Posted under Tags
The ambiguity comes from the fact that along with making toys based on popular copyrights like Star Wars or Harry Potter, the Lego company also has its own original copyrights, such as Ninjago and Bionicle. Right now, the lego tag is being used to tag both "lego bricks" and "fanart of Lego's original series that doesn't necessarily depict them as lego bricks." Maybe these two meanings should have separate tags.
fossilnix said:
Maybe these two meanings should have separate tags.
We could go:
copyright: the_lego_group
general: lego
And implicate all lego owned copyrights to the_lego_group, and use lego for any depictions of the actual bricks.
Alternatively:
copyright: lego
general: lego_bricks
This should be self-explanatory
I like the first suggestion, as the_lego_group is unambiguous and encompasses every IP, whether it's spinoff toys or the movie.
Second suggestion is bad due to said ambiguity; people will still use lego for the bricks and it'll need frequent cleanup. However, once the_lego_group is established, we can alias lego_bricks to lego.
create implication the_lego_movie -> the_lego_group
create implication ninjago -> the_lego_group
create implication bionicle -> the_lego_group
Should be all the LEGO intellectual properties.
My apolocheese for the necrobump. In my defense: a moderator told me to do it.
Do we really need an umbrella tag for this? Unless the properties are being crossed over (of which there are zero examples currently on the site), I don't understand who is searching for this unless actual Lego are being involved. Taking my current pet tag Ninjago for example (and coincidentally, what this whole thread was originally about!), only 3 out of 81 posts are the characters in their Lego form. When 95% of posts look like post #10623445, is there really a point to keeping it attached to the Lego name?
I understand your underlying point on not having an umbrella tag for all Lego properties, but I disagree with your argument on them not looking like LEGO. Unless you're proposing that we make LEGO theme copytags, we're still going to need a copytag for things like post #8385459, post #8896641, and post #7447520.
Damian0358 said in forum #414242:
I understand your underlying point on not having an umbrella tag for all Lego properties, but I disagree with your argument on them not looking like LEGO. Unless you're proposing that we make LEGO theme copytags, we're still going to need a copytag for things like post #8385459, post #8896641, and post #7447520.
I was speaking mostly for Ninjago and having it under a generic Lego copytag. I think for generic, property-less art of Lego minifigures (e.g. post #8385459) The Lego Group taf would be fine.
In my mind its the same as tagging every Genshin post with miHoYo instead of just the ones with MiYouJi and Mimo.
I noticed theres a Lego Space tag... I think for that, an implication to The Lego Group would be good. Things like Ninjago and Monkie Kid are considered their own franchises and most art separates it from the plastic building blocks.
...I hope that all makes sense. Yell at me if it doesn't.
BUR #53667 has been approved by @evazion.
remove implication ninjago -> the_lego_group
create implication lego_space -> the_lego_group
create implication lego_super_mario -> the_lego_group
So if there are no further objections, let the voting commence.
I'm neutral on removing The Lego Movie, so I haven't included it in the BUR.
EDIT: I've removed the line about Bionicle as I'm unsure about that copyright.
Updated by sabisabi
BUR #53668 has been approved by @evazion.
create implication ninjago:_dragons_rising -> ninjago
Given this is a Ninjago related thread here's a related BUR I just noticed.
The bulk update request #53667 (forum #414304) has been approved by @evazion.
The bulk update request #53668 (forum #414306) has been approved by @evazion.
