New guidelines for LEGO Ideas projects
Posted by Huw,
LEGO has just updated its guidelines for LEGO Ideas projects which, frankly, is about time!
The most interesting points are that projects that look 'too big' and that won't fit into a 'single product box' will be rejected or returned for resubmission. Projects that propose a whole themes-worth of sets or exploit multiple IPs are no longer permitted.
A few common-sense rules have also been stated: no projects based on ideas that have already been approved (Wall*E, Doctor Who, Caterham, etc.), no life-sized weapons, no inappropriate IPs and no Dimensions expansion pack proposals. As a result, a number of projects will be archived.
You can read the full set of guidelines on the Ideas blog and below.
This will undoubtedly stop a lot of time-wasting project submissions being approved. What else do you think should be in the guidelines to prevent the Ideas site being swamped with chaff and unrealistic projects, as seems to be the case at the moment?
- Once we produce a LEGO Ideas set based on a third-party property, we will not accept more Ideas submissions based on that property. This sharpens our guideline on follow-up products based on LEGO Ideas submissions. Once we approve a licensed project for production through LEGO Ideas, we will archive other projects based on the same property and not accept new submissions based on the that property.
- Projects must fit in a single product box, so we are setting a part count limit of 3,000 pcs. While we can’t count the pieces in your photos, if your model looks too big we will send it back and ask you to submit a smaller model at our own discretion.
- Projects must focus on a single concept or third-party property. This essentially expands on the “no playthemes or series” rule and also rules out “mass customization” projects (e.g. custom mosaic or minifigure makers) as well as combining more than one third-party property into a single project. (E.g. a project containing both Porsche and Ferrari cars).
- It’s now simpler to collaborate on projects. We have removed the requirement to email us declaring your collaboration. You must still receive explicit permission from someone else before including their original work in your project. All new collaborative projects must mention collaborators’ LEGO Ideas usernames in the description, and state that their original work is included with the member’s explicit permission.
- New restrictions on project contents
- No iconic elements referencing third-party properties we find inappropriate for the LEGO brand.
- No large or human-scale weapons or weapon replicas of any kind, including swords, knives, guns, sci-fi or fantasy blasters, etc.
- Projects may not propose LEGO Dimensions expansion packs.
- You may only use logos that belong to third-parties in the context of your model, similar to LEGO logo guidelines. You may not display logos that do not belong to you in your artwork, since this can imply endorsement from the logo owner.
- New guidelines to help improve project descriptions
- At minimum, please write your description to include a description of your model, why you built it, and why you believe it would make a great LEGO set.
- In some cases, moderators may make basic grammatical changes on your behalf so we can speed up the approval of your project. We will never change the nature of your project and we will notify you by email if we make any changes.
- Terms of Service now preserves projects that gain a significant following. While we understand you may occasionally want to delete a project with only a handful of supporters, to either re-submit with improvements or clean up your project portfolio, once a project reaches 1,000 supporters it will not be removed.
- Terms of Service revises language regarding assignment of rights. We have worked with our Legal department to clarify how you assign us rights when you submit a project, and reassure you that you may share and publish your submission to promote your project online, in media, your portfolio, and other places for non-commercial purposes.
44 likes
61 comments on this article
Excellent - some sensible new guidelines.
I'd still welcome a ban on projects featuring existing I.P.s, e.g. Star Wars. Maybe next time....
This should be a good thing.
I think they could have specifically stated IP's that they will not accept Ideas for.
Such as
Star Wars
Star Trek
Lord of the Rings.
Dr Who
SpongeBob Squarepants
Indiana Jones
Back to the Future etc.
etc.
That's a very good thing. Makes me wonder if there's actually a 3,000 piece Ideas set in the pipeline...
Although, what does "No iconic elements referencing third-party properties we find inappropriate for the LEGO brand" mean? No explicit references to material inappropriate for children? I guess that means no Simpsons... wait...
3,000 piece limit! Yes! No more oversized MOCs that will never be sets!
So, as long as they've not approved an existing IP for Ideas, it's still possible? Ie: Star Wars or Toy Story?
"Once we produce a LEGO Ideas set based on a third-party property, we will not accept more Ideas submissions based on that property."
To avoid the mess we landed in with Ghostbusters HQ...
The rule about logos could be tricky. So you can make a model of a car, you may call your project by the make and model of the car, but you can't put the brand logo in your pictures...
Overall they seem sensible rules though.
Sounds like maybe the Saturn Rocket could actually be released at the size it is, considering they didn't say max of 1000 or lower. It would just mean an expensive set would be released.
Ideas is still going?
what in the freaking would LEGO! no weapons!
