Talk:76060 Doctor Strange's Sanctum Sanctorum

From Brickipedia, the LEGO Wiki

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 76060 Doctor Strange's Sanctum Sanctorum article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
The forum can be found here

Article policies

Deletion[edit source]

  • You have got to be kidding me. This is ridiculous. Why the hell is it ok for Eurobricks to discuss the set and Brickset to have an entry on it, but we can't mention it even exists? Besides that, everyone who's remotely even in to marvel knows about the set since it's been talked about about for over 6 months, what do they actually think they're going to gain from censoring a site that doesn't even get a fraction of Brickset's or EB's viewers. Makes me want to leave their stupid program. NovaHawk 23:55, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
  • @Ajraddatz: - are you sure it wasn't just about removing the Shop description (I notice that's been removed from the site) not the whole page? In that case, the request's totally reasonable NovaHawk 00:12, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
    • I emailed LEGO asking them about this. LegoFan4000 talk 00:19, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

I would've assumed that "censored" is one of the things Brickipedia is not, but apparently that's not the case, or at least it's not explicitly spelled out on the policy page. This really reminds me of a recent case of Lucasfilm and Disney abusing the DMCA in a (futile) attempt to censor a picture of a Star Wars action figure. Lawyers are, of course, allowed to request whatever they want, but I don't think we should give in just because they're lawyers. Either there's proof of wrongdoing on our part, or there isn't. It's literally that simple.
If and when the information is objective and verifiable, even if it's concerning a currently unreleased set, there should be no problem whatsoever — as I believe the case is/was with this page. Most images fall under fair use, as no completely free versions of certain things can ever be produced (basically all pictures of Star Wars sets are considered derivative work, for example). --Jack Phoenix (talk) 03:05, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

  • ^ ToaMeiko (talk) 10:33, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
    • Looks like its ok to have it on Brickia as well. LegoFan4000 talk 11:08, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
    • It's not so much the legal aspect, the way I understood it