Lego figure knockoffs

[rkold]

Help me out here. For starters, I do not want to buy bootleg anything. That said, Last month I bought a set of mini figures off amazon. They were not marketed nor labeled as Lego. I thought I was in the clear so long as I wasn't buying something labeled as genuine.

First, I can't believe I am arguing this because I am very pro-fan works and feel like copyright has been extended far too much in this country. It warms my hurt that fan-fiction can become legit, like 50 Shades of Gray (not that this is a good book, but it is legit) or the book on Mycroft Holmes that Kareem Abdul Jabar just wrote (though Mycroft Holmes is no longer under copyright) I love parodies and appreciate fan drawn comics. However this smacks of recasting. I collect various types of dolls and there have been huge issues with recasting and how it is hurting the hobby.

Why are these bootleg/recasts? Because all of these characters in the sets are copyrighted. Lego has to pay money to Marvel or JK Rowling or Disney or DC Comics or Universal to use the characters of Hulk or Harry Potter or Elsa or Batman or Claire. Do you really think whoever you bought these from has given any money to the actual copyright holders of these products? Thor or Loki or Rapunzel as names are out of copyright, but the minifigs in question are specifically Thor and Loki as conceived by Marvel comics.

I think it is pretty clear that these figures are recasts since they are "compatible" with Lego and just looking at them they look just like the official Lego pieces.
http://www.lego.com/en-us/marvelsupe...35178aa7a294a1
Lego Captain America

http://www.amazon.com/Marvel-Avenger...iglink20284-20
Fake Captain America

Yes, there are differences, but to someone who is just buying a toy for their child, is it really that obvious? I'm glad you knew these weren't Lego products, but it sounds like 123LuckyMom thought they were.

These are obviously a little too similar if parts from these can be used for actual Lego minifigs. I suspect since these are all shipping from "abroad" that they are seconds or merchandise taken from the factories actually making Legos and being sold on the black market. It happens with dolls, I would not be surprised it happens with Legos too.

The issue of being a bootleg/recast is more than whether something steals the logo of a company though. If I published a book called Larry Planter but used all the text from Harry Potter, it would still be plagiarism even if I didn't claim I was JK Rowling or this was the 8th book in the series.

[MamaMolly]

Ok, I get what you are saying. But what about Mega Blocks vs. Legos? Mega Blocks can be used with legos, the sets are compatible, just different brands. MB aren't bootleg Legos, and both brands have generic figures (like a cop) as well as specific characters (like Sponge Bob). So if I've got my head wrapped around it, I guess the issue of bootleg comes into play when talking about the characters?

So help me with this one: Let's talk purses. Let's say I see a bag at a flea market labeled Chanel. It was quilted leather, has the double CC on the front, came with a dust jacket, box and everything, but at $20 and with a label in chinese I know it is not authentic. To me that is clearly bootleg. But what about the bag at the next booth in the flea market that is exactly the same but instead of the CC logo it has a GC logo. Or a GG. Is that bootleg? When an obvious detail of the 'trademark' is glaringly different?

[rkold]

Ok, I get what you are saying. But what about Mega Blocks vs. Legos? Mega Blocks can be used with legos, the sets are compatible, just different brands. MB aren't bootleg Legos, and both brands have generic figures (like a cop) as well as specific characters (like Sponge Bob). So if I've got my head wrapped around it, I guess the issue of bootleg comes into play when talking about the characters?

So help me with this one: Let's talk purses. Let's say I see a bag at a flea market labeled Chanel. It was quilted leather, has the double CC on the front, came with a dust jacket, box and everything, but at $20 and with a label in chinese I know it is not authentic. To me that is clearly bootleg. But what about the bag at the next booth in the flea market that is exactly the same but instead of the CC logo it has a GC logo. Or a GG. Is that bootleg? When an obvious detail of the 'trademark' is glaringly different?

I believe that yes, generally that GG logo if everything else is done to make it look like a Chanel bag, is a knock off. I think copyright issues can be a little more confusing with fabric goods specifically vs. non fabric goods.

It's not just that the characters are copyrighted though. I don't own any MBs but I can't imagine the actual blocks are exactly the same as Legos. And from the images I am seeing on-line, no one would take a MB figure be it a firefighter or a licensed characters (Smurfs, Barbie, Power Rangers etc.) for a Lego minifig. Yes, you could play with them all, but the design of the figures are different. You can't take the hands off a MB Firefighter and stick them on a Lego minifig firefighter and they would certainly look "off" if you could successfully do it. MBs are a legitimate other building product, the ones are Amazon are recasts or some other sort of counterfeit goods, they were either made by literally recasting lego minifigs or are some sort of factory seconds/products taken from factories. This is not a product that the makers spent time designing.

Look, if I took a copy of 1989 by Taylor Swift, ripped it on my laptop and then burned a new CD and had my DD make a cover for it, I still wouldn't be allowed to go out there and sell it. It's still a counterfeit good even though it is obviously fake. (It gets complicated because I believe you should be able to give it away for free while RIAA says no, you can't.)

Personally, I would be concerned about the quality of these items. These toys have not gone through any sort of testing to see what sort of paints or plastic is used and they could be dangerous. These are not Lego products. These are not toys released for children to play with in another country. These are items that are counterfeit and they are being sold from "abroad." They've had no sorts of inspections anywhere.

EDIT

As consumers we all have lines in the sand we draw regarding counterfeits. I for example have no problem if someone wants to take a Lego MiniFig and make their own Custom Sherlock and John from Sherlock. I have no problem if they want to sell them. I do have a problem if they recast minifigs to make Sherlock+John minifigs and sell them on a mass basis.

