fred67

Trust me, when it's my time, it's not something I'll have to "admit," I'll come right out and say it - and it's not too long now, just over a year. Hmmm.... so young he must be counting the Star Trek movie and not the show (1966), which predates me by 1 year (I'm 48). I can hear it now... "there was a show?!?!"

Excellent work, the build of the house is really nice. Good job. I have to wonder if Grandma was last seen last Christmas when she went to get the presents she hid under the house. EDIT: I also like how you did the wrapping paper!

This! Although, thankfully I haven't cared what other people think for quite some time. If people actually say something (like ask me if I'm buying for a child) I tell them that I'm the LEGO collector in the family; I have some on display at work... a lot of people simply don't know what's out there. Luckily I work in a creative environment, and I'm not the only one with toys - mine just happen to be LEGO. I just gave a coworker a Mystery Machine (and got an extra Velma and Daphne) because I know she's a Scooby Doo fan... she loved it. So with this, as well as other things in life, anyone that would think of me badly about something they obviously know little or nothing about isn't worth my concern.

Yeah... I don't normally save boxes, but Ideas boxes and Architecture boxes (at least the smaller ones) are maybe a little bit more "special" than standard boxes, and I save those.

The security is working for me, but the search still causes an error. The only thing I've changed is downgrading my Ubuntu install back to 14.04 and from 64 bit to 32 bit. I get "sorry, an error occurred while searching" when I click on "discover." Works on firefox, not chrome.

Me, too. The first year I had LEGO trains (the crappy Railway Express), we put them around the tree as best as possible (only had the track from two Railway Express sets, so a lot of curves, four straights). I did that for a couple of years (adding a lot more track). Then we moved the tree to a different room with a shaggier carpet and I stopped; now I set up a couple of tables with the winter village and the trains. I bricklinked the Christmas Train. Last year, after adding Santas Workshop + a bunch of trees and making a handful of my own reindeer, I bought another table and do an "L", but I don't have any pictures.

The history is well known; of course TLG is going to give their own whitewashed version of it. But for quite some time they sold bricks identical to the kiddiecraft ones. Just like MB, who sold/sells bricks just like LEGO... but then added their own into the mix, as did Kre-O and Best-Loc. The simple fact is that things are never quite as simple as we make them out to be, and the way the world advances is by taking existing ideas and improving on them - and that's exactly why patents expire. Yes, it's true, sometimes people just capitalize on the ideas of others and don't innovate, but none of these major companies have NOT made unique bricks. I'll repeat what I said earlier - the patent system is not perfect, but ALL of these major companies have benefited both from the existence of patents AND the fact they expire, as have we all. EDIT: I want to add more to that last statement... it's not just the products they produce, but EVERYTHING along the line in the manufacturing process. All of those things - the patents for ABS formulas, tooling machines, injection molding processes, even shipping processes... they ALL benefit from the expiration of patents. EVERY major company does, Apple does, Samsung does, every major electronics manufacture has both been protected by patents, and taken advantage of expired patents. You can't blame MB or Best-Loc without blaming virtually EVERY single major company out there, INCLUDING TLG.

At closer inspection, that's for a pack of eight... although it's apparently not available right now (although it should just say it). But still, that's $2.00/each. The 6x6 ones are available for $12 - for a four pack, so $3 each. I understand you may not need more than one, but the prices are not really out of line for what you're getting. There are other options, though, and you can check ebay. You can also buy other containers and do it yourself, like these ones that I used that are admittedly not nearly as nice: Dice cases to display minifigures. by Fred Haab, on Flickr You can also buy baseball or softball size display cases from the container store and build up the display you give your family member.

So then if we can limit it to a couple of things - like copying things that TLG has a legitimate trademark on (minifigures) or a licensed trademark (superheroes and other licensed property), then while I would agree that those companies "might" be doing something that is not only illegal, but "bad" (as the topic says), including "bad" for TLG - but not "LEGO" as a product, because in vast majority of cases people know exactly what they are getting. If you're paying $5 for a Gucci bag, you're not getting a Gucci bag. It's really that simple - and it's not to say that the world should exist around a "buyer beware" mentality, it's not a justification for companies trying to pass off products as a name brand, it's that consumers can't be stupid about it either. ... OK, I initially posted a really long rant, but will simplify it to this: If you're paying $5 for a Gucci bag, you're not getting a Gucci bag - and you KNOW you're not getting a Gucci bag. Does that make it bad for Gucci, or the bag industry in general? No. Gucci didn't lose a sale... you can't tell me someone who wants a genuine Gucci bag would pay $5 for one and think they're actually getting a Gucci bag. Now, when those companies are trying to sell you that knockoff for $1000, that hurts the industry... but none of the LEGO clones are actually purporting to be LEGO. Most don't even mention LEGO on the packaging, claiming to be compatible with other plastic bricks. Now there are some that do try to confuse people with looking like LEGO, and then I'd say that yes, those companies are bad and hurt LEGO, but otherwise people should know what they are buying.

