[HN Gopher] Lego Microscope
___________________________________________________________________
Lego Microscope
Author : freddypaulo
Score : 347 points
Date : 2021-04-23 12:32 UTC (10 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (github.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
| seesawtron wrote:
| How about a paper based microscope developed by Manu Prakash at
| MIT? [0] Its supposed to cost 50 Cent.
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foldscope
| etrautmann wrote:
| This was developed at Stanford right? That's where Manu Prakash
| works and that link says Stanford as well.
| seesawtron wrote:
| Studied at MIT, opened his lab at Stanford. I am unsure about
| where the intellectual property lies.
| mhb wrote:
| _where the intellectual property lies_
|
| Leeuwenhoek?
| boringg wrote:
| Great project, next one can you make an electron microscope?
| Invictus0 wrote:
| I met a guy at PennApps several years ago that built an STM
| microscope. Pretty neat project, I went and found the link [0].
|
| [0] https://devpost.com/software/angstroms-matter-imaging-atoms
| kazinator wrote:
| https://i.imgur.com/Kfc8XIW.png
|
| Sorry, couldn't resist.
| busyant wrote:
| I know a chem prof who built a Lego spectrometer.
| https://publiclab.org/wiki/lego-spectrometer
|
| Legos are just wonderful.
|
| edit: I know nothing about woodworking or crafting any building
| materials, but I always wish I could perform those types of
| projects. And whenever some potential project comes up, I think
| to myself, "but I could build it with Legos."
| jonplackett wrote:
| Would be great if Lego jumped on board projects like both of
| these and released them as kits.
|
| They'd only need create a few 'scientific' bricks to make them
| work. Not that different from Mindstorms.
| adolph wrote:
| Lastly will be the precision Lego 3D printer in which one may
| print Lego compatible parts including the Lego 3D printer.
| em-bee wrote:
| oh, i am soo waiting for that. you can already print
| compatible bricks now, but the results are not quite there
| yet, but that's totally the future. instead of buying sets
| in a shop i'd lofe to just print out the parts at home. one
| nice thing is that, since the parts are so small, it's much
| easier to deal with print failures, because reprinting a
| broken part is much easier than reprinting a whole model.
| sombremesa wrote:
| > Legos are just wonderful.
|
| One of the most fascinating things about HN is how people will
| come out in droves to bash the environmental impact of mining
| cryptocurrency, but legos are just wonderful - nevermind the
| plastic waste.
|
| There must be a name for this phenomenon.
|
| Obviously this post will get downvoted with no real rebuttal -
| more idiosyncracies of the quality platform that is HN.
| escape_goat wrote:
| I prefer it when the commentary on Hacker News does not
| extend to hot takes. I am sure there are many hypocrisies to
| be observed on HN, but you are drawing a patently false
| equivalence between the carbon footprint of cryptocurrency,
| which if it produces value, certainly does not do so
| directly, and the impact of the plastic pollution caused by
| lego pieces, one of the most heavily conserved categories of
| plastic object in the world.
| sombremesa wrote:
| Say what you will, but any post on HN that even mentions
| cryptocurrency in passing has an environmental alarmist as
| the top upvoted post whereas here any such thing will be
| downvoted to the bottom.
|
| > I prefer it when the commentary on Hacker News does not
| extend to hot takes.
|
| Seems like you don't speak for the hivemind. Hot takes get
| upvoted on the regular around here. Just not when they
| don't conform to the echo chamber.
|
| I found a name for the phenomenon that I was looking for, I
| think.
| cbsks wrote:
| Waste?? I still have my legos from my childhood. No plastic
| wasted here!
| sombremesa wrote:
| That plastic will outlast you, though. When considering
| environmental impact it's prudent to look beyond a couple
| hundred years - which I admit we suck at as humans.
| em-bee wrote:
| and it will be handed to my kids and grandkids, and they
| will pass it on. most bricks will hopefully not end up in
| a landfill.
| sephlietz wrote:
| I don't think you need to search for a psychological
| explanation.
|
| I think it is probable that many people think the benefits of
| Lego far outweigh the benefits of cryptocurrency mining.
| Ygg2 wrote:
| People at CERN: Hold my particle accelerator.
|
| Lego: Ok.
|
| https://home.cern/news/news/experiments/using-lego-study-bui...
