# Can LEGO sue its copy-cats? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 25, 2004, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-lego-sue-its-copy-cats/246930 "2004-05-25T03:31:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Meeko](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e495f1/32.png) [@Meeko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meeko)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2004, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-lego-sue-its-copy-cats/246930/1 "2004-05-25T03:31:49Z")
Well thats it basically, The building block toy… I wonder because I saw that Car commercial again with “Mega Blocks” and thought it was highly in poor taste not to use LEGO. This assumes that LEGO was the first such toy, I hope this is the case. ---
**Author:** ![SmackFu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/53a042/32.png) [@SmackFu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmackFu)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2004, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-lego-sue-its-copy-cats/246930/2 "2004-05-25T04:11:12Z")
They can sue. They have (in Canada, since Mega Bloks are made by a Canadian company). [They lost.](http://www.blakes.com/english/publications/brip/article.asp?A_ID=151&DB=blakesProperty) The article has more details. Essentially, LEGO lost because they were trying to claim the Mega Bloks copied the unique look-and-feel of the pattern of bumps on top of the blocks. But that design was originally purely functional, so it was claimed in patents that have since expired. Allowing someone to claim that a patented idea is also a unique look-and-feel would undermine the whole patent system, in that they would never expire. ---
**Author:** ![ColonelDax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/71e660/32.png) [@ColonelDax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ColonelDax)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2004, 12:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-lego-sue-its-copy-cats/246930/3 "2004-05-25T12:27:52Z")
Just noting that Lego was granted leave to appeal the Canadian decision. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2004, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-lego-sue-its-copy-cats/246930/4 "2004-05-25T14:25:26Z")
> [@](#): > > I wonder because I saw that Car commercial again with “Mega Blocks” and thought it was highly in poor taste not to use LEGO. If they had used Legos in the ad, then Lego _might_ have had grounds for suit. I’m assuming they made up a fake block because that avoids any legal problems. But the larger question, really, is why you think Lego _should_ sue or why you think Lego should _have grounds_ for suit. The most common grounds for this kind of a suit would be some kind of intellectual property claim. Let’s go through them one by one: _Copyright_ law protects original works of creative expression, such as literary works, musical works, dramatic works, pantomimes and choreographic works, pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works, motion pictures and other audiovisual works, sound recordings, architectural works. Lego blocks are none of these things. They are blocks, toys. They are not original works of creative expression. Even if Lego was the first to come up with that particular design of toy blocks, the reason for that design was _functionality_. If something is _functional_ (speaking broadly), then the law doesn’t allow you do protect it as a creative work. _Trademark_ law protects a _mark_ that identifies the origin of goods. Well, Lego does have a protected mark: “Lego.” If someone else uses that mark in connection with the kinds of goods that Lego makes, then, yes, Lego has grounds for suit. But, you’ll note, this is a reason to _avoid_ saying “Lego” unless you are, in fact, the Lego company. Related to trademarks is _trade dress_ law, which basically allows you to claim the entire shape and “look” of the goods as the trademark. However, once again, you can’t claim trade dress when the design is functional. _Patent_ law protects ideas regarding _useful things_. Ah, here we go. Lego blocks can fit into this category. However, patent law is very limited and, as a previous poster said, the patents in question have expired. In our legal and commercial system it’s very important that patents expire because, although you want the inventor of something useful to get a certain degree of benefit, you don’t want to grant him or her a perpetual monopoly. We consider it more important that competitors be allowed to compete directly with another company’s products. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2004, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-lego-sue-its-copy-cats/246930/5 "2004-05-25T15:51:32Z")
> [@](#): > > I’m assuming they made up a fake block because that avoids any legal problems. They didn’t. I haven’t seen the commercial in question, but Mega Blocks are a real toy built along the LEGO design. ---
**Author:** ![Kamino\_Neko](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kamino_neko/32/34_2.png) [@Kamino\_Neko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kamino_Neko)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2004, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-lego-sue-its-copy-cats/246930/6 "2004-05-25T21:16:21Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > They didn’t. I haven’t seen the commercial in question, but Mega Blocks are a real toy built along the LEGO design. The only difference between Lego and Mega Blocks is that Mega don’t have Lego pressed into the top of each pip. They’re designed to fit with legos (it’s part of their marketting, too.). ---
**Author:** ![sturmhauke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e47c2d/32.png) [@sturmhauke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sturmhauke)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2004, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-lego-sue-its-copy-cats/246930/7 "2004-05-25T21:24:48Z")
Well, the knockoffs aren’t quite as durable and don’t hold together quite as tightly. On the other hand, they’re cheaper. ---
**Author:** ![Trigonal\_Planar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/0ea827/32.png) [@Trigonal\_Planar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trigonal_Planar)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2004, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-lego-sue-its-copy-cats/246930/8 "2004-05-25T22:39:27Z")
The knock-offs, really, are quite crappy; downright unacceptable if you’re into lego. ---