ME Models sells 4x4 and 6x6 versions.

And yet there should be no confusion with LEGO, it doesn't even say "Compatible with LEGO" on it... and "ugly" is in the eye of the beholder, in this case. It's certainly not my kind of set, but I know plenty of people who bought Best-Loc sets (especially military themed, since TLG won't do it) and were very happy with them. Again, TLG didn't invent the interlocking plastic brick, so to call any other company that makes plastic, interlocking bricks "clones" is really just... wrong. So yes, this thread is asking a question, but we can't even agree on what "clone" means. Did Chevy "clone" Ford? Did Ford clone Benz? When companies create sets that really look like existing LEGO sets, with LEGO trademarks (or trademarks licensed to LEGO, like the superhero minifigures), then you can argue those companies are doing something wrong and that their existence may hurt TLG, but other companies making interlocking bricks, even ones directly compatible with LEGO, are doing nothing wrong, they aren't violating patents, they aren't violating trademarks, and if someone is confused about whether or not it's LEGO is entirely on them - again, it's like confusing a midsize family sedan made by Chevy with one made by Ford - let's face it, there are a surprising number of similarities between car brands on similar class vehicles. And you're ignoring the fact, as I pointed out before, that these companies often DO make bricks that TLG does not - so yes, they actually innovate. MB actually has a number of bricks that LEGO enthusiasts would love TLG to "clone." That creates competition, and competition is good for us, but it is (or can be), more importantly, good for TLG, because it forces them to innovate as well - and we all like at least some of the innovations they've come up with over the past 20 years, which makes us want to buy more. It's actually a wonderful ecosystem to have, and while patent law might need some work to deal with some specific issues they never thought of when they were writing the laws (mostly technology related), they've done an excellent job at allowing innovative companies to prosper without stifling competition. So to answer the question, if there is a clone brand - you know, one that is actually ripping off sets that LEGO is currently making, and anybody is "fooled" into buying one thinking that it's genuine LEGO, then both TLG and the consumer suffer. But I submit that this is extremely rare.... it's hardly the same as someone making look-alike Gucci bags that are actually hard to tell apart. The problem I have with what you're saying is, again, while LEGO might be the best, Best-Loc, Kre-O, and MB all make some very good quality products (again, even if not on par with LEGO). What they are making is no more a rip off or "clone" than what Ole Kirk Christiansen did. I also submit, again, some third party businesses like BrickArms, BrickForge, etc., etc., are doing GOOD for LEGO, making LEGO more valuable for many enthusiasts. So before the CMF elf, before the LOTR sets, people who were into medieval fantasy could build an elf army. If they had no such option before, they would probably be buying less LEGO than they would have. We might not even have what I consider to be one of the most beautiful sets EVER made - The Emerald Night - without Big Ben's Bricks. I guess what I really am saying is, if we really want to discuss this, we have to nail down what "clone" means, but if anyone thinks that "clone" means any compatible building bricks that aren't made by LEGO, then I cannot take it seriously. Again, if anyone thinks only TLG should be allowed to make 1x1, 1x2, 2x2, 2x4 bricks, for example, then you should argue only one company should be allowed to make nails, or screws, or loose leaf paper and binders.... it's just patently (no pun intended) absurd (IMO).

I know Disney didn't write Cinderella, but I'd definitely associate Cinderella with Disney at this point... sadly, maybe, but true.

You're confusing copyright with patents. Your book is copyrighted, and protected for a lot longer than your lifespan. And once it's out of copyright, it's in the public domain. Patents expire precisely to encourage competition. If patents didn't expire, our technology would be decades behind where it is right now as most companies are happy to rest on their laurels while protected by patents while competitors build on what is already there, and the fact of the matter is that pretty much all companies benefit from both the existence of patents AND the fact that they expire.

^^ Don't get me wrong, there's definitely a resemblance.... I guess I kind of look like him when I'm wearing glasses. Maybe I should shave (my hair is not gray, only my beard, it adds 15 years to my appearance - which already isn't all that great).

And yet LEGO was THE clone brand for many years. The world isn't so simple, and many of these companies (including MB) have introduced original bricks that TLG has never made. They spend their time and money researching, too, even if not to the extent that TLG does. EDIT: I also shudder to think what the world would be like if we applied your logic to everything else. You could only get your smartphone from apple, and it would cost several times more than it does; only one company could make PCs, only one company could make laptops, only one company could make cars, bikes... there's a reason patents expire.

Agree with Aanchir... that's kind of the point that voters narrow it down to a few sets to be reviewed. I agree most of the submissions are useless and crappy, that people use the site to show off mocs when there are clearly other sites more suitable for that. But it is what it is, and there have been great sets that came out of ideas, so I don't see how it's not "good."

