Neverending Story Ideas project removed from review

Another blooper in the Lego Ideas history?

I’m a little disappointed. I really loved that movie as a kid, though all my friends have said it doesn’t hold up watching as an adult.

I wish I’d gotten the movie sooner. Now my kids are probably a little too old for it.

Sad could of added profits to whoever gets rights The Neverending Story..
lol The Neverending Story.

I’m not disappointed and I grew up in the 80’s. I love half of the 80’s nostalgic merchandise companies put out (and actively buy it) but just because something came from the 80’s does not make it an automatic nostalgic winner.

The "nothing" takes over!!!!!!

I loved the movies but would never buy it.
Now the main question will the reboot be as bad as the 2nd movie or will it reach artemis fowl level?

I've never heard of this thing, so seems quite odd to turn down the free publicity. But it is now clear there would be no path to approval even if this was the most popular submission, due to the ownership dispute.

@RobA said:
"I think I'm much more disappointed that they are going to churn out another sad, desperately soulless remake... "

They've done it with Thomas the Tank Engine (model / CGI series to "All Engines Go"), they've done it with DC / Marvel Comics a ungodly amount of times (DC's "New 52", for example), LEGO Ninjago is also apparently getting a reboot this summer.

Basically, Hollywood / Comics / TV / Songwriting are out of new ideas. If you can think of it, somebody has already done it. That's one of the reasons they reboot / redo everything.

@Reventon said:
"Good childhood movie at the time. But would never buy a Lego set of it."
Same here. Loved the movie as a kid (and still do, just bought the Blu-ray recently), especially the soundtrack brings back so many memories - the German version I mean, not the US version where they totally changed all the music. Even though the title song by Limahl is kind of catchy.

But I don't need a LEGO set of any subject of the movie. I'll rather re-read the book and let my own imagination fill in the scenery.

@AustinPowers said:
" @Reventon said:
"Good childhood movie at the time. But would never buy a Lego set of it."
Same here. Loved the movie as a kid (and still do, just bought the Blu-ray recently), especially the soundtrack brings back so many memories - the German version I mean, not the US version where they totally changed all the music. Even though the title song by Limahl is kind of catchy.

But I don't need a LEGO set of any subject of the movie. I'll rather re-read the book and let my own imagination fill in the scenery. "

Umm… then why did you watch the movie instead of letting your own imagination fill in the scenery?

If the franchise is stuck in licensing hell then its not like this submission ever had a real chance of becoming a real set. Its still pretty low of them to issue a copyright takedown, but no one ever accused copyright lawyers of being human.

Honestly, I don't think this would have been picked anyways.

@CCC:
But they don't really profit from the site. The Ideas site costs money to operate and maintain, and has no direct revenue streams. Only the sets that get chosen provide any income potential, and those would have any applicable licensing agreement in place before they even announce that it's been picked.

@B_Space_Man:
Clicking through to the other article, it sounds like the author hated the movie. Film rights had long since expired, but there was a question of whether the merchandising rights to the 1984 film were granted in perpetuity. The German courts ruled they were not. Given the late author's animosity towards the film, I don't think it's likely that the estate would grant anyone rights to produce merchandise based on the film. Since the author's estate doesn't actually own the film, you'd also probably need to get whoever owns the film to co-sign any licensing agreement. Since the film and the book were recently pitted against each other in a civil court case, I highly doubt there would be any chance of that happening. The takedown notice was likely issued by the estate, which probably doesn't want to even be reminded of the film.

@karrit:
Ideas is, at first, just a hosting platform. Lawsuits worldwide have tended to side with the hosting sites regarding the impossible task of having to browse through every submission and figure out which ones need to be weeded out due to copyright infringement. The onus falls on the copyright holder to issue notifications, which is exactly what happened here. IP-based projects consistently get voted up more often than original submissions. They do have a rule in place where no more than 50% of approved projects can be IP-based, but the truth is that those sets help drive interest in the platform. Take them away, and even stuff like the Old Fishing Store and the motororized lighthouse may have trouble gathering enough support to get approved for production.

