• Aggravationstation
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    34
    ·
    4 months ago

    The product is known as LEGO. The plural is not LEGOs.

    The boxes contained multiple pieces of LEGO.

    A shipment of glass does not contain glasses. It contains multiple pieces or sheets of glass.

    • Chainweasel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Language evolves. Incorrect pronunciation, punctuation, and pluralization can become “correct” through popular usage.

        • Pfeffy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          What do you think would happen if you tried to sell “Legos”?

          Do you think Lego would agree with you then?

          • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            You’re diving into Intellectual Property law here, and there’s lots of nuance beyond just registered trademarks.

            You could likely be fine selling a round pastry filled with apples call “LEGOS”. If there was a trademark for it at one time, and it has been abandoned, you might even be able to register the trademark yourself for your round pastries.

        • Num10ck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          time for them to register Legos then, instead of trying to fight global linguistic trends

          • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            I seem to remember a legal decision that prevented them from doing so (a horse leaving the barn type situation), so I don’t think its possible. Lego is hardcore about the “lego” trademark though:

      • BorgDrone@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Exactly! Just like we eat a bowl of popcorns or a plate of rices or pastas with beefs or porks, maybe with a nice glass of wines, teas or milks. After that we can go to the beach to play in the sands or if it’s winter we stay in and watch the snows.

        • arglebargle@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          Shrimps is perfectly acceptable and correct, so watchout, any of those examples could happen…

      • Hugh_Jeggs@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        4 months ago

        Language evolves

        Says every American who has to have it [simplified]

        Lol

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Each box is easily worth 1-2 hundred. On the low side. They’re legos. and some of those sets are the limited-time only sets

      The falcon sets are all 500+, if I’m reading the thumbnail right (paywall, erg.)

      If we assume 100 per, that’s still 300k in value. “It’s just plastic”… might be a legitimate reason to not buy the sets, but c’mon. You wouldn’t knock collecting art (“it’s just canvas and paint.”)

      • Pfeffy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        Are you comparing mass-produced plastic machine made pieces to art? I will absolutely agree that you can make art with them, but at the end of the day we’re talking about plastic trash injected into a mold. If you want to get me to somehow defend a company that sell s plastic waste for a massive premium, it just isn’t going to happen.

        • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          At the end of the day, we’re just talking about some pigments and solvents smeared across some cloth.

          I agree some of it can be art, but it’s still just trash. And don’t even get me started on the lumps of mud!

          Actually, if we want to get pedantic, I would suggest the kits are more in line with prints rather than original paintings, but just because you see it as trash, doesn’t mean it is.

          • Pfeffy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            Certainly my opinion doesn’t change the value of it. you can spend all the money you want on plastic garbage. Or by Taylor Swift records. Or buy a Tesla cyber truck.

            Opinions are subjective, but you are factually purchasing pennies worth of plastic for hundreds of dollars because of some kind of nostalgic brainwashing or just general silliness.

    • Tja@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Same like a 3k LV bag is 150 bucks of leather. Or a 100 dollar bill is a few cents of paper.

      • Pfeffy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Agree on the bag. Disagree on the currency. If Legos were used as currency then it would be totally logical if still completely stupid. Even then, there’s human labor involved in making a quality bag, but every Lego brick is exactly the same and made by a machine out of a penny’s worth of plastic.