Others can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think what people are excited about is the prospect of a female dress piece with posts instead of studs, and that doesn't make her taller than the male minifigures. Hopefully they'll make a standard slope dress piece like that, and I'm thinking a lot of us are happy about that prospect. I did a ballroom dancing MOC and actually got a complaint from someone that the women were taller than the men, and wanted me to fix it. Yeah... but if you saw what I looked like right now (with reading glasses), you could say it was me, too (and I'm not that old - under 50, but my beard is quite gray), so I think it's fairly generic.

^^ w.r.t. brickarms/brickforge/altbricks/brickwarriors and a slew of others, the fact is that you need to give the people what they want. For a very long time we were stuck with what companies offered us, and despite knowing what we wanted, it was easier for them to say "no" and not offer choices (look at AT&T before the breakup). Nowadays there is still a lot of corporate mentality that our choices are what they offer us, but they are way behind the times and companies need to adapt to the modern world. Anyone that doesn't believe TLG is intently looking at what these third parties are offering is delusional - as time goes on, we get more and more "official" versions of what these entrepreneurs have been giving us for years. It makes no sense today to be a LEGO "purist." Why wait 10 years for Big Ben type train wheels? Or elf armor or weapons? And, of course, they offer us things TLG never will, like modern weapons. I think of LEGO like computer operating systems or game consoles - it's silly to argue about which one is better, the answer is always that it's the one that gives you what you want (or at least the most of what you want).

Ahh... even when I switch to firefox (on a clean install of Ubuntu Linux), it says it's an unsecured connection. On firefox I can add a security exception; I think why Chrome still doesn't work is that you need to approve each page, so the search function must count as separate and just fails. I will use firefox for now, but I think the Ideas security certificate expired.

Ideas doesn't work for me anymore. I click on "Discover" and get a search error every time. I also keep getting "site not secure" warnings because it keeps trying to redirect the browser to use https instead of http, but apparently it's not actually using secure data (SSL). I gave it a few days, cleared the browser of all cookies, and still not working.

Yes. Sadly. It's what the world has come to. Should honest people have to buy locks and security systems? Should honest people have to go through TSA security checks at the airport (or be extorted out of time and money to bypass)? So when the idea to have a waiting period (I think I said a day or so, but even an hour would work) gets shot down, I don't get it. If someone's a fan of LEGO and wants to participate on this board, they'd happily register, maybe reply to a confirmation email, and have a short waiting period. I think the only people it would put off are the ones not really serious in participating anyway, others would wait. But if, instead, the people that run the board want to ask a few minor questions, then yes, that's what we now have to put up with.

My usual reaction when so many people vote the latest series as the best is to get annoyed that people have such short term memories... they get excited about a figure or a piece, and suddenly the whole series is better than previous ones. But not this time... I've never seen such an outstanding array of figures and new pieces, I'm absolutely amazed. Bravo, TLG. I may go back to buying full boxes.

Except patents for the bricks and techniques themselves have long since expired, all TLG has right now, aside from any NEW patents, are trademarks. They can't trademark the brick. They've successfully defended the trademark for the minifigure in some countries.

Hmmm... reading the Fair Play Brochure. First of all, I like how they glace over the history of LEGO and it not being an original product to begin with. OK, you added the tube, congratulations... that was almost 60 years ago, and you think the patent should last that long? I guess not - most competitors use tubes, but why do they then think they have special protection on the 2x4 brick with tubes? The trademark on the minifigure is understandable, but the 2x4 brick? I also look at the panasonic ad, and have to ask them to prove it's LEGO. I understand their concerns, but as long as it's not called "LEGO," it's almost always "fair play." MB and Kre-O are prime examples. The "clone" brands that are actually copying LEGO sets and packaging to try to look like LEGO might be a concern, but they are casting a pretty broad net. In fact, if you wrote a book of reviews of LEGO sets and wanted to include pictures (particularly including minifigures and 2x4 bricks), they're claiming you have to have their permission.... no, I really don't think you do. When you buy a set, you're not constricted by any particular special license.... you might not be entitled to make a whole picture book out of it, but some percentage is fair use. No, but it doesn't cost much more (*) for them than it does other companies. TLG can charge whatever they want for products, but I can't stand when people try to claim it's for some magnanimous reason like better quality plastic - TLG is now the biggest toy company in the world and their profit growth has exceeded their sales growth almost every year for the past decade. That means higher average profit margins across the line. Period. They are free to do it - I'm a capitalist, they're a capitalist company, and they can charge what they want to maximize their profits - but make no mistake that the high prices are purely motivated by profit. (*) It's debatable that they use a "higher quality" plastic than clones, but any additional cost is going to be a tiny fraction over MB or other major brands. In the end, it's still just ABS plastic.

I vote we consider responding to EVERY SINGLE new user post with "welcome" in order to boost your post count to be a form of spam.