not really the problem. The problem is that both LEGO's stickers AND prints SUCK. Well, they generally suck, but sometimes they don't (prints darker than the part are ok, when they're properly centered that is), and you can't know when they do or don't, because they're always bright and color-matching on the packaging. Sure I would rather know from the packaging if the prints/stickers are gonna suck, but 1. it's LEGO afterall and I assume they're gonna suck, 2. I can still watch a review, pretty much every LEGO set has a detailed review somewhere (can't say the same about other brands). Also, off-center prints is a matter of bad luck/bad batch, so it's not the packaging's fault. But off-color stickers/prints isn't a matter of bad batch, sucking is the standard for LEGO here. You may get a replacement printed part from LEGO if the print is off-center, but you're not gonna get a replacement part of sticker when the colors aren't matching, simply because they won't exist. Btw, same thing for -mould marks that LEGO often photoshops out of promo pictures -"gold" parts that look lacquered on promo pictures but are shitty stripey ones (that's normally limited to their 3D renders) I would also like LEGO to go back to "stickers over assembly", because 1 sticker is easier to apply than many, will leave much less gaps, and if you wanna separate the pieces you can still use a cutter. And as for prints, I would also like LEGO to do what most of their competitors do: print over assembly. We all remember the lines not matching on the Mustang. It happens all the time with LEGO. It doesn't happen with chinese brands because they print over pre-assembled parts. Yeah, for those who still manage to defend LEGO on prints & stickers, just look at what the chinese do for a fraction of the price. At worst they're as bad as LEGO, but some brands do a much better job (some also use UV printing, that has pro's & con's, personally not a big fan).

While I don't like anything that LEGO has done to BL, which fortunately isn't much yet (first they removed chromed parts - I can live with it, now they change the logo for an ugly one but I could care less), something has kinda killed BL for me, but it's not LEGO, it's simply the postage fees. BL was about placing small orders to small stores in neighbor countries, and getting your order a few days later for a few bucks. But now does it still make sense to place a 15€ order when the postage fee is also close to 15€? I have over 300 orders there, but haven't ordered much in the last few years. That's a postage fee I'm ready to spend for a large order from a store that has everything I need, but that's not what BL was about - no store had everything you needed, and you have/had to place at least half a dozen orders for a MOC. Because of that, IMHO it would make sense for LEGO to turn BL into an Amazon-like distributor, where sellers wouldn't pick/sort themselves, but deposit/send their parts/sets to the closest LEGO hub, which would then be responsible for picking & delivering (like more local PABs). Large distributors simply don't pay the same to send stuff around. The current BL model simply isn't fitting modern postage anymore. my problem with Brickowl is that it's just like BL, it has never had anything more to offer so I've never understood the point of its existence. But I would absolutely switch to Brickowl if they started supporting alternate brands. There's just no good marketplace for all the parts that LEGO doesn't produce, especially recycled from sets. Some rare brands do sell individual parts, but generally your only option is to get them from sets. Meanwhile, plenty of megabloks parts are most likely thrown away out there while they should totally be recycled the same way (other than in bulk through ebay).

The spotlight is on more than 2 parties (Ben, the Mansell, the Goreman, the BAM guys, and the police), and it also is on the other BAM franchisees. Some are previous victims, some are current victims, but some are crooks as well and had been exposed a month before the whole story caught fire. I'm talking about the chrome gold C3PO story.

I think that temporary "harassment" is the least of the problems for BAM franchisees. The name, pretty much the only thing they're paying for, is done. And if people (well, americans) boycott BAM (which would be the right thing to do and is not "harassment"), they're done. If I was owning such a store, atm my priority would be to find a way to get out of the franchise and continue my business under another name (which their contract probably forbids). And it's not because yeah, they would be fine if Ben hadn't done anything (which sounds like Scoobydoo's "if it weren't for you meddling kids"), that it's HIS FAULT. He just pointed his finger at it. At more than what he was hoping for, actually (thinking of the corrupt police).

I think the mcneff would like all of it to go into their & their lawyer's pockets, and I wouldn't be too surprised if it ends up that way. I think for safety the Mansel should have created the gofundme, not Ben.