@Duq: I'm not sure about the logo thing. Just from what I'm reading, I would think usage "in the context of your model" means that, to use your car example, it would be acceptable to display the logo on the front of the car where it would normally appear on the real thing. But it would not be acceptable to display the logo by itself, for example in the corner of a submitted image.
Edit: to clarify, if what I'm thinking is correct, this would be an acceptable use of the Jurassic Park logo: https://ideas.lego.com/projects/118241
This would be an unacceptable use: https://ideas.lego.com/projects/118912
All good rules. 3000 piece count is still very lenient, but fair. No IP's that have already passed a Lego Ideas Review to is great, it will prevent future"Firehouse Fiascos." And no full size wrapons make sense to (besides I think the MOCs of people such as Nick Brick are astounding and far to complex for a Lego set anyway...), although that unfortunately probably bans lightsaber hilts from bring submitted.
I think the big ones are definitely no existing IPs, and under 3000 pieces. It would be interesting to go back and look at all the projects that made it to the review stage but never had a chance based on these restrictions. I totally agree it's about time Lego spelled it out for people.
So for the projects under review now we can safely eliminate 1/3rd of them: Jurassic Park Visitor Center, Rolling BB-8, Jedi High Council Chamber (existing IPs) and probably Modular Train Station for piece count.
*fingers crossed that Johnny Five makes it
Oh man I'm so happy with these guideline adjustments.
Submitters just don't get the hint; every set released so far has been a small, sub-$100 set that has never been part of a core theme or IP.
Yet we get inundated with Star Wars this, modular that, etc. My eyes do the biggest roll up into my head when I go browse the Ideas website.
Hopefully this returns most of the submissions to relevancy.
Glad they've cleared it up, I was already done with the IP sets and the modulars everywhere.
As much as I agree with the complaints made about current IPs, Ideas works surprisingly well with them. Even though Lego will never make an Ideas set based on them, it gives these set ideas the exposure they need. The Shield Helicarrier for example, started out on Ideas, as did the Ghostbusters HQ and neither passed review. Ideas is a good way for Lego to see which sets we want, even if they don't stick the Ideas logo on the box.
@Razzanator234: The problem with that claim is that neither the Shield Helicarrier project nor the Ghostbusters HQ project had any influence on the LEGO Group's decision to release sets of those things. Both sets were in development well before the fan-created versions were proposed to LEGO Ideas.
^If it became more obvious that Lego was browsing the Ideas submissions, then creating sets based on the popular ones without compensating the submitter, then why would people be motivated to submit creations to Ideas? If you're going to tantalize us with the prospect of sharing the royalties, then you'd better make good on that promise when you produce the set. It's another good reason to cut off future submissions based on IP that was already used; it allows Lego designers to expand the offerings within that IP and avoid the hard feelings toward the Ideas community.
I'm with Dr. Dave. These changes are long overdue, highly obvious, and totally sensible. They just left off that one last thing about existing IPs
I'm excited to see what starts coming through after these are in place. This and other recent changes to the guidelines show that LEGO is pushing us to be more original in our submissions. I feel like their ideal sets would be ones like the recent ball maze or the Exo Suit, which capitalize on someone's creativity instead of another company's IP. (But I guess if that was the case, they would stop selecting existing IP submissions like the Yellow Submarine...)
The 'existing IP' clause only applies to those that have already been licensed as a result of Ideas: Ghostbusters, Caterham, Adventure Time etc., not to the likes of Star Wars.
However, I think we would all agree that there should be a guideline stating that projects based on IPs that LEGO has licensed at one time or another, are not acceptable. That would save everyone a lot of wasted time.
Yes. Best thing ever would be to purge Ideas of al the SW stuff
Wow, Lego is pushing for originality and not nostalgia!!! How long did it take to (finally) get this message across for the Ideas concept? Granted Lego has had a hand in not promoting this concept as most of what has been released in the Ideas line has not been original.
They should remove project based on current IP's. I think it would be cool though if Lego started polling people on Ideas for future sets based on IP's that they want.
Example: list four different Ideas they have for Star Wars sets and you vote for 1. The one with the most votes gets made into a future set. They could do the same with other major themes such as super heroes. Just thought it would be a good idea since we seem to get the same remakes over and over again.
I'm kinda pulling this idea from Dewcision, where everyone gets to vote for their favorite of two Mountain Dew flavors and the one with the most votes stays around as a permanent flavor.