@SmilingCyclops:
Which sequel? NS2 or NS3? There was also an HBO animated series that ran for one season.

Shouldn’t have won anyways, such a deceptively-advertised film.
Neverending Story? It had an ending!

@TheRightP_art said:
"Umm… then why did you watch the movie instead of letting your own imagination fill in the scenery?"
Easy.
Because back when I saw the movie for the first time I didn't know it was even based on a book.

Actually I only got the book about twenty years later. I also didn't know that the movie only covered the first half of the book.

Since then I have both re-read the book and re-watched the movie several times, but to my memory and imagination they are two separate entities.

Normally when I have read a book first and then watched a movie based on it I tend to prefer the book. Same the other way around.
With the Neverending Story I love both just as much, because while I have the movie memories as well, my imagination of the events as described in the book is totally distinct from them.
Which is easy since the movie (as is often the case) changes quite a lot of things versus the source material.

Whoever owns the copyright to Neverending Story clearly doesn't understand how Ideas works. If they don't want a set then wait until Lego ask if they can make a set and then simply decline. The world at large assumes Lego didn't want to make it. Now everyone knows it's down to them, not Lego. So petty, as proved by how rarely this happens, if ever.

It seems odd that this story is doing the rounds on Lego news sites now when the blog post on Ideas mentioned happened over 2 weeks ago on the 4th January.

this is stupid.
lego can not make the set with out 1st geting the merchandising rights to do so.
making this type of takedown of a IMAGE!!!! thats up for a Review so lego can look into and try to GET merchandising rights! plan outright stupid.
this just show that Michael Ende’s estate have no real True idea how Lego Ideas Works or Coppyright ingeneral.

This news comes now? Long time after the review is finished. I saw something about one was gone and found this out. But sorry to see it gone. I know there have been some problems in the past so assumed that it was that what lead to the problems. That the current holder did not want others to take part of it.

honestly? I know there's been some successful Ideas sets based on external IP, but I'd like to see all IP based Ideas separated off into a different stream.

@Doctor_Hugh said:
"Whoever owns the copyright to Neverending Story clearly doesn't understand how Ideas works. If they don't want a set then wait until Lego ask if they can make a set and then simply decline. "

But they asked? That's why you get the news now. Rights clearance happens before the final decision.

Not surprised. This kerfuffle has long been known after Ende died a few years ago. The creator could have known about it and so could LEGO. They could have nipped it in the bud, so to speak, that is removed it from Ideas/ locked the voting long before. That said I'm not even convinced this is particularly attractive. It would have required a major rework. Just dredging out Fuchur and a few minifigures seems a bit too little to really warrant a set....

I am gutted as I would have loved to own this set. Hopefully it will get another chance in the near future.

@Mylenium said:
" @Doctor_Hugh said:
"Whoever owns the copyright to Neverending Story clearly doesn't understand how Ideas works. If they don't want a set then wait until Lego ask if they can make a set and then simply decline. "

But they asked? That's why you get the news now. Rights clearance happens before the final decision.

"

No, the news happened on the 4th January, not now. The point is this idea was removed, not just declined.

@CCC said:
" @Doctor_Hugh said:
" @Mylenium said:
" @Doctor_Hugh said:
"Whoever owns the copyright to Neverending Story clearly doesn't understand how Ideas works. If they don't want a set then wait until Lego ask if they can make a set and then simply decline. "

But they asked? That's why you get the news now. Rights clearance happens before the final decision.

"

No, the news happened on the 4th January, not now. The point is this idea was removed, not just declined."

It happened on 4th but noticed until now.

And yes, it was removed completely as the IP rights holder does not want to allow LEGO to use their characters and names without their permission. LEGO declining to make the product but keeping the submission as a failed project on their site would not comply with that.

"
I think we all understand why it has happened, the point raised is how petty this makes the copyright holder look considering all the other external IP models on Ideas which are left for all to see and enjoy. I accept how copyright law works, even if I don't necessarily agree with it at times.

What a shame. It is a really good looking set. It catched my eye.