| tzs wrote:
| > edit: I know nothing about woodworking or crafting any
| building materials, but I always wish I could perform those
| types of projects. And whenever some potential project comes
| up, I think to myself, "but I could build it with Legos."
|
| I bought a case for the Raspberry Pi camera that has a LEGO-
| compatible back and a small LEGO set (10692) specifically for
| making things to hold the camera where I want it. It has worked
| great.
|
| Question for LEGO geeks: my set only has one L-bracket, and it
| is quite small. Looking at other sets at local stores, they
| also only have one or two small L-brackets.
|
| Is there some way other than L-brackets that people use when
| they want some LEGO assembly to connect perpendicularly to some
| other assembly?
|
| Or should I just order an assortment of brackets from a third-
| party LEGO brick marketplace site, like this [1].
|
| [1]
| https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?catType=P&catStrin...
| pbhjpbhj wrote:
| You can put a flat Lego piece perpendicular between two rows
| of studs. I don't think it's quite as secure as having an
| L-bracket though.
| em-bee wrote:
| it also stretches the studs apart a tad to much, so it's
| not recommended.
| tzs wrote:
| That's almost what I ended up doing, except rather than
| putting the flat piece between two rows of studs, I put it
| on top of the studs and had adjacent stacks to stabilize
| it.
|
| Two flat pieces back to back are very very close to the
| width between the sides of two rows of bricks separated by
| one row of empty studs.
|
| Here is a photo [1]. Here it is with the three top braces
| and the cable holder removed so you can see everything [2].
|
| This the LEGO compatible case I'm using for the camera [3].
|
| [1] https://imgur.com/a/ggNe5uM
|
| [2] https://imgur.com/a/jz525N7
|
| [3] https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01F19WI0O/
| wongarsu wrote:
| In addition to brackets also consider hinges [1], like the
| standard 1x2 hinge [2] or for higher load a combination of
| e.g. [3] and [4]. There are also various solutions using
| Technic parts.
|
| I'd honestly just order what you need from bricklink.
| Alternatively get used Lego by weight from ebay. Around here
| you get a kilogram of unsorted, good quality Lego for EUR20.
|
| 1:
| https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?catType=P&catID=22
|
| 2: https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=39
| 37...
|
| 3: https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=30
| 36...
|
| 4: https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=30
| 38...
| blacksmith_tb wrote:
| This pattern is what people call 'SNOT'[1]. As my 10yr old
| has moved up to more complex sets, the percentage of those
| increases, sicne they allow designers to achieve different
| effects. I would personally recommend the 1x2 or 1x4 blocks
| with studs on one side, those are fairly sturdy.
|
| 1: https://swooshable.com/snot
| Dachande663 wrote:
| Please note, the plural form of LEGO is LEGO, not Legos. As per
| LEGO themselves[0].
|
| [0]
| https://twitter.com/lego_group/status/842115345280294912?lan...
| jerf wrote:
| The Lego corporation is welcome to care about that for
| trademark reasons, but the rest of us don't really have a
| need to do so. "Legos" is clearly in common usage, failure to
| YELL ABOUT LEGO IN ALL CAPS and all.
| retSava wrote:
| Ugh Lego and trademarks. My wife and I had Lego threaten to
| sue us for trying to import "legos" of mass destruction, it
| seems. We ordered a lego-compatible kit, which is ok I
| think, since it's only the lego figure that is patented
| Lego, the logo and name of course trademarked to Lego, and
| any brand cooperation to respective rights holders (eg Star
| Wars).
|
| However, a kit without Lego names or logos, and without
| Lego-figures, and without any branding or copy of existing
| Lego-kit, should be ok.
|
| But no. In some way, our customs withheld the package and
| we had lawyers for Lego threaten to sue us if we claimed
| rights to the package. They attached the Lego figure patent
| with the threat. We said, burn it, forget it, and
| acknowledge that we can sleep at night again please, but
| they forgot the last part.
|
| It was a kit worth about 10EUR, and we have hundreds of
| EUR's of Lego. Now we've stopped buying Lego. Also, less
| plastic crap.
|
| Not to sound bitter, but the big friggin majority of kids
| toys industry is shit and the world would be a better place
| without it. Sorry for the steam :S.