Clothing knock offs are different. Knock off designers don't tend to actually buy the latest Versace, take it apart, use those pieces as a pattern to cut out and then mass produce. Instead they tend to take the structure or the color. It gets illegal and into counterfeits when brand names are stolen and the design is mimiced as close to the original as possible.

[Melaine]

I thought they were legit because they said Marvel brand.

[rkold]

I thought they were legit because they said Marvel brand.

You're welcome to contact Marvel but I'm pretty sure they're not legit and Marvel has not given them permission to use their brand. Again, I could rip a Taylor Swift CD and say it's Taylor Swift, but that doesn't mean I have permission to do this. I'm sorry that you were taken in, but it's just an example of how pernicious counterfeiting is. Generally, companies only sign on with one particular manufacturer of a singular product because otherwise it would be conflict of interest. It's why Barbie is with MB only and not Lego and MB doesn't have any Marvel characters.

I shared the links with the person I know who works at Lego and they are contacting their legal department to look into having these products removed for being counterfeit.

[MamaMolly]

I believe that yes, generally that GG logo if everything else is done to make it look like a Chanel bag, is a knock off. I think copyright issues can be a little more confusing with fabric goods specifically vs. non fabric goods.

It's not just that the characters are copyrighted though. I don't own any MBs but I can't imagine the actual blocks are exactly the same as Legos. And from the images I am seeing on-line, no one would take a MB figure be it a firefighter or a licensed characters (Smurfs, Barbie, Power Rangers etc.) for a Lego minifig. Yes, you could play with them all, but the design of the figures are different. You can't take the hands off a MB Firefighter and stick them on a Lego minifig firefighter and they would certainly look "off" if you could successfully do it. MBs are a legitimate other building product, the ones are Amazon are recasts or some other sort of counterfeit goods, they were either made by literally recasting lego minifigs or are some sort of factory seconds/products taken from factories. This is not a product that the makers spent time designing.

Look, if I took a copy of 1989 by Taylor Swift, ripped it on my laptop and then burned a new CD and had my DD make a cover for it, I still wouldn't be allowed to go out there and sell it. It's still a counterfeit good even though it is obviously fake. (It gets complicated because I believe you should be able to give it away for free while RIAA says no, you can't.)

Personally, I would be concerned about the quality of these items. These toys have not gone through any sort of testing to see what sort of paints or plastic is used and they could be dangerous. These are not Lego products. These are not toys released for children to play with in another country. These are items that are counterfeit and they are being sold from "abroad." They've had no sorts of inspections anywhere.

EDIT

As consumers we all have lines in the sand we draw regarding counterfeits. I for example have no problem if someone wants to take a Lego MiniFig and make their own Custom Sherlock and John from Sherlock. I have no problem if they want to sell them. I do have a problem if they recast minifigs to make Sherlock+John minifigs and sell them on a mass basis.

Clothing knock offs are different. Knock off designers don't tend to actually buy the latest Versace, take it apart, use those pieces as a pattern to cut out and then mass produce. Instead they tend to take the structure or the color. It gets illegal and into counterfeits when brand names are stolen and the design is mimiced as close to the original as possible.

Thank you so much for holding my hand through this! I felt like something was 'off' but was having the hardest time pinpointing it, and your posts really helped me clarify my thoughts.

My DH and I have had a long standing argument about an umbrella he wouldn't let me buy. (stupid thing, I know!) It had a really, really ugly, not-even- close but wearing the right color clothes non-Mickey looking mouse on it and the word MEYOKE was printed on it. I thought it was hysterical, and a prime example of a failed attempt at bootlegging. DH said that because the intent was to make a fake MM umbrella, no matter how cruddy the execution, it would have been unethical to buy it. Let's just agree we won't tell him he was right. Ok?

[rkold]

Thank you so much for holding my hand through this! I felt like something was 'off' but was having the hardest time pinpointing it, and your posts really helped me clarify my thoughts.

My DH and I have had a long standing argument about an umbrella he wouldn't let me buy. (stupid thing, I know!) It had a really, really ugly, not-even- close but wearing the right color clothes non-Mickey looking mouse on it and the word MEYOKE was printed on it. I thought it was hysterical, and a prime example of a failed attempt at bootlegging. DH said that because the intent was to make a fake MM umbrella, no matter how cruddy the execution, it would have been unethical to buy it. Let's just agree we won't tell him he was right. Ok?

Sorry for the late response, I want to apologize if I made you feel bad. It's been good for me to help me articulate why I take so much issue with these toys and not all the fan made items I would buy happily and appreciate immensely. For me a lot has to do with mass production and the fact that these fake mini-figs do trick people. Recasting has really hurt one of my hobby communities and created an environment of distrust with second hand sellers and that makes me really sad.

I really want to stress again that this is a line everyone needs to draw for themselves, I just wanted to make clear that these toys were not like the 18 inch dolls that look a little like American Girls but aren't at Target or MegaBlox.

In the case of the umbrella, I admit, I probably would have just laughed and I would have been tempted too. (It's more an example of copyright infringement vs being an actual recast.) I think what would hold me back is just the fact the umbrella has never actually been inspected for sale and so who knows what it is made out of. Things sold in Chinatown are not necessarily legally ever sold in China or any other Asian country. Other countries do have different safety regulations (and views on copyright) than the US, but when something is mass produced I do have concerns if that item(s) hasn't undergone any sort of regulation because it is counterfeit.

[MamaMolly]

Oh no worries! I really appreciate your feedback. The Meyoke Mouse umbrella wasn't in the USA, and it was in a country that has a lot of counterfeit goods for sale. Right now we are living overseas and fake bags, shoes, etc. etc. etc. is for sale everywhere. Seriously. Want a Chanel tea cup? Hermes more your style? Prada perhaps? And they are very bold about it, there is no hiding it. It rubs my American sensibilities the wrong way.