TLG overreacting this year with letting to deleate prelim pics?

[Klaus-Dieter]

Hello everybody!

You surely noticed that in the last days TLG had contacted BS, Flickr (and perhaps even other homepages for showing pics) to (let to) delete the pictures of the first half of next year's preliminary set pictures.

Since it's of course TLG right to do want they want to do (in a limited space of course), they are allowed to do this. But is it really necessary? Has it got any influence on their future profit? And how do you like or dislike this?

I thought that it would be interesting how the majority here on EB stand to these action and these questions.

Here is my opinion:

Of course I understand TLG's policy that they don't want other companies (esp. clone brands) to copy their sets.

And I even find it ok when there are no prelim pics directly shown here on EB but there are only posted links.

But imo TLG this year is really a bit overreacting.

I mean: Weren't there always prelim pics around in Sep.-Oct. in the past years?! And there was never that a heavy reaction of TLG.

They even have to think about their fans. If their fans get some prelim pics to see earlier than only the official pics shortly before the release of the sets, they can plan for which sets they want to earn money and which sets they want to buy. Of course they this way might perhaps not buy a set they would possibily have bought if they wouldn't have seen early pictures of a more wanted set. But all in all you have to say that 1. the customer's budget is limited - he or she can't buy more sets he or she can afford to and 2. when their fans can plan which sets they want to buy and then can get these sets they are much more happier than if they lost their money by buying a less wanted set. So all in all it's supposably about the same profit for TLG - whether they tolerate prelim pics to circulate or not. But when they don't tolerate, their fans are less happy. And that might eventually result in the profit.

The argument about clone brands releasing very similar sets if there cirulate set pics too early is indeed right.

But it is imo not weighty. I mean: People like us which really like Lego would never buy (more) clone brand sets as long as TLG continues with the high quality sets (imo esp. concerning the last years of City and Star Wars). And not that "hard-core" Lego fans buy clone brand sets anyway.

So do you agree or not? And which is your opinion? Any thoughts and ideas?

Comments are welcome.

Klaus-Dieter

Edited September 28, 2010 by Klaus-Dieter

[Etzel]

No, I don't think TLG is overreacting. The pictures aren't supposed to be out by now, and therefore TLG deletes them of course. I know that it seems like a pretty useless action since when the pics has found their way out on the internet there's nothing to stop them, but I think TLG still needs to stand up and mark that it's not OK for them.

We AFOLs are very spoiled with preliminary pictures and sometimes we act like it's our "right" to see pics half a year before they are released. Do we need 6 months of planning and preparation to decide which sets to buy? I did enjoy seeing the pictures of the winter and spring sets, but I sure wouldn't be upset if I would've had to wait a couple of months more.

[-JD-]

I think the deleting of pictures all over the web is alright.

To be honest, it's nicer in a way as it is more of a surprise when the final pictures are issued and we can see things we couldn't before. Ofcourse, there is always the issue of clone brands churning out similar stuff after seeing the pictures before LEGO releases their own.

There is also the issue of people on video websites, such as Youtube, taking the credit for finding the images when others went to all the hard work themselves.

[ThatGuyWithTheBricks]

There is also the issue of people on video websites, such as Youtube, taking the credit for finding the images when others went to all the hard work themselves.

Exactly.

I think it's not that TLC is overreacting, it's more that they haven't reacted in the past. Plus, the OP are breaking their contracts by releasing confidential info.

[freakwave]

Of course I understand TLG's policy that they don't want other companies (esp. clone brands) to copy their sets.

And I even find it ok when there are no prelim pics directly shown here on EB but there are only posted links.

...

The argument about clone brands releasing very similar sets if there cirulate set pics too early is indeed right.

My two cents,

About clone brands or rip offs: I think those guys have different means to get hold of set pics. I mean, where did those pics came from? Those are from the Shop-Catalogues, which are avaialble to many toy stores to have them place thier orders. So set up a "dummy" store and get access, scan, mail to <insert country of choice>, done.

May be even easier if the catalogues would be printed in <insert country of choice> where the clone brands originate from.

Therefore I personally think that the clone-brand argument does not really count. I might be wrong though.

It is difficult to keep the details secret for a mass-market product like the Lego sets and especially if you have them released in a range fo 30 to 60 a year (or more, I did not count) and are required to time this with releaseing a catalogue to fit the release window. So a long lead time is required. Set design, production, shipping, catalogue printing etc.