| [deleted]
| jacquesm wrote:
| You're right to be bitter, especially so because Lego has
| a pretty sordid history in this respect, the only reason
| they exist is because the founder copied someone else's
| IP and made a bundle of money on it. At the root of every
| great fortune there is a great crime. Oh, and the
| original inventor committed suicide. Those little
| details.
| em-bee wrote:
| the patent for the lego figure is expired too. they still
| have a 3d design mark on the figure which bluebrixx is
| working now to overturn.
|
| you tried to privately import a single box? i can
| understand lego going against commercial importers, but
| private shipments of individuals who don't have any
| resources to defend themselves, that's just ridiculous.
|
| _However, a kit without Lego names or logos, and without
| Lego-figures, and without any branding or copy of
| existing Lego-kit, should be ok._
|
| and they are. but you have to make the effort to defend
| yourself against the accusations, which a commercial
| importer can do, but it's totally unfair to put that on
| individuals for a single set.
|
| which set exactly did you try to import?
|
| there are a few large importers in germany, you may
| consider those. avoids the hassle...
| eigenket wrote:
| Where are you from? In Britain I'm pretty sure I've never
| heard anyone say "Legos", it sounds very American to me.
| jerf wrote:
| My main point here is that you probably don't run around
| saying LEGO, in all caps, not singular vs plural.
|
| I understand why the LEGO corporation does it, but it's
| their problem, not ours, and we don't really need unpaid
| lego consultants running around lecturing people about
| the "correct" way to refer to them.
| eigenket wrote:
| Yeah I was just surprised by the assertion that
|
| >"Legos" is clearly in common usage
|
| Given that I don't ever hear people using it.
|
| Personally I get faintly annoyed by people saying "legos"
| the same as I would by people saying "sheeps" instead of
| sheep when referring to multiple, although I don't think
| I've ever corrected anyone over it.
| munificent wrote:
| _> Given that I don 't ever hear people using it._
|
| I certainly do. The people around you are not a uniform
| sample of all communities on Earth.
| eigenket wrote:
| That was exactly my point. The guy was saying people
| shouldn't correct an "incorrect" thing which is in common
| usage, but I was trying to emphasise that it isn't common
| usage everywhere.
| hprotagonist wrote:
| i remember being galled by it in the late 80s, so this
| debate, at least, has been going on for some time.
| 1024core wrote:
| > My main point here is that you probably don't run
| around saying LEGO, in all caps, not singular vs plural.
|
| WHAT? DOESN'T EVERYBODY SHOUT WHEN THEY SAY LEGO??
| em-bee wrote:
| we do when we step on them
| frosted-flakes wrote:
| I think it's fairly obvious why they want people to refer
| to them as a brand--they don't want to lose their
| trademark. If LEGO becomes so generic as to lose its
| association with the company that created it, then they
| lose out to all of the copycat companies. Velcro has done
| the same ("hook and loop, one side's a hook, the other's
| a loop"...).
| mitchdoogle wrote:
| Strange because as an American I've almost always heard
| to them referred as Legos. As a kid, my friends and I
| said, "let's play with Legos". My parents would say " get
| these legos off the floor". Seems odd to me to think of
| these phrases without the "s" on lego
| eigenket wrote:
| I have a pet theory - in north america you have a popular
| snack called an eggo (pluralised to eggos) thats
| basically a waffle.
|
| I think americans started calling lego legos because they
| were already calling eggos eggos. In the uk and europe
| generally we don't have eggos, so we don't have legos.
| em-bee wrote:
| the catchphrase from the advertisement is "leggo my
| eggo", where leggo means "let go" which can't have an s
| appended. i have never had them so i am not sure, but i
| don't think they are that popular, and i haven't seem
| them referred to in plural
| gbear605 wrote:
| As a kid, I heard people say the phrase "legos my eggos",
| (since the "leggo" had lost al of its association with
| "let go").
| j4yav wrote:
| Please, the Eggo corporation would prefer you refer to
| them as one EGGO or multiple EGGO waffles (tm)
| eigenket wrote:
| Interestingly the company initially wanted people to call
| them "Froffles", but people apparently called them
| "eggos" due to the fact that they taste eggy. Then the
| company changed the name to "eggo" to reflect that.
|
| I checked the wiki page and thought the contrast between
| the two approaches is interesting.
