Ralph_S

Thanks for the advice. I know some of them in person and have already told one of them when I actually saw him yesterday. The rest will have to be e-mail this weekend. I'm pretty sure the kids are actual kids. Cheers, Ralph

Right, apparently I'm 8% evil. I'm a bit insulted actually. It would have been 6% if I hadn't admitted to not believing in god! Cheers, Ralph

Thanks for this nice review. I own one of these sets and knew the winch wasn't electric (of course, a spring can also be used to store energy, so it can deliver power), but I agree that it's not really useful part. I also had one from the Coast Guard helicopter and after that had been under tension for a while, it didn't work as well as it used to. I do like this set, though. It's got some great parts and the design of the models is quite good. You are absolutely right that it looks as though it shouldn't be too difficult to turn it into a military helicopter. In fact, apart from the number of rotor blades it looks very much like a civilian version of a helicopter that the US Army used to have: the Sikorsky CH-54A 'Tarhe', also known as the 'Skycrane' The plane reminds me most of a Pilatus Porter. Cheers, Ralph

Glue it? I wouldn't do that if I were you, because you'll never ever be able to take it apart and you'll never by able to change it (except by adding parts to the existing structure, of course). At the moment you might think it's the best thing since sliced bread, but a few years from now you may actually find that you don't like it all that much, that there are some things that you want to improve or that you'd rather use the parts to build something new. Many of my models are complicated and often quite fragile, but I have displayed them at public events. It's not unusal for something to break, but so far it's never been too difficult to fix things. Granted, I've never taken them on a nine-hour plane trip, but I have taken them on pretty lengthy journeys by car. Just pack it very carefully in s small box with some packing peanuts around it. Some bits might come off, but you'll avoid major structural damage. You might want to see whether there are things you can do to make it a bit stronger and if you really do want to add some strength by glueing things, use adhesive tape where you can't see it. That can always be removed. One more obvious suggestion, don't leave your MOCs on the floor were you can step on them or otherwise hit them with your foot! Cheers, Ralph

You're right. They were taken down sometime on Monday, even though I didn't send them the list of copied pictures yet. It would appear that they're either reading this thread or your comments did the trick. Many of the other copied pictures (by other builders) are still on-line though. I'm not sure what to do about those: send LEGO the list, contact the individual builders so that they can contact LEGO themselves or publish them here. Cheers, Ralph

You're welcome. You may know that building planes is one of the main things I do with LEGO and I'm very particular about what I like, so my comments might be a bit more critical than those by other builders. That doesn't mean I dislike what you're doing. I think it's a great subject to build and think you've done a pretty good job. The propellors shouldn't be too expensive on bricklink. BTW, they work really well in water, that is until they get caught in the 'pondweed' Cheers, Ralph

I'd been meaning to post my opinion about this MOC a few days ago, but as I was thinking about it got interrupted by a telephone call and forgot all about it. Other people have already told you that the wings really ought to be more rectangular and you might move them forward a bit. What lets the MOC down is the shape of the fuselage. If you look at just about any picture of a triplane, you'll see that the top of the fuselage is practically horizontal and that the bottom slopes up towards the tail. Right now, the tail on yours looks as though you ran out of parts. Trying to stick closer to that shape would also solve the problem you are having with the pilot sitting too low. You'll see that the wheels tend to be attached to fairly thin stalks quite far under the fuselage. That's not easy to replicate on something this small, but you might try to see whether you can build something abit less bulky then you have now. Despite this, the overall look is pretty good. I think the propellor looks fine, although you perhaps replace it with an actual propellor part. I like your use of a 4x4 round brick for the engine. It might not be the most sophisticated thing to do, but it looks the part. The stickers are nice. I also like the wheels, although I suspect they're a bit too big. The pilot looks fine to me and the pictures are nice and well-focused Cheers, Ralph

I agree. We're not going to stop plagiarism. The only thing any of us could do to prevent our pictures from being copied is to not post them online, and since we enjoy looking at each others pictures, that's not really an option. The only thing LEGO could do to prevent plagiarism on their site is to pull the plug. I don't think it is reasonable to expect them to do that. Considering how easy it is to recognise pictures that don't belong to the people who post them -even to somebody who doesn't follow brickshelf, MOCpages and Flickr and even without a watermark- I do think I can reasonably expect LEGO to make more of an effort. In that light, I'm happy to report that it would seem that the pictures I mentioned in this thread have already been removed Cheers, Ralph