And now you have a lot of fans who are gulping down each piece of information they can get their hands on, which is understandable.

This is different for e.g. mobile phone producers who also want to keep the effect of surprise. Here it might be easier to keep a secret due to the limited number of products released per annum.

fW

[prateek]

I think they are over reacting. Sure, they're a company with its own policies, but what bothers me is that they decide to take down pics this year, whereas nothing was done in previous years.

[BearHeart]

No, I don't think TLG is overreacting. The pictures aren't supposed to be out by now, and therefore TLG deletes them of course. I know that it seems like a pretty useless action since when the pics has found their way out on the internet there's nothing to stop them, but I think TLG still needs to stand up and mark that it's not OK for them.

We AFOLs are very spoiled with preliminary pictures and sometimes we act like it's our "right" to see pics half a year before they are released. Do we need 6 months of planning and preparation to decide which sets to buy? I did enjoy seeing the pictures of the winter and spring sets, but I sure wouldn't be upset if I would've had to wait a couple of months more.

I do. I'm on a 'LEGO budget' so the more into the future I can see the better. Seeing those Pharaoh's Quest and Atlantis pics made me cancel some of the purchases I was going to make in the rest of 2010 in order to save my money for 2011.

Wait, I guess thats not good for TLG.

[ThatGuyWithTheBricks]

I think they are over reacting. Sure, they're a company with its own policies, but what bothers me is that they decide to take down pics this year, whereas nothing was done in previous years.

See my comment.

[fred67]

It doesn't really bother me, but I think they are overreacting... everyone is well aware they are preliminary pictures and may not represent the final product, and I think it has less to do with clone brands (who would just end up bribing someone anyway, if they really wanted to), and more to do with avoiding problems like when sets turn out different than the preliminary pictures and people start whining and complaining, or like in the case of BearHeart, they don't want their current products to compete with future ones.

[Mirandir]

I don't think they're overreacting either. And I believe that it's not the images in themselves that LEGO cares about. Because as mentioned it's not that difficult for the competition to get possesion of the prelims.

I rather think it's the fact that they've seen negative talk about theese preliminary pictures affect sales in a negative way. And this year they're really putting in an effort trying to get a message across.

[Skafte]

They have every right to have the pics removed! The pics belong to the company, and someone has violated their trust and shared the secret contents in the retailer's catalogue. It doesn't matter WHY they want them removed, they do, and that is that.

I wouldn't mind being surprised by a new set in a toy store once in a while!

[Aanchir]

It's nonsense to say they're overreacting. LEGO has every right to ask for the pics to be taken down, and any website with a respect for LEGO's confidential relationship with its retailers should comply.

I don't hold anything against the people who appreciate this sort of information when it becomes public. But helping to make it public, and thus helping a retailer betray the trust LEGO has placed in them, is something that AFOLs should be conscientious about. Whether or not you stop doing it is your own choice, in which peer pressure will certainly play a role.

Overall, in my opinion, it's only fair for LEGO to try and put a stop to the mindset where this sort of sneak-peek is expected free-of-consequences each year. Enjoy the sneak peeks while they last. Maybe even save them to your computer to enjoy for yourself. But there's no need to think that once the pics are out, anybody and everybody somehow has earned access to them.

[CP5670]

I think TLG's approach to internet marketing is naive and that they are missing opportunities by covering up leaks instead of using them to generate hype. However, I don't necessarily like or dislike TLG for this. They are a business and trying to maximize their profits, and as a consumer I don't really care about their profits. I personally like to see the pictures in order to plan out future purchases, and it always remains trivial to find them despite TLG's efforts.

Also, I'm not sure whether TLG demands pictures to be removed, or simply asks them to be removed and website owners comply (but could choose not to). I don't know if TLG actually has any legal authority to take the former action. Their beef is with whoever leaked the pictures in the first place (and presumably violated an NDA), not random sites who subsequently propagate them. I do know that product leaks like this are common in other industries. I frequent some computer hardware forums and we get leaked pictures showing up there all the time, and no company tries to fight it.

[Bailey.]

I think this is a way to prevent other companies to copy LEGO's upcoming sets. I think it's a good way of avoiding Mega Sucks and other cheap chinese companies to copy. I've seen so many copied sets by China, specially copies from Paradisa, and little town sets. They fail at life!