| greenwich26 wrote:
| More likely, the Americans lengthen the e in the first
| syllable into almost a diphthong, like /eI/, and shorten
| the "o" in the second syllable into a schwa kind of sound
| that can comfortably be followed by /z/. Meanwhile, in
| British and many European accents, the first syllable is
| short and strongly stressed /e/, and the o is /oU/, and
| you can't add an s without contorting your mouth in some
| horrible way. Which is why British people are so
| disgusted by "Legos". Try saying it with an American
| accent.
| unbalancedevh wrote:
| As an American who grew up playing with and saying
| "legos," I've never heard anyone pronounce it the way
| you're suggesting.
| eigenket wrote:
| Yeah thats probably a more reasonable explanation than my
| theory. On the other hand its pretty common to say silos,
| speedos (both for swimwear and slang for a speedometer)
| and flamingos in British english and they have very
| similar endings.
| tragomaskhalos wrote:
| It seems to be a fairly clear-cut geographical divide -
| Americans always pluralise, Britons never do. Without
| knowing but based on other lexical splits, I'd expect the
| majority of the rest of the Anglophone world to follow
| British usage, with Canada going either one way or the
| other. Usually Americans can cite 17c usage as a
| precedent - not in this case !
| em-bee wrote:
| you are of course right, and people have been trying to get
| the word lego to be used as a common term for all lego
| compatible bricks, but that's dangerous as for now lego can
| stop anyone from publishing anything about alternative
| brands using the term lego. so they have to avoid doing
| that or will get in trouble. better to avoid the term lego
| altogether and just call them bricks.
| shoefindortz3 wrote:
| You might not really need to avoid using the term in a
| way that is understood by the general public. There are
| quite a few (United States) precedents for losing
| trademark if a term becomes genericized. For example:
| Asprin, Escalator, Flip Phone, etc.
|
| There is a wikipedia list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
| List_of_generic_and_genericize...
| dividedbyzero wrote:
| I use "bricks" (or the very neat tearm "Klemmbausteine"
| in German) in any context where Lego legal might want to
| interfere, and stick to Lego/Legos otherwise. It's a
| common term beyond any reasonable doubt by now, and
| corporations really shouldn't pry their greedy tentacles
| that deeply into everyday life.
| em-bee wrote:
| right, i have a hard time avoiding the term lego at home
| with my kids too. the main problem for me though is that
| i am quite disappointed with how lego treats competitors
| that i just don't want to promote the lego brand anymore.
|
| btw: german seems to have developed two terms. i don't
| know where it originated, but bluebrixx (and i don't know
| who else) uses the term "noppensteine".
|
| we'll have to see which term becomes more popular. both
| are descriptive, but "noppen" is a rather rarely used
| word which feels a bit wierd when you are not used to it.
| [deleted]
| incanus77 wrote:
| Jesus, I'm gonna stop reading comments on LEGO posts here
| since every time there is a grammar war.
|
| I and everyone I know has been calling them LEGOs since I was
| a kid in the 70s; that's good enough for me.
| throwaway287391 wrote:
| Even you're misconstruing their recommendation. "LEGO is
| always an adjective" implies there is no plural form, because
| there is no noun to begin with. You're supposed to say "LEGO
| brick(s)", apparently...
| fnord77 wrote:
| I don't think we should allow corporations to dictate how we
| use language.
| tkahnoski wrote:
| Anyone know of an alternative site to buy bare lenses? Trying to
| find something where I wouldn't fork over the international
| shipping fees.
| skeletonjelly wrote:
| As an Australian I share your issues! Interested to see if
| there's any responses
| MarkusWandel wrote:
| Note how this is built in the "stacked" method, i.e. old school
| Lego. Even with technical parts, this was uniquely accessible. My
| proudest achievement was a smooth running, jamproof pump for
| elevating marbles; you can see it from about 0:27 in this old
| camcorder video:
|
| https://youtu.be/Mw3dUbRfMSw?t=24
|
| These Legos encouraged engineering thinking all the way and were
| the defining toy of my childhood.
|
| Modern Legos are stunning. Look, for example, for the Rubik's
| cube solve machine that can twist a (lubricated) cube to
| completion in a few seconds. However they're no longer stacked
| from bottom to top; they're built "inside out" and the best tool
| to come up with a design for them is probably a CAD program.
| Stunning results for those who have put in the time, but not so
| encouraging for tinkerers just starting out. So it's nice to
| still see "old school" stuff being built.