Both are actually bad for Lego, but I don't know what's worse, between Lego becoming genericized and Lego not being the default bricks anymore. "interlocking bricks" doesn't cut it, though, as small-sized ones have become popular, and it's not "legos" if it's not compatible. I know I've recently switched from "LEGO MOC" to just "MOC" in my titles since I went all brands. he doesn't just tell, he (& others) proves

So much has been filmed & documented in other ways in this story. All we've seen from Ben's side is... film & documents. All we've heard from the other side is... "trust me" (while they ALL also film & have documents). Except from the Police's "oopsie" (if you can believe that) that worked against them. And information found by third-parties that also has worked against the crooks. I just can't see what could possibly have been done on Ben's side, that wasn't filmed or edited out, that could move the cursor to the other side even a little bit.

I don't think they do (maybe just to YT creators who'd review other brands and say legos), however they certainly do not like it at all. Saying legos/legoes is a step towards genericizes the brand (even though we're talking about real Lego sets here, but that's not even important in the story), and Lego would certainly hate "legos" becoming the next aspirin or cellophane. And there's more every day. Mormon YT channels concluding both "it has nothing to do with mormons" and "looks like typical mormon mafia". And now traces of the Amon dude trying to steal a company in 2020 (and also suing his dad) have been found. Coffeezilla should definitely dig into that, even if it has directly nothing to do with the case, it adds to the shadiness of the villain stache guy.

Some of his stunts are just jokes that for some reason some people manage to take seriously. Like, "she signed a contract stating that she can't call the police on me". That's an obvious joke. And it's also not more "illegal" than getting someone to sign a "I sell you my soul" contract. It just has zero legal value, and that's pretty much it. It's not like he tried to enforce it, or it's any enforceable. Some of his stunts, like the lottery or the small claims split, might be ones he did seriously. But it's ok because he's kinda a likable idiot, he's a Napoleon Dynamite. And stupid doesn't mean wrong. If he knew the risks, then it was stupid but he took those risks and IMHO it was well worth it. If he didn't know, that just makes him naive, still not a villain. And yeah he possibly put some of his teammates in "danger", but they're all adults, and I don't think he tricked them. I think he did a pretty good job and gave us one of the most, if not the most entertaining stories since the internet (even though it's a whole and the villains are part of it). He also exposed what needed to be. Whatever he did, you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs. And had it followed the legal route, then there would be no story (bad guys might have won, bad cops would have continued their business, and you wouldn't have heard of any of it). It's even quite possible that all of the bad actors are still gonna -legally- win. But morally & from all other angles, they've already lost.

Yeah, well to me (& I used to be a purist) it has always been about a form of art with a set of rules. It has never been about the LEGO brand to me, just the set of rules. So what I did is just move to another category with another set of rules, because there's better to do in that category (and thus also higher expectations, when judging). I also see it as an extension of digital (bricks) design, where you're never restricted on the colors & availability. In my new set of rules however, there's no room for a shoelace or a bit of plastic from a container just because they are LEGO-branded or have once appeared in a LEGO set, as to me those aren't "in-system". But to each his own. I've definitely cut a part for this AT-ST (the antenna, for the railing on the roof), but I'm still looking for better options because I still don't like the idea. Also, I grew tired of having to do hacks for stud inversion & stuff like that that other brands make dead easy. Everyone can do stud inversion now, it's not a clever hack anymore, it's just wasted time (& space) IMHO, I've just moved on. As for the changes on Rebrickable, I don't know for sure the motivations behind it. On one hand, it's true that pretty much everything you put on Rebrickable, ends up on Ali. Well, all of my stuff did (and I never cared), and I assume it's the same for everyone. So it's a form of protection for its users I guess. But if it goes as far as having an official swearlist that censors *mentionning* pretty much any non-LEGO brands *in discussions* or even private messages, that makes me think that the intentions are different. I believe that the main motivation is to make it friendly to the LEGO brand, in order to be later acquired (because for the LEGO company, having full control over sites like this, is probably worth a lot more than their true value). And that I can't agree with. Another hint is that I can't spot "Sluban" in the list of banned brands, whereas all the other chinese ones are - which makes me think that this list might be coming from LEGO itself, as LEGO has already made deals with Sluban in (/out of) court (I learnt the hard way that Sluban sets are never seized by customs like most other brands are, and it was confirm by the/a law firm that works with LEGO). So that's suspicious to me.

A few months ago the project got disabled on Rebrickable, where it didn't fit the new rules. Since then I keep being asked where to find it. So I've just put it there for everyone: AT-ST Project Guide It's pretty much the same files, including versions 2, 3 & 4. It does NOT include 4.5 as there are no instructions made for it (only a few non-LEGO parts, but still hard to make a proper manual for it), and there will not be one for the future version either (way too many hard-to-find parts). Also thanks to all those who had bought it over the last years.