FYI, they added a bit of an FAQ to help clarify which IPs are okay/not okay:
https://legoideas.uservoice.com/knowledgebase/articles/910194-what-licenses-ips-based-on-former-and-current-le
Also, one of the comments on the blog post clarifies "projects based on third party licenses that LEGO actively produces are welcome", but "for these projects there is a higher possibility of overlaps with products that we are developing internally and a reduced chance of such projects passing the LEGO Ideas Review, compared to other projects based on third-party properties The LEGO Group does not hold."
https://ideas.lego.com/blogs/1-blog/post/66?comment_uuid=838be99f-6030-475d-a259-3c4c7a3bf317comment-838be99f-6030-475d-a259-3c4c7a3bf317
I hope this doesn't send the Voltron project down the drain, I am really hoping that one makes it next review after watching the new Netflix series!
^ the most interesting takeaway from that FAQ is this nugget:
"We will also not accept concepts substantially similar to the following original Ideas products:
Exo Suit
Research Institute
Birds
Maze"
how they interpret "substantially similar" could be very narrow or quite broad. very intriguing.
It's about time. Maybe now I can start browsing the Ideas site without being super annoyed.
^^So no more Neo-Classic Space, museum, or Lowell sphere-styled animals? :(
Maybe now I can focus more on my project....
I'd certainly like to see more sets with play features and break away from the display piece styled sets. I'm okay with some of them being display oriented, but it feels dull having one paper weight released after another. They lack the liveliness and lack many qualities that non-Ideas sets have.
I would love to see two sections to the Ideas site:
* Projects that use existing licenses, or are based on real-world themes
* License-free projects, born purely of new ideas
I feel that since licenses will always have a pre-existing following, grouping them with (and in competition with) original ideas is just simply unfair. By virtue of their existing mindshare, they are poised to do better than anything original.
Look at the most recent round of projects that were in review: Only one of them was not based on a license or a specific real-world theme.
I like the themed stuff as much as the next guy, but I absolutely love the original, non-specific stuff. I also feel like it allows for a bigger range of fantasy play, which is one of the best things about LEGO.
Has LEGO publicized a list regarding what material (and possible IP's) they find inappropriate for the brand? They've gotten away with a lot... (coughSimpsonscough)
I like what commandervideo says. Too many sets from Lego Ideas are not original ideas. It's a waste, just picking random existing properties, instead of creating unique sets like the exo-suit.
I would like to see some new tabs or options such as Expired Projects and 10,000 Vault. These options could have sub tabs such as Not Achieved less than 1000, over 1000 and over 5000 supporters, and 10,000 Supported or in Review, and 10,000 Project Not Approved.
By shifting projects that have expired and the 10,000 group would make the current project search much easier.
3000 parts is a BIG project threshold. All of the advanced Creator Expert modular buildings or the flagship Technic sets have less than 3000 pieces.
The idea that the sets have to be lower than 3000 pieces is pretty easy. As FlagsNZ stated most sets are under 3000 pieces. If it was not already a set/ part of SW the 10030 Star Destroyer JUST misses the piece count... I think that it is still a high piece count as history proves that they are picking things that are 20-70 USD. I like the idea of making it easier to go things as Flagz pointed out. I tend to not look at the site anymore because it is 99% stuff that would not be made to begin with. I also would like to see a split of the sets by cost. I personally would not mind a good modular building to be put through the ideas area, but I think that it would be hard to be given the green light as apposed to something the Ecto-1. I think it is funny they are saying that no sets after they do a specific IP, as we all know that TLG will be putting out more than one set to maximize the money that they paid for the ability to use that IP.
A limit on how many projects a single creator can submit to LEGO Ideas, rather than clogging up the site with projects that cannot even pass a tiny milestone. That gives others the opportunity to find other interesting projects rather than seeing several projects from one creator.
I think there is another layer to the following 'new' rule:
"Once we produce a LEGO Ideas set based on a third-party property, we will not accept more Ideas submissions based on that property."
The unwritten intention in this rule could be interpreted in that LEGO use the Ideas platform - and all the data collected on number of sets purchased, demographics, purchase price etc - to test whether a new theme could be rolled out.
This analysis could start long before the originating project reaches 10,000 supporters. The Ghostbusters Fire House is the theme that emulates this concept. TLG obviously want to avoid similar episodes in the future.
All Ideas projects can be used to launch a new theme, whether or not it includes third-party property. Ideas project developers need to take a close look at the data points that all supporters must consider before their support is submitted.
It would be good for the LEGO Group to publish a case study of one of the earlier Ideas (or Cuusoo) approval processes, so that Ideas project developers can get a better feel for the entire submission process.
I think they should clear up whether ideaas can be submited for themes such as Star Wars and Superheros.
^ It's perfectly clear. They can be submitted, they just have very little chance of passing review (read none). It is still worth mining them for ideas, and seeing what concepts are popular. This is really the whole point of Ideas, the royalties and occasional sets produced are mainly a carrot to get people to go to the effort of submitting.
^Exactly.