The vehicle Ed Diment and myself built for the Neo Classic Space website (L.U.R.C.H.) weighs about two kg. It uses universal joints in the drive, because it was driven through the front wheels and those were also used for steering. You can see part of one in this picture: All kinds of things failed on early versions, but never the universal joints. We put them through a fair bit of abuse without any problems. I have no experience with the newer three-long ones, though. The vehicle is powered by an XL motor and it is geared down. We tried driving an early version of the vehicle without any gearing and as a result it was going so fast on its fat wheels that it was almost impossible to control. The motor certainly doesn't lack oomph (to use a scientific term ). Cheers, Ralph

I don't know how many examples I have to show you of watermarked pictures or pictures that are otherwise easily recognisable as not belonging to the person posting them in order for you to realise that watermarking makes little difference. I know it is well-intentioned, but it is missing the point, because the issue isn't that my pictures are being stolen, but that there are copied pictures all over that particular site. If I were as concerned about my pictures as you seem to think I am and I would be hell-bent on preventing people from copying my pictures, rather than watermarking the thousands of pictures that are already on the internet, I'd keep my things on flickr (where who can download them is restricted) and simply delete the rest. I have contacted LEGO not just about my pictures. I've told them that I've found many more pictures that have been copied and intend to contact every builder that I know whose pictures are among them. Rather than having all of them contact LEGO on their own, I've offered to send LEGO a list of all the copied pictures that I already managed to find, so that they can remove them and to then inform the other builders. This is not about my pictures. What I think is harsh is that people start attributing a motive for raising this issue to me that I don't have and then start questioning whether I am building in order to get credit. Ralph

It's clear to me that many posters here completely misunderstand my motives. Of course I don't like it that other people copy my pictures, but that is really not the core of the problem. I have no doubt that my pictures will ultimately be removed by LEGO. My motivation is not that I feel I should be getting credit. I get more credit than I could ever expect. Every single one of the MOCs in those pictures has been blogged on the Brothers Brick and most have been on Gizmodo. Whenever I take models to public events I have people walking up to me and asking me whether I am Ralph S. or Mad Physicist. Me getting credit really is not an issue. I understand that many of you feel that if I would watermark my pictures they wouldn't be copied. I also understand that you mean well, but you are completely missing the point. Even if it were practical to add a watermark to all my pictures already on the internet, it wouldn't solve the problem. It's obvious that most people who copy pictures and pretend that they are theirs don't give a toss about whether or not it's blindingly obvious that they are lying and don't give a toss about anybody telling them that what they are doing is wrong. Me adding watermarks wouldn't stop people from copying my pictures and it certainly wouldn't stop them from copying other people's pictures. This would still be happening if each and everyone of us would be adding watermarks. I've given plenty of examples and could give you loads more. My own pictures only matter in this conversation because without them being copied and a friend of mine informing me about it I wouldn't have been aware of the scale at which plagiarism occurs on Lego Universe, and I used them as an example to show you how common it actually is. The reason why I even brought it up here on Eurobricks is because somebody else here had already noticed the problem with LEGO Universe and I felt I should mention that I had already informed LEGO about it, because I've seen it happen with my own pictures. I also felt that it would be useful if our ambassador contacted LEGO about it. Finally I was curious as to why people commit plagiarism in the first place. That's it. Ralph

I know you mean well, but this is exactly the type of response that I described with "People start to gloze over plagiarism and then start pointing a finger at the person whose work is being plagiarised". Getting recognition is nice, but certainly not my reason for building. I was building with LEGO when the only people who got to see what I did were my parents and sister and the internet was something only a few scientists and soldiers used. I also have no problem whatsoever with people building a model that is either inspired by what I do or is a copy of the model that they build themselves. That is flattering. I have regularly supplied people with detail pictures of how the MOCs are put together in order to help them. I actually did that earlier today. I have tried to reason with people who commit plagiarism on numerous occasions. In response they either delete the comment (I've seen it happen on MOCpages and on flickr) or they flat out deny doing it. They already know that what they're doing is wrong, but apparently value the attention they get more than doing the right thing. It's not just my MOCs either. Really, just spend a little time browsing Lego Universe. In just half an hour I found more than a dozen pictures that are either my own or that I recognise as belonging to other LEGO builders I know and no matter how many extenuating circumstances any of us cane come up with, that's just wrong. LEGO have been informed and they have a responsibility to do something. I'll keep you informed of what I hear back from them. Ralph

You don't have to feel sorry for me, although I am a bit ticked off, mainly by some people's attitude that this sort of thing is OK or that I myself am somehow responsible. I'm surprised nobody has asked me yet whether I've ever used illegal software, in an attempt to show that I am equally guilty of copyright infringement. The only thing that I can do to make sure that my pictures aren't copied is take all of them off line. BTW, if you've ever bought anything through shop@home, you've already got an account. Ralph