| app4soft wrote:
| JFTR, There are few other projects on Lego-based microscope
| design on GitHub[0], for example _IBM 's MiscroscoPy_[1].
|
| [0]
| https://github.com/search/?o=desc&q=lego+microscope&s=update...
|
| [1] https://github.com/IBM/MicroscoPy
| napolux wrote:
| what's the magnification of this? I see 100u from the video, but
| is there any measurement?
| notanote wrote:
| From the paper:
|
| For the high-magnification objective we find M = 254x. For the
| low-magnification objective we find M = 27x.
| robochat wrote:
| This reminds me of the Lego seismometer:
|
| https://mindsetsonline.co.uk/shop/lego-seismometer-kit/
| jimmySixDOF wrote:
| Back in 2017 I supported a Kickstarter for Foldscope - The
| Origami-inspired Paper Microscope. I got a classroom package and
| they are still in use for all I know.
|
| Foldscope is analog and priced to fit low income countries STEM
| needs but this Lego hack is nice too.
|
| [1] https://www.foldscope.com/
| kuu wrote:
| Interesting. It's a pity that shipment costs to my country
| multiply the price by 5 :\
| snypher wrote:
| Yes, even $10 for the paper microscope is too much. It was
| designed to be cheap to increase access to instruments and
| make them more likely to be used. Selling them in this way
| really makes me wonder where the profit goes. For comparison
| I have a Carson Microbrite 60x-120x and it was $12.
|
| Edit: as an aside, how do they have discontinued items in
| their store that are for 'international' orders only?
| whoisburbansky wrote:
| I was under the impression that the individual kits are
| sold for much more in order to be able to fund subsidized
| kits for classrooms.
| imagineerschool wrote:
| Thank you! I have used Foldscopes with my students and had SO
| MUCH FUN!
| evanb wrote:
| Here's a functional all-Lego microscope:
| https://ideas.lego.com/projects/fcce15cd-27e0-405b-990b-681b...
|
| No non-Lego pieces; even the lenses are Lego minifig-scale
| magnifying glasses.
|
| Unfortunately, it didn't get enough backers in time to advance to
| production.
| jonplackett wrote:
| The downside being that the 'through microscope' image just
| looks like a badly enlarged version of what you can see on the
| slide...
| jayceedenton wrote:
| This is fantastic. There are some incredible ideas on that site
| and this microscope is a good example of an expert model maker
| using their creativity to work _with_ the constraints of the
| Lego.
|
| Lego seems to provide just the right amount creative control
| whilst still imposing its own rules and limitations. You see
| tiny models that express the character of the subject so well,
| often by using blocks in unexpected ways to create the subtlest
| hint of a form. The end result has so much charm but requires
| great skill.
|
| That site led me to this working piano:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dM7kj5XI_HY
|
| Well, I guess it's silent, but it has the mechanics. Wow.
| Tabular-Iceberg wrote:
| I wonder if it would hold any weight in the dispute if he claimed
| the brick was not actually a Lego brick, but one of the numerous
| perfectly legal stud-compatible knock-offs.
| foreigner wrote:
| Pity you still need non-lego lenses though. Can anybody come up
| with a way to avoid that? Perhaps something based on the
| principles of a Camera Obscura?
| em-bee wrote:
| try this:
|
| https://rebrickable.com/mocs/MOC-4627/Nico71/lego-microscope...
|
| it uses a water drop as a lens.
| [deleted]
| bombcar wrote:
| From another comment:
| https://ideas.lego.com/projects/fcce15cd-27e0-405b-990b-681b...
| pachico wrote:
| Why a pity? Why the obsession of putting the money in only one
| pocket even at the great cost of losing the concept of hacking
| you way through it?
|
| I think it's great that you can use piece of all sorts and I'd
| encourage everyone to follow the same principle.
| exar0815 wrote:
| Risky. They will most probably be hit with a cease and desist by
| Lego because it is Lego, and by Apple for unauthorized use of
| Apple parts.
|
| On a more serious notez absolutely great project!
| rozab wrote:
| There is a huge market for unofficial sets (MOCs) which Lego
| has always allowed to exist. Distributing instructions is
| definitely fine.
|
| https://buildamoc.com/
| offtop5 wrote:
| Why though.
