I voted for option number 2. Here's my logic:
1. On the copycat argument: I don't think it is accurate to dismiss all brick brands as morally wrong or clones. As others have pointed out, the patent for the brick expired many years ago and it's also worth remembering that LEGO itself did not originate the basic interlocking brick concept, by this logic, it is a copy of Kiddicraft. While I understand that legality doesn't equate morality in this case for many, the fact that the basic brick is the same across the board provides compatibility for the consumer. Making a compatible component isn't the same as copying protected creative works.
2. On the parts and sets: Many established brands such as Lumibricks, Pantasy, Reobrix, and Mould King design original sets, develop their own pieces where necessary, and sometimes create alternative engineering solutions because LEGO still holds patents on certain newer elements. Compatibility and originality are not mutually exclusive. Obviously, brands who steal designs from MOC creators or other brands are an entirely different topic.
3. On the prices and brand allegiance: Over the recent years the average price of Lego sets has steadily creeped upwards with quality issues becoming increasingly noticeable, such as color matching, sticker use, missing parts, etc... At the same time, a larger amount each year of Lego's budget goes into marketing, not R&D. Comparing the quality between a Lumibricks or Pantasy set to a Lego set (With both alt-brick brands including abundant amounts of prints, comparable or better brick quality than lego, and even lights), and it is clear that although Lego is payed at a premium, the product itself is double or thrice the price of what it should be. I don't understand why we should owe a brand allegiance or loyalty in any circumstance, or help it maintain a monopoly, let alone one that sells overpriced products.
Lastly and on a personal note, for many people and in many regions Lego is prohibitively expensive (In my home country for example the average price for a Lego set is usually double the US price) It is only thanks to "copycat" brands that I have been able to use bricks at all. I created an account just to comment here (Hopefully I will continue to be active) but have lurked around the pirate forums for over 5 years. Ironically, I got into the theme thanks to an alt-brick set of all things and have grown to love the theme over the years.
.jpg.053112224e37f02532f45cd37f6f95ba.jpg)
.thumb.jpg.f5eeca24eef0fcd0750c6116d89b19ae.jpg)
I voted for option number 2. Here's my logic: 1. On the copycat argument: I don't think it is accurate to dismiss all brick brands as morally wrong or clones. As others have pointed out, the patent for the brick expired many years ago and it's also worth remembering that LEGO itself did not originate the basic interlocking brick concept, by this logic, it is a copy of Kiddicraft. While I understand that legality doesn't equate morality in this case for many, the fact that the basic brick is the same across the board provides compatibility for the consumer. Making a compatible component isn't the same as copying protected creative works. 2. On the parts and sets: Many established brands such as Lumibricks, Pantasy, Reobrix, and Mould King design original sets, develop their own pieces where necessary, and sometimes create alternative engineering solutions because LEGO still holds patents on certain newer elements. Compatibility and originality are not mutually exclusive. Obviously, brands who steal designs from MOC creators or other brands are an entirely different topic. 3. On the prices and brand allegiance: Over the recent years the average price of Lego sets has steadily creeped upwards with quality issues becoming increasingly noticeable, such as color matching, sticker use, missing parts, etc... At the same time, a larger amount each year of Lego's budget goes into marketing, not R&D. Comparing the quality between a Lumibricks or Pantasy set to a Lego set (With both alt-brick brands including abundant amounts of prints, comparable or better brick quality than lego, and even lights), and it is clear that although Lego is payed at a premium, the product itself is double or thrice the price of what it should be. I don't understand why we should owe a brand allegiance or loyalty in any circumstance, or help it maintain a monopoly, let alone one that sells overpriced products. Lastly and on a personal note, for many people and in many regions Lego is prohibitively expensive (In my home country for example the average price for a Lego set is usually double the US price) It is only thanks to "copycat" brands that I have been able to use bricks at all. I created an account just to comment here (Hopefully I will continue to be active) but have lurked around the pirate forums for over 5 years. Ironically, I got into the theme thanks to an alt-brick set of all things and have grown to love the theme over the years.