And what would be the point of that? What is to keep them from claiming that it is their real name (just about everybody uses an alias anyway) or that they have the original creator's permission to copy the picture? Don't say it doesn't happen. I've had a kid on MOCpages tell me that he had the builder's permission to copy a particular picture, seemingly oblivious to the fact that I was the builder in question. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the kids who have copied my pictures don't know what they're talking about either and are unlikely to be the builders of the models in question. The person who first posted the B-1 wrote that it took him and four friends three hours to build, which struck me as very funny, because it took me at least 80 hours spread out over four weeks -excluding the time spent on planning for it and sourcing the parts. His 'future pirates' is the admiral's launch of Lego Monster's HMS Hood, BTW. He does know how to pick them. Another one calls the Hawkeye a 'lego plane car' and writes this as the caption: 'its a plane that is a car two'. One of the people who commented on it seems to suspect there is something fishy going on as well, because he writes: "I'm very sorry to type this.. But this is not a car. I forget the exact number given to this radar aircraft.. I can indeed say this is not a car. I've also seen this elsewhere. Can you add more pictures of it, or tell us more about the aircraft? Please." All of this makes me wonder whether moderation is limited to making sure that there is no swearing or name-calling and whether there actually even is a person who moderates the content. Thanks Bricksmith and Cyclone Titan. Skinny boy, I'd already be happy if they were to add a way of reporting plagiarism and perhaps moderate the content better. Cheers, Ralph

The sets they sell at Windsor are nothing really special. Because the park indeed is no longer 100% owned by LEGO they won't get exclusive sets like cafe-corner compatible buildings, UCS sets or the Emerald Knight, for instance. They will normally have a fair few recent sets and occasionally will have sets there at a considerable discount. Last time I was there -early this year- they were selling Sentai Fortress sets at half price and I have been told that those have discounted further. Unlike most normal shops they will have a Pick-a-Brick wall. The price is fairly steep, but they sometimes have quite rare parts. I've been able to pick up quite a few pearlescent grey bricks and plates, for instance -which you normally won't find in sets. Cheers, Ralph

Watermarking doesn't work. At most it can serve as a deterrent, but there are plenty of people who don't hesitate to copy pictures with the watermark still on it . Here are a few watermarked pictures that obviously don't belong to the person who posted them: http://www.flickr.com/photos/23973567@N04/3374542814/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/23973567@N04/3374518588/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/23973567@N04/3373701445/ on flickr no less. I also hope you don't honestly expect me to manually watermark and replace the thousands of pictures I've uploaded over the last four years. In my opinion the most effective way of dealing with plagiarism is that we as a community agree that it is not acceptable and report it if we see it. This whole attitude of "you should be flattered", "they're only kids", or "this is the internet, and this is normal" is part of what keeps it going. Users shouldn't think that they can get away with it. Flickr, MOCPages and brickshelf have systems for reporting plagiarism in place, the first one through 'report abuse' and on the two others you can email the admin and the copies will be removed very quickly. On flickr and MOCpages, if a user does it again, their accounts are removed. MOCPages has really improved in the last months, because many users themselves are keeping an eye out for plagiarism and report it if and when it happens. I've been told that MOCs of mine have been copied there as well recently, but by the time that I was told about it the copies had already been removed. Most of my newer pictures are hosted only on flickr, where I can restrict who can download them to people that I know. On brickshelf I only post low resolution pictures. Most of my newer pictures on MOCpages aren't actually hosted there, but on flickr instead. It isn't 100% watertight, because if you can see something there's always a way of copying it, but it does throw up a barrier. I'm fairly certain that those pictures of mine that have appeared on Lego Universe have been downloaded from MOCPages or brickshelf. The only thing that I can do to prevent this is to simply not host anything there. I would consider that a loss. On LEGO universe you can report plagiarism through customer service, but they're not really equipped to deal with it. That site simply has a problem. It's a commercial activity hosting content of which the copyright is owned by a third party. I hope that the ambassador program and my latest e-mail to LEGO can get them to do something about it. Cheers, Ralph