Actually, a guy shared a link of youtube with the title "Lego minifigs series 3", I bet they were the prelim pictures.. but I saw it was removed by order of "LEGO company or LEGO systems - something... I actually never thought LEGO would make youtube remove certain videos.. OUCH!

[davee123]

I think it's also unfair to say that they haven't done this in the past. The earliest I can recall is back in 2000, when they requested that LUGNET remove links to scans of a retailer catalog. They've done this in the past with varying levels of tenacity, and this year they've done it to EuroBricks... what, twice?

I don't think it ought to be a big deal for LEGO, and I also don't think it ought to be a big deal for fans, either. I don't think LEGO is fuming mad, storming up and down their halls about how EuroBricks posted links to leaked information. My guess would be that someone saw it, and thought "You know, that really shouldn't be there. I'll ask them to take it down." Now, if EuroBricks was getting threatened with legal action for not following through, that'd be another matter. THEN I'd say LEGO was overreacting.

In the end, I see it as luck of the draw. You were fortunate enough to see a retailer catalog? Great! You just happened to be online when the pictures were posted? Good for you! But if you missed it, then oh well, no big deal. This hobby is FILLED with opportunities for people that happen to be at the right place at the right time. Count yourself lucky if you get to see preliminary pictures. And if you don't get to see them, don't sweat it.

DaveE

[David Thomsen]

I don't think it's over-reacting too much... it's like if I were writing a book, and a preliminary copy of it was leaked that was full of typos and rough bits I hadn't sorted out yet... I'd be quite angry about that.

As much as I like to see preliminary images, I also respect that it's Lego's right to choose when and where to reveal their products. I'm glad these images don't really get seen by most of the people in the world, just a minority of enthusiasts who are on the look-out for them.

[fred67]

aacchhh... nobody is saying they don't have the right, just that it could be an overreaction.

I think they're overreacting, but it's not like I blame them or think they don't have the right.

I don't think it's over-reacting too much... it's like if I were writing a book, and a preliminary copy of it was leaked that was full of typos and rough bits I hadn't sorted out yet... I'd be quite angry about that.

That's not a valid comparison, it's more like the cover of your book was released, even though it might not necessarily be the final version.

Edited September 28, 2010 by fred67

[Vindicare]

They have every right to have the pics removed! The pics belong to the company, and someone has violated their trust and shared the secret contents in the retailer's catalogue. It doesn't matter WHY they want them removed, they do, and that is that.

I wouldn't mind being surprised by a new set in a toy store once in a while!

Exactly. There's a reason there's a big confidential stamped across the pictures.

[Artanis I]

I don't think they're overreacting either. And I believe that it's not the images in themselves that LEGO cares about. Because as mentioned it's not that difficult for the competition to get possesion of the prelims.

I rather think it's the fact that they've seen negative talk about theese preliminary pictures affect sales in a negative way. And this year they're really putting in an effort trying to get a message across.

I think this point is probably the main reason. Often the photos are tiny or blurry or the set isn't finished yet. Let's take for example the SP3 sets (top example Undercover Cruiser) from this year. When preliminary pics came out, there was a lot of "oh this looks crap" "I won't bother getting this" etc but when the official images were released the sets were much better than people were first saying. I bought them all and thought all 5 were very good sets. (Better than the previous year.)

[CP5670]

Let's take for example the SP3 sets (top example Undercover Cruiser) from this year. When preliminary pics came out, there was a lot of "oh this looks crap" "I won't bother getting this" etc but when the official images were released the sets were much better than people were first saying. I bought them all and thought all 5 were very good sets. (Better than the previous year.)

SP3 is a better illustration of the opposite point. Everyone in the SP3 2010 thread was looking forward to 5984 and 5985. If anything, the leaked images created extra hype around those sets and lots of speculation about the minifigs they came with. There are plenty of other examples of this too. I think SP3 2009 was actually better received on EB in the leaks than in the final products, some of which were disappointing.

The preliminary images are more accurate than people would like to believe. There have been very few cases of substantial changes being made between the preliminary leaks and the final products. The vast majority of sets come out with at most minor (and in many cases no) changes from the leaked images. I can't recall ever seeing such an image and then being truly surprised by the final product.

[lightningtiger]

It depends on what you call overreacting, personally I don't think so.....just ask a film maker or song writer/singer about their latest release - sadly on the net pirates are everywhere and to make a quick buck they'll do anything even copy things not available in shops, etc., yet.