@CCC said:
" @Doctor_Hugh said:
"I think we all understand why it has happened, the point raised is how petty this makes the copyright holder look considering all the other external IP models on Ideas which are left for all to see and enjoy. I accept how copyright law works, even if I don't necessarily agree with it at times.
"

Why are they being petty for protecting their intellectual property? I think it is good that a small company has stood up to LEGO in this way, as they were using IP that they have no right to use. Just because other companies don't ask for LEGO to stop using their IP without permission on IDEAS doesn't mean everyone should just accept it when they do it. LEGO frequently complain about other companies infringing their IP and threaten fans for using the combination of letters LEGO in their web addresses.

They are the ones that publish this statement to protect themselves but obviously not others: We also believe that designs, company names and trademarks should not be used in unrelated settings without the owner’s consent.

Yet they frequently use other companies' designs, names and characters without permission on IDEAS.

You may think the other company looks petty. Whereas I think it shows how LEGO thinks that it can just do whatever it likes unless action is taken against them, and doesn't really believe in the statements they make when it comes to copyright and fair play."

LEGO only provide the platform, they aren't using the IP, that would be the fan designer. There is little difference between the designer posting the model on the Ideas website or Instagram. What I consider petty is saying no one can make a model of something which is special to them and sharing that model with like-minded individuals.

I'm all for large corporates being taken down a peg or two, as in the case of the blatantly unfair terms LEGO use on the Ideas website stating they own fan designs for three years whether they use them or not, but I don't see this situation falling into that category.

Perhaps we just agree to disagree on this.

Not interested....

@PurpleDave I meant NS2, I never saw anything beyond that.

@Ridgeheart Yeah, the wish-granting corrupts him in the second half.

Do.... do they not know they get to turn it down due to copyright once Lego reaches out to them? Do they get that this is a fan project at the moment?

Well I loved the movie as a kid. I would love a set as an adult. So this is disappointing, but I also can't say I've been waiting for it to exist either.

Was never a fan of the book (or either movie) so I'm not terribly disappointed.

@CCC:
Yes, in this case, IP-owners can request the images be taken down, even though TLG does not profit from them at all until they sign a contract and start producing sets to sell. However, the same image could be posted on Flickr, and Flickr would actually profit from hosting the image due to ad revenue, but the IP-owner would have more difficulty getting the image removed. Why? Because the person who posted it made an original work of art, even if it is derivative of the IP, but they are not directly profiting from the public display of that image.

One crucial distinction between the examples you provide, though, is that TLG is not the original source of these images. They didn’t post it. They didn’t present it as, “Hey, here’s a cool product you can buy from us.” They don’t even present images of any projects on LEGO.com (just the final sets that were approved, licensed, and redesigned). A private citizen posted them through a program that allows a wide range of submissions, but does not monetize them unless any applicable licensing deal is signed first. If TLG randomly posted images of models based on IP they don’t hold any rights to, that’s a different matter, since anything they put on the main site is implied to be a product they’re planning to sell. There’s no reasonable expectation that a random Ideas project is available for purchase, and even if you leap to that conclusion, there’s no way to buy it directly from TLG.

TLG isn’t required by law to remove every IP-based project that they don’t currently hold the license to. If that were the case, it would be impossible to submit IP-based projects because they would be immediately in violation of copyright law (unless submitted by the copyright holder, as happened with Minecraft), or they would be ineligible due to being tied to an active license. And if the images can’t be hosted, the project can’t be voted up to the point where licensing discussions can be initiated.

Laws have been passed with the recognition that it’s an unreasonable expectation that sites like YouTube, Flickr, and so on would not only have the ability to wade through every single submission that comes through their site, but that they’d also immediately recognize even the most obscure IP on site. The more successful the site becomes, the more impossible it is to keep up with the sheer amount of submissions. The compromise was therefore that IP owners are responsible for finding any violations and issuing takedown requests, and only then does the hosting site bear any responsibility. Once notified, though, you’re expected to comply right away.