Well, I suppose I should take that as a compliment then, because it keeps happening to me too. I can't go watermarking all the pictures I already have on line and I don't think it stops people from copying pictures either, with the watermark and everything. The only thing it might do is make it easier to recognise who the pictures belong to. Any sort of discussion about plagiarism always ends up this way. People start to gloze over plagiarism and then start pointing a finger at the person whose work is being plagiarised. Have you taken a look at the challenges page at LEGO Universe? If not, I suggest you do. You'll see that just about anything on there that isn't clearly built by children is a copy of somebody else's work. Plagiarism is endemic there and IMO LEGO should do something about it. Cheers, Ralph

I don't feel a mild sense of bemusement. I know there are a lot of people who will say something along the lines that they're just kids and this is just the internet, but IMO plagiarism undermines something that we all value -openly sharing pictures of our MOCs through the internet. I'm pretty sure these kids know that what they're doing really isn't right, even if it does make them feel good. Cheers, Ralph

They do say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. I still don't get what anybody gets out of being praised for something they didn't actually do. I can understand students committing plagiarism in hopes of getting a decent grade without having to do the work, but what's the incentive here? Praise? That doesn't make sense to me, because being praised for something I didn't actually do would make me feel guilty rather than good. If LEGO indeed hand out prizes, it's a different matter. I know. It's pretty horrific. It makes one appreciate the old-fashioned simplicity of brickshelf. Cheers, Ralph

I really don't understand why people do this sort of thing. What sort of enjoyment can you get out of getting credit for something you haven't actually done yourself? I'm not going to do anything until I hear from LEGO again, either in response to my 2nd email to customer service (which I don't expect to get before Monday) or through our ambassador. Cheers, Ralph

Thanks. I'm not sure whether posting a comment will help, but I appreciate it. I have contacted LEGO again (via e-mail) and have told customer services that there are a lot more pictures, not just from me but from other as well. I'll keep you informed of what I hear back. This is one of the reasons why stopped posting on MOCpages as well several months ago. The problem there has decreased considerably, because Sean Kenney has been very diligent in removing them. Of course, I hadn't realised that the people who do this sort of thing have simply moved elsewhere. Adding watermarks isn't an option for the hundreds of photos I already have, of course, but I'm certainly considering it for the new ones. I am also seriously considering taking my creations away from MOCpages and brickshelf, because unlike flickr, there are no restrictions on who can download what. Cheers, Ralph

I think that the most likely reason for why they haven't is because they're not really aware of it. If you don't follow what's going on on brickshelf/mocpages/flickr odds are that you won't recognise that any of these pictures don't belong to the persons who posted them there. Furthermore, I suspect that few AFOLs ever check out what is on the LEGO universe pages, so won't even know that other people are copying their pictures. I wouldn't have known that my bomber is on LEGO universe either and wouldn't have complained to LEGO if I hadn't been told about it by one of my friends on flickr. The only certain way of stopping it is to pull the plug on these challenges, but sadly that would also affect the vast majority of children on there who do post their own models. Cheers, Ralph

On Thursday I was told by a friend of mine that my B-1B had been entered in one of the build challenges on the LEGO Universe homepage. Since I didn't enter it, I decided to have a little look round. I've contacted LEGO through their customer service Thursday evening. I've already heard back from them. Customer service obviously aren't really the people who should deal with this, but I had no other way of contacting anybody. They apologised and will forward the message to the people who run LEGO Universe so that they can see what they can do to prevent this sort of thing. They'll also remove the pictures and the user. It's pretty much all I could hope for. However, there's a bigger problem. In the meantime I've spent some time browsing LEGO Universe and I found another copied picture of my B-1, two pictures of my E-2C Hawkeye (both by the same person), and one each of my F-15E Strike Eagle and my Mi-24 Hind as well as several other MOCs I recognise as belonging to particular people. I've made a list and I'll probably be contacting them. Just about everything on there that doesn't look as though a little child built it is either a set or a copied picture. I hate plagiarism with a vengeance and I don't understand what people gain by getting credit for something they didn't make. It's disgusting. LEGO have a problem if they have pictures on their website that are not copyrighted to the people who post them there. Perhaps this is something one of our ambassadors could raise with LEGO as well. Cheers, Ralph

The fire truck has definiately been improved. Very nice. Cheers, Ralph

I have visited the model shop in Windsor. They do have a stash of elements that never appeared in sets, quite possibly from the time when there were fewer limits to what they could order. Examples would be trans clear 1x4 tiles, green finger hinges and green train windows. The Windsor creation centre has a model of a Boeing 747 in the colours of Virgin Atlantic suspended in its lobby. It's mostly built with pearlescent grey parts, which were ordered from Billund specifically for this purpose. They can still order certain elements from LEGO that you can't get in current sets. They are known as "Q-list elements". The selection is fairly restricted though. Cheers, Ralph