Mylenium

Interesting, though it seems to me that animating this stuff deeply inside a model would be like pulling teeth. Any automated features planned like auto-detecting gear trains and forward/ inverse kinematics? Also, and apologies beforehand for highjacking this thread, what's up with the import bugs? I was just trying to import my model (https://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?/forums/topic/177422-moc-classic-car/) and the black turned all trans orange and some parts were oriented wrongly, regardless of whether using the .io file or the original .mpd. A quick look on the forum didn't reveal anything and the orientation issues appear on too many pieces to be parts-specific IMO. Mylenium

Just for those who may not be following me elsewhere a little catch-up. This Easter Egg model was built for a contest. For more details check out my blog: https://myleniumsbrickcorner.wordpress.com/2020/05/03/egged-all-over/ Mylenium

You probably will never get a full answer on that due to LEGO's strict policies. At the end of the day, though, I don't think it's much different than with other products that got recalled or never released - most of it will likely simply be pulped, ground to powder and burned because separating the packages and sorting the pieces would be way too much work. I also have seen photos of some unreleased sets being distributed in some user groups, so there's a chance they get used sensibly, after all, if only as parts sources. Of course there's also this whole mess with journalists, Ambassadors and the like that may get info and pre-release sets, sometimes merely giving the impression of a set being on the roster when info leaks, but never actually being released. Other than that one could probably make it one's life work to collect all the relevant info like the production numbers on the seals and boxes and tracking when the sets appear in which outlets, how quickly they are sold out, how fast LEGO can re-stock and so on. Sometimes you can see that a set has only been produced three weeks ago, other times half a year. This is again a point that makes me think that LEGO can still hit the brakes on some sets very late in the process even if e.g. press photos have already been released, furthering the impression that sets got scrapped when as a matter of fact none were ever actually produced. If one understood this logic and the internal processes behind it, one could likely make some good predictions about release dates and win some bets.... ;-) Mylenium

I recently created a competition entry for one of them official LEGO #buildtogether contests run by some user groups and media outlets and cobbled together a "Classic Car" sort of thing. For more details and free instructions check out my blog post: https://myleniumsbrickcorner.wordpress.com/2020/04/28/azure-vs-black-round-two/ You can also find the MOC on Rebrickable: https://rebrickable.com/mocs/MOC-41023/Mylenium/classic-car/#comments Here's some pictures to get you stimulated:

Yes/ No/ Maybe/ Perhaps/ Likely not. LEGO is part artistry, part simple technical problem solving. You could get all deep into the psychological and philosophical side of it, but suffice it to say that a three-year-old doesn't fall into that category at all (scientifically proven) and that even many older kids and adults struggle with this kind of "abstract" thinking. You could even go so far as to open up an endless discussion about how some people may be able to capture the appearance of an object, but the underlying structure is terrible, not just in engineering terms. And specifically to microscale you could also argue it it takes a particular "oversight" thinking and map-like spatial awareness, and there are studies on that as well why and how many people have difficulties with that. Don't get me wrong, as I wrote I admire anyone who does amazing micro scale/ nano scale stuff, but at the same time it seems all to apparent to me why not more people are doing it for pretty clear reasons. Mylenium

Your argument falls apart at the single, most important point: Abstraction and perception of the world around you. Posed differently, one could argue that we should live in a world overflowing e.g. with painters, because ultimately you can do great things with toilet paper and a cheap pencil, but alas, we're not in that world. A huge fraction of the populace just hasn't any such inclinations. And even within the remaining artistically inclined crowd it may simply not be for everyone. Just as much as you have to be able to create this stuff, you have to be able to enjoy it based on the same principles. As far as I'm concerned I enjoy looking at other people's work of that kind, but I honestly couldn't be bothered to get into creating nano scale stuff myself. I simply prefer other things and have different aspirations. It's about more than cost and storage space. Mylenium

I'm not clear why you even think it's an issue. The whole front part of the hinge construct merely slides along the central axle. It has no rigid connection to the central fuselage. Likewise, the sides of the hinge thingy can move freely. There is nothing here that would even warrant a discussion about illegal building techniques or whatever you are trying to see in those images. There may be some weird behavior actually building it due to tolerances causing some tension, but on an abstract engineering level everything should zero out and be stress-free connections. Mylenium

People are still going to want to buy LEGO even in a pinch. Prices are currently going up even because people are sitting at home twiddling their fingers. So why would you cut off your own legs by not supplying enough stuff to fill demand? I honestly don't follow your logic. And whether or not there are any long-term effects remains to be seen. If there are any, then I feel just the opposite of what you state might be the smart move - just don't fire out so many super expensive sets and give people a few smaller, more affordable sets they can still buy on a limited budget. Sure, LEGO are not going to see any significant growth for a while, but earning half a dollar on a small set is still better than earning zero dollar on a big set nobody can afford... Mylenium

That is so cool! I'm almost tempted to re-create it just for giggles and adding it to my shelf. Mylenium

Not really. Why does everyone assume bringing back old parts would be as trivial as pulling an old mold from storage? Even if that's the case, it may require a massive overhaul or a complete work-over to be compatible with contemporary molding machines. Either that or an old mold still needs to be replaced with a completely new one for the same part. At the end of the day reviving an old mold can be just as costly or worse even than creating a new one from scratch. Mylenium