I&#39;m a conformist&#33; !

[Holodoc]

No, TLC is not overreacting.

It's all about the confidential stamp all over the pics.

It is sky clear that uploading these photos is simply ILLEGAL!

And spreading these around the net is nothing else.

And not having reacted in the past years does not show anything.

If I was the manager in charge at TLC (and leaking pics were a serious issue to their sales figures) I would even sue the people uploading the photos.

[Aanchir]

I think TLG's approach to internet marketing is naive and that they are missing opportunities by covering up leaks instead of using them to generate hype. However, I don't necessarily like or dislike TLG for this. They are a business and trying to maximize their profits, and as a consumer I don't really care about their profits. I personally like to see the pictures in order to plan out future purchases, and it always remains trivial to find them despite TLG's efforts.

Also, I'm not sure whether TLG demands pictures to be removed, or simply asks them to be removed and website owners comply (but could choose not to). I don't know if TLG actually has any legal authority to take the former action. Their beef is with whoever leaked the pictures in the first place (and presumably violated an NDA), not random sites who subsequently propagate them. I do know that product leaks like this are common in other industries. I frequent some computer hardware forums and we get leaked pictures showing up there all the time, and no company tries to fight it.

One problem with this suggestion is that when sets are leaked this early, it's extremely possible the hype will have worn off by the time the actual sets are released. Let's face it-- after a few pages of comments about new, leaked pictures, people stop having anything meaningful to say about them. The discussion becomes stale, and basically dies out until actual, finalized pics come around to revive interest.

Furthermore, who's to say that covering up the images doesn't generate hype in itself? People get a lot more excited about leaked pictures when they're the only pictures available. Letting everybody and their brother operate a folder on an image hosting site with all the new pics takes away that feeling of exclusivity.

As for your last statement, my own belief is that sites like Brickshelf will tend to get cordial requests to take the images down, whereas sites like Flickr with fewer ties to the AFOL community will be more likely to face threats of legal action. And whether or not LEGO actually has legal standing in such an event, they have the clout and the reputation that it's much easier for large sites like Flickr to comply than to wait and see how far LEGO will go to get the pictures removed.

[fred67]

No, TLC is not overreacting.

That's still a matter of opinion. I think you guys need to preface these statements with "I think," as the legality is not in question, but just because they are within their legal rights doesn't mean it's not overreacting in the same way that giving everyone who crosses a street in the middle a jay walking ticket just because you legally can, or giving everyone going even one mile an hour over the speed limit a ticket just because you legally can.

It's all about the confidential stamp all over the pics.

It is sky clear that uploading these photos is simply ILLEGAL!

Yes, it is, these people should not have done that. I want to point out, though, that it's a civil case, not a criminal one.

And spreading these around the net is nothing else.

Wrong. If it's stamped with a copyright, that's one thing, but "confidential" has no binding on anyone that didn't sign an NDA.

And not having reacted in the past years does not show anything.

If I was the manager in charge at TLC (and leaking pics were a serious issue to their sales figures) I would even sue the people uploading the photos.

(I added emphasis here)

I think they are overreacting. They are within their rights, to be sure, and what they did in the past has no bearing on what they're doing now, but unless someone can substantiate that leaked pictures somehow lead to reduced overall sales, I'd have to say they are overreacting. It's not even that I blame them... nobody is saying they aren't within their legal rights, just that putting the effort into taking down the pictures is likely costing them more money than it could possibly save.

I support them on principle... because people did have legally binding agreements with them that they violated. Probably the most common thing is that these pictures are released by someone NOT under NDA, but who got the pictures from someone who was. A catalog on the desk of someone's manager, for example. If the manager (or a store's buyer) signed an NDA(*), then they can't leave that stuff lying around.

(*) - OR, if part of the agreement to be a licensed retailer requires NDA.

just ask a film maker or song writer/singer about their latest release - sadly on the net pirates are everywhere and to make a quick buck they'll do anything even copy things not available in shops, etc., yet.

Another invalid comparison... this is no more than releasing a preliminary version of album art, not the actual content... same thing with the invalid book comparison above.

Edited September 29, 2010 by fred67

[Front]

Wrong. If it's stamped with a copyright, that's one thing, but "confidential" has no binding on anyone that didn't sign an NDA.

Confidential means that the company has legal rights and can sue anyone that has had anything to do with putting the images on the internet or hosting them.