|
| You need to physically buy Legos for this project. It's not
| like their showing how to print Legos
| em-bee wrote:
| the patents for lego bricks have long expired, so anyone can
| copy them, which is why we are now seeing many alternative
| lego compatible brands, because they are in fact legal.
|
| what is not legal is to clone the exact models that lego
| produces, and to pretend that a clone is lego, which it
| isn't. but as long as the alternative brands come up with
| their own models they are perfectly legitimate.
|
| as for this microscope, it's not even a product, just a
| design, there are websites where these designs are shared,
| and even sold (without the bricks which you have to acquire
| separately). you can even upload your own designs to a lego
| ideas site where you can promote it and ask lego to sell it
| as a model.
| lostgame wrote:
| Not to be _that_ person, but it 's 'LEGO', whether singular
| or plural. I used to work for LEGO and they would take this
| really seriously.
|
| Similar to 'deer', one LEGO brick is one LEGO brick. A pile
| of LEGO bricks is still a pile of LEGO bricks. :)
|
| https://twitter.com/lego_group/status/842115345280294912
| dsr_ wrote:
| LEGO fan for 40+ years here, last set purchased a couple of
| weeks ago. Don't bother doing this.
|
| - People who care will notice that other people who care
| use the term appropriately, and will do it themselves.
|
| - People who don't care won't, and will be annoyed if you
| correct them.
|
| You can use the difference as a shibboleth.
| InitialLastName wrote:
| LEGO (the company)has to take it seriously because they
| have to defend their trademark. Likewise, the manufacturer
| of hook-and-loop fabric closures has to be very clear [0]
| when a hook-and-loop fabric closure is their product or
| not, but lay-people are happy to call them all Velcro.
|
| [0] https://www.velcro.com/about-us/trademark-guidelines/
|
| Edit: pronouns not my game
| em-bee wrote:
| i think you meant to say "their trademark"
| InitialLastName wrote:
| Yeah fixed.
| detaro wrote:
| How is that relevant to the plural case?
| spijdar wrote:
| Like someone mentioned in another thread (edit: and another
| reply written while I typed this), LEGO the company cares
| about this for trademark reasons -- they don't want the
| word to become generic and lose trademark protections.
|
| In the US, I've never actually heard someone use the
| "correct" plural, everyone just says "Legos", which makes
| it reasonably correct IMO. That said, I've heard "LEGO"
| plural occasionally in Europe, more people seem to care
| across the pond.
| blackoil wrote:
| Sued for making things with Lego!! That would be ironic.
| jayfk wrote:
| It wouldn't surprise me if they get sued by lego:
| https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6623789/Lego-sues-Y...
| OldTimeCoffee wrote:
| You've linked a Daily Mail story with a baseless assertion
| and LEGO themselves said it was because of the logo of the
| store. The story has the owner of the store holding up a
| t-shirt of the logo such that it's somewhat obscured and the
| remaining focus is on the store itself.
| em-bee wrote:
| this guy unfortunately did make some mistakes. he did
| change his logo though, but he later got in trouble again
| for not clearly distinguishing between lego and compatible
| brands.
|
| however lego has been very heavy handed in dealing with him
| and others, causing him to choose to stop selling any lego
| in his store, focusing on alternative brands only.
|
| lego is trying to prevent competing brands to sell their
| models at all costs. currently they are fighting bluebrixx
| and johnny's world, who are both large german importers of
| alternative brands on the basis of the similarity of their
| minifigures, while those minifigures are not similar at all
| (except for the fact that they have the expected body parts
| and are compatible with lego bricks)
| pantalaimon wrote:
| Well he stopped selling LEGO after that and is now
| promoting LEGO alternatives which do have a better price /
| quality ratio.
|
| That LEGO tries to push any competition out of the market
| with shady legal tactics (e.g. claiming minifigures appear
| too similar even though they clearly feature different
| proportions and characteristics) while at the same time
| hiking prices leaves a bad taste.
| em-bee wrote:
| indeed. fortunately bluebrixx is now attempting to get
| the lego 3d design mark of their minifigures invalidated.
| not because bluebrix wants to sell minifigure clones, but
| because lego is using their 3d mark as basis for their
| claim that any other minifigures even dissimilar ones
| would violate that mark. bluebrix believes that they have
| a good chance to be successful.
| cbsudux wrote:
| This is a great project!
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-04-23 23:00 UTC)