Well, if it's true, then this sounds like a stupid way to go about such matters. I mean budgeting is part of every production/ manufacturing planning, but it should not be dependent on such simplistic metrics and absolute factors. Mylenium

To bad then that's just not how CAD to 3D conversion works... Mylenium

Most likely you might want to use one of those LDraw to Program X conversion tools or scripts. There used to be a Python script for Blender. No idea how up-to-date it is and obviously it would require the entire LDraw parts library to exist as converted files somewhere so it can be loaded. Other than that the usual OBJ and 3DS exports will do, though you lose all hierarchical info, steps etc. and also need to fix textured elements. personally I never minded this part, as in my line of work as a professional 3D artist I'm used to reorganizing CAD data with millions of pieces, but it sure isn't for everyone. You can spend days doing this repetitive and tedious stuff. Mylenium

Well put! Mylenium

Lovely! :-) Mylenium

As long as you don't use any original artwork, i.e. the logos, poster type etc. there's nothing wrong with that. There is no such thing. People who want to rip it off will do so and for a million reasons disclaimers and copyright notices are not legally proof. They are just friendly reminders, nothing more. Mylenium

Long and short: No. It's one thing for some people to indulge in their nostalgia or movie fandom and buy an ugly 200 Euro pirate ship or a 300 Euro Ghostbusters HQ, but a whole different thing to turn this into a whole series that can sustain itself. Putting on the rose-tinted glasses usually is a bad business adviser. And let's be honest with regards to the specific issue: Pirates (and some other subjects) are dead in the overall pop culture, so assuming LEGO would go out on a limb to transform this into an all out theme seems to me more than a major stretch of the imagination. I would also argue that Ideas more or less has become a place for "Here's your tree house set, now shut up." fast turnaround solutions where they can quickly cash in on highly demanded singular sets, not a test bed for the viability of long-term series. In fact as per my own casual observations I tend to think that most themes wouldn't last long, given how quickly sales numbers seem to drop off after a while and how little some of those sets are even being discussed on social media or forums like this very one, which to me is pretty much an issue with a lot of LEGO's releases these days. They don't appear to "have legs" anymore and perhaps that#s also why LEGO have fallen into this "more,more,more; bigger, bigger, bigger" pattern on some level... Mylenium

It looks lovely the way it is. It may not pass as the real St. Elias, but it would be a wonderful addition to any Steampunk-ish city. :-) Mylenium

The police, fire patrol and tuned versions are post-1990, though, i.e. Western custom cars. They never existed way back then. Mylenium

Nope. You're wrong on so many accounts. It's not as easy as "emailing your lawyer" nor is anything in copyright law ever "obvious". It's all riding on expert opinions and a judge/ jury understanding the arguments presented in a legal case. Even those photographers cashing in still had the burden of proof the first time around and only after setting a legal precedent, i.e winning their first case or getting a settlement with the person the sued acknowledging their wrongdoing. Anyway, this could be endless and it's getting tiring, so I'm retreating from this discussion.... Mylenium

Nope. Publishing something doesn't magically imbue it with some form of extended protection beyond its initial creation. It only empowers you to determine the usage rights by ways of specifying a specific license type like GPL, BSD, CC0 etc. and to some degree control proliferation of your works. And you are also wrong that doing so is limited or defined by commercial use. If I publish an image online and just don't care about limiting its usage it is free to be used in commercial works, for personal use and whatever else. I may just need to spell that out somewhere and may stipulate that at least a citation of the original source may be required. Other than that it seems to me that you assume that copyright law has some magic aura that protects you from all evils or at the very least allows you to reclaim your works by just pointing fingers. That's just not the case. You proactively have to defend and keep track of your works and any "letting it slide" attitude weakens your case. Ultimately that's why I as an media and graphics artist never have bothered. I've seen stuff of mine being used on Discovery Channel documentaries when it was never intended to. Should I have sued the production company and be caught up in this for years? An utter waste of time and not worth the effort. So once more: If anyone took this logo thingy to court, this would end up being the same. At the end of the day it would be something like 2 million lawyer fees against 2 million paid in damages and nobody gains anything, if this would even be considered a winnable case on LEGO's behalf, which I don't. Let's just leave it at that or else this ends up like those pointless "Someone stole my precious MOC/ instructions." threads... Mylenium

In my designer way of thinking I sure could, but yes, it would not necessarily be enjoyable to look at without sunglasses. ;-) Mylenium

Sure, but how would you defend your doodle if someone still misused it? That's ultimately the point: It comes down to that old "the letter of the law vs. its interpretation and practical application vs. whether you can afford the litigation". That's no different with this logo here. On a plain legal level you would have to proof malicious intent to begin with and then some... Again: If LEGO were to make a fuss about this artwork, it would be going nowhere. Too many ways to explain this coincidental similarity away. :P Mylenium

If only it were so simple. It's easy to say that everything comes with a built-in copyright, but the legal interpretation is a million times more complicated. Not every doodle on a piece of paper is art, after all. This could be endless. Suffice it to say that I stand by my initial statement: This would be going nowhere. If I were a judge I'd immediately dismiss he case because LEGO have exceeded their statute of limitation and not filed a complaint in a timely manner. You know, formal aspects are just as important in legal matters and I don't even need to give you a million other reasons dealing with the actual merits of an alleged copyright infringement that may be relevant. A potential case just doesn't hold water. Mylenium

...but equally irrelevant. Even copyright doesn't last forever and is subject to different regulations across different countries. Mylenium