@Big_Jarv said:
"It's a shame for those really into the subject matter. But the set wasn't offering anything revolutionary to me. May as well be a Ninjago dragon set."

What did Ninjago dragon sets ever do to you?

@Murdoch17 Ninjago’s not really getting a reboot, or at least not a big one. It’s been stated that the same story will continue with the same characters. They’re just “re-skinning” as it were after the events of Crystalized.

@Doctor_Hugh:
Paramount famously shafted their own fanbase during the early days of the World Wide Web when they issued C&D notices to every Star Trek fan site they could track down, all so they could launch their own paywalled fan site with the expectation that everyone who frequented the fan-operated sites would leap at the chance to fork over money to have access to any online Trek content. It backfired on them, because they were actually interested in maintaining some sort of amicable relationship with Trek fans.

The author of the book hated the film, and the estate appears to be trying to honor his wishes and opinions. They probably don’t care if they keep the movie fans happy, especially if they’re trying to get a new film production off the ground. Most likely they got tipped off that _this_ project got voted up, and didn’t think to check if there were others.

@CCC:
Again, TLG is not _publishing_ these images. They didn’t create them, either. They’re simply hosting them. The projects as they stand are original works of art, and gain certain protections up until the point you try to monetize them. Nobody has actually done that, though. It costs TLG money to operate the Ideas site, which has a different URL to distinguish it from their online store. No money exchanges hands through the Ideas site unless a project clears review and any appropriate licensing deals are struck. There’s zero chance of that happening, based on how the estate reacted to a single model reaching this point.

If the owner of any specific IP really wants to contact TLG and have their property added to the permanent banner list, I’m sure that’s something they would be willing to accommodate. But you’re making it sound like TLG is running a contest to make the best Falkor, with entry fees, votes taken by 1-900 numbers, and the intention of sneaking out shipments of black market Neverending Story merch. That’s simply not happening. The worst misstep I’ve ever heard of them making regarding IP is the first time they licensed Winnie the Pooh from someone who only had partial rights to the IP that didn’t clearly include merchandising deals.

@Castlebrick said:
"So that's how the story ends."

Ha ha. Great joke. Never-Ending Story. You're dead to me.

@PurpleDave said:
" @Doctor_Hugh :
Paramount famously shafted their own fanbase during the early days of the World Wide Web when they issued C&D notices to every Star Trek fan site they could track down... "
And CBS did it again when they effectively forbade all future fan made episodes or movies a couple of years ago.
Which is such a shame because it meant no more episodes of awesome fan based shows like "Star Trek Continues".
Yeah I know, off-topic to this thread, but I had to mention it anyway since it still angers me every time I think about it.

@AustinPowers:
Lucas was actually really cool about that stuff. I mean, try to sell "Jedi robes", and his team of lawyers would have you shut down in a hot second, but the fan films he was totally behind. He even helped a few of them, like the excellent Troops, get published on home video.

Neverending cooooommeeeeents…

@PurpleDave : I know. Goes to show how some know the balance between making lots of money and keeping the fanbase happy, while others don't.

I mean, Lucas was even cool with Spaceballs - as long as they didn't sell merchandise - hence Yogurt's running gag about the subject.

I wonder how often this happens without us knowing about it. There are lots of IPs that aren’t allowed that really don’t make any sense. For example, Final Fantasy is off limits while plenty of other video game franchises are fine. Could this be that Square Enix simply doesn’t allow it?

I am extremely disappointed about this news. I was really looking forward to this set. I wish they could sell the MOC instructions.

@AustinPowers:
The way I heard it, Mel Brooks offered “no sequels, no merchandise” when seeking permission, even though 1st Amendment free speech rights would have covered it as a work of satire.

This genuinely looked like it would be a pretty good set, sad to see it gone.

@Scissorhands84 said:
"I am extremely disappointed about this news. I was really looking forward to this set. I wish they could sell the MOC instructions."
Even if it hadn’t been forcibly removed the odds were never good that this would have been one of the 1-2 models actually chosen to be made.

So...it's now "The Never Coming Story", gotcha.:)

"Neverending Legal Battle."