**Author:** ![Kamino\_Neko](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kamino_neko/32/34_2.png) [@Kamino\_Neko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kamino_Neko)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2004, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-lego-sue-its-copy-cats/246930/9 "2004-05-25T23:13:42Z")
> [@sturmhauke](#): > > Well, the knockoffs aren’t quite as durable and don’t hold together quite as tightly. On the other hand, they’re cheaper. That’s rather the opposite of my experience with them. Mega Blocks hold every bit as well as Lego, and stand up to such things as being stepped on, or pried apart after idiot brothers glue them together a lot better. ---
**Author:** ![Meeko](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e495f1/32.png) [@Meeko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meeko)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2004, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-lego-sue-its-copy-cats/246930/10 "2004-05-26T04:02:21Z")
I didnt mean to ask “Can Lego sue the Car Manufacturer (Honda, I think)” I just wonder if Honda didnt want to put up the big bucks for Lego blocks. ---
**Author:** ![commasense](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/commasense/32/3017_2.png) [@commasense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/commasense)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2004, 4:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-lego-sue-its-copy-cats/246930/11 "2004-05-26T04:21:18Z")
> [@Meeko](#): > > I didnt mean to ask “Can Lego sue the Car Manufacturer (Honda, I think)” > > I just wonder if Honda didnt want to put up the big bucks for Lego blocks. Charging Honda lots of money to feature Lego in Honda’s ads wouldn’t make much sense, since Lego would have gotten nearly as much benefit without the expense of producing the ad. In fact, they should have offered to make it as easy as possible (providing their experts to make the models, etc.), or even paid Honda to be included. I’d guess that Mega may have made Honda a better offer for just that reason. ---
**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2004, 4:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-lego-sue-its-copy-cats/246930/12 "2004-05-26T04:37:40Z")
Actually there is more to this than meets the eye. Volvo Cars signed a deal with Lego to be the offical car of legoland. This agreement was signed before I saw the Honda ad for the first time. Lego then built a solid Lego [Volvo XC 90](http://car.kak.net/modules.php?file=article&name=news&op=modload&sid=1662) (check the link for some cool pictures) > [@](#): > > As the recognized leader of safety in the automotive industry, Volvo is the “Official Car” of LEGOLAND California and will work with the theme park to bring messages of driving safety to the park’s 1.3 million annual visitors. The Volvo XC90 made of LEGO bricks, although not drivable, will stand at the park entrance as a symbol of the two companies’ commitment to safety and family. > > “The partnership is a perfect fit with our ‘Drive - for Life’ initiative that focuses on affecting driver behavior and safety,” said Vic Doolan, president and CEO of VCNA. “We will be working with LEGOLAND to develop innovative safety awareness activities.” > > Recently, LEGOLAND’s popular Driving School (ages 6 to 13) and its Jr. Driving School (ages 3 to 5) were reintroduced to carry Volvo’s name and reputation for safety. As near as I can tell from the ad the Honda is CGI, the Volvo is real. I got to see the Volvo XC 90 in person back in April. When they opened the driver’s door (yes the door opens, the wheels turn and the whole thing rolls) The model makers at Lego hung a pair of giant fuzzy dice made from Legos, from the rearview mirror. 🆒 So now the question becomes does anybody have a cause of action here? ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2004, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-lego-sue-its-copy-cats/246930/13 "2004-05-26T15:05:38Z")
> [@Rick](#): > > So now the question becomes does anybody have a cause of action here? I don’t see any. What facts do you think would give rise to any cause of action? ---
**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2004, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-lego-sue-its-copy-cats/246930/14 "2004-05-27T00:12:51Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > I don’t see any. What facts do you think would give rise to any cause of action? I don’t know, I was wondering. You have one car maker signs a deal with the company that makes the most recognizable brand of building blocks in the world. The agreement is for advertising both company’s products one a building block and the other an SUV. Then another car company comes in and produces an ad for their SUV that uses CGI showing it being “built” out of very similar building blocks. Could this cause confusion in the public’s mind, and is that confusion actionable? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2004, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-lego-sue-its-copy-cats/246930/15 "2004-05-27T14:16:09Z")
Asking whether this causes confusion is not the first step in a trademark infringement action. First you have to ask whether there is a protectable right here somewhere. You’d have to argue that “a commercial showing a car made out of toy blocks” is a protectable mark of some kind. That’s going to be a real uphill battle. First of all, it’s probabaly not going to be a registered mark; you’d have to protect it as an unregistered mark. Then you have to show that the company has actually used this idea of a car made with blocks to mark its products, which I’m pretty sure it hasn’t. Then you have to show “secondary meaning”; that is, in the mind of the public, showing a car made out of toy blocks is already associated in their minds with a particular manufacturer. The only other thing I can think of is a copyright infringement action and that’s not going to be easy either. Did they actually copy the commercial? Now, remember, you can’t protect ideas or storylines. You have to show “substantial similarity” between the two commercials.