The new rules are great but I think LEGO should explicitly ban Ideas projects from licenses that LEGO are actively producing sets in like Star Wars and Super Heroes. (and also licenses like Jurassic World or Scooby Doo where they aren't currently producing sets in those IPs but know they cant/wont produce anything new for them) Doing this would help clean up Ideas and make it easier to find (and support) all the wonderful projects out there that actually have a chance of passing review.
^^I believe they use them for marketing research.
@KeyboardKafe: They don't have an explicit list, but I think it's safe to assume that any R rated movies, TV-MA rated shows, or M rated video games would be off the table. Aside from a few early episodes rated TV-14, The Simpsons usually tends to be rated TV-PG, so not much different than many of the movie licenses LEGO has had over the years.
I like voting for big star wars sets. I want them. I want lego to know I want them. I want them to know I value creativity and authenticity when they're designed.
That battle for Hoth set never would have gotten 10k votes.
Just saying ;)
To bad about the Rolling BB-8 project. I was looking forward to that one. I think that some of the already licensed sets could sell quite well.
My guess, lego's maximum for ratings is T, PG-13, and TV-14.
My guess, lego's maximum for ratings is T, PG-13, and TV-14.
Finally, some sensible rules. I hated the descriptions that made no sense, or the projects that were super big.
I feelnlike resubmitting my board game idea. I'm sure that's against the rules, but that thing was cool but nobody supported it.
Which means maybe it wasn't very cool.
It's a good start, finally. I quit Ideas because of the weight of utter rubbish and huge vanity projects. I might go back.
Lego can be very hypocritical, they won't allow Ideas sets based on Firefly because of guns and a main character being a prostitute. Yet they didn't hesitate to make a mini fig of not only a prostitute but a prostitute with a gun for a leg in The Lone Ranger line. Shaun of The Dead is also banned, but they continue to make zombie minifigs including recently one of a child. I love zombies but how does dead half eaten children come back fit into Lego's vision?
Why did they put such a high piece count as the limit? Most approved projects are around 700 pieces. We haven't had a single project above 1500 pieces, let alone close to 3000. That would be around a $250 set. No way they are going to produce that from Ideas considering all the past projects. They might as well gave a more realistic max of 1500.
Bah! I wish they would ban any ideas involving licenses all together. There are wonderful, original creations on ideas but they get buried under the avalanche of fan boys of 3rd party IP.
^ Ditto.
^I agree. The ideas should be about your own ideas, not somebody else's.
All relatively decent rules, but feels a lot like 'too little, too late'.
CUUSOO was in a beta phase for eons before it became Ideas, but it often feels like LEGO is still just beginning to understand the kinds of projects that fans ask for and succeed here, and are only now curtailing those plans, when these rules should have been in place earlier on.
^ I don't see why the mention of the Exo-Suit should imply no more (Neo) Classic Space Ideas. It's simply saying, stop submitting obvious and childish clones of a bi-pedal Spaceman-piloted mech (of which there have been several).
Also, they've made it clear that even if they reject your idea, they will still refuse you the ability to publish your own instructions or kits for another three years, or even a published picture you might get paid for. The Exo-Suit could not exist under these rules.
Goodbye IDEAS. I'll be keeping my 'ideas' to myself from now on.
I like the piece count. So many projects obviously could not be sold in stores.
My big issue is scrolling through new ideas and finding things that were obviously submitted by a young child (bound to happen, legos are all ages, especially geared towards young kids). But Ideas is clogged with sets that basically just rectangles made from multi-colored bricks taken from other sets. A lot of police stations and pools, existing IPs, and buildings that are like 70's level simplistic.
Of course, I don't know how you curb that, but that's my biggest issue with ideas.
No obvious Jurassic Park ideas Lego failed to make. Ever.
"Projects based on third party licenses that LEGO actively produces are welcome", but "for these projects there is a higher possibility of overlaps with products that we are developing internally..." leaves some hope for a half-size LEGO Technic BB-8 droid. https://ideas.lego.com/projects/126131/updates
This is a unique project that aims to make the functions work, filling the build-and-drive gap in the market. The original aim was the same price point as 42030 front loader, with a similar amount of Power Functions. With the drive, turn and spin functions assembled for the first time it has reached that point, so it might need some more for the head controls in due course.
I will have to watch the 3000-piece limit. The forthcoming Technic BWE has over 3000 pieces with 1 motor. BB-8 uses a lot of small pieces for the shell, and more motors. The piece limit is also a price point guideline. If the final version of BB-8 is no more than the Porsche at £250 then it would still be in the ballpark for a Technic set. It's unusual not to have a complete model before submitting the project but I've posted 16 updates so far and it is well on the way to 1000 supporters.
I'd like to see Technic branch out more into BB-8 or animals with realistic movement; there will always be many types of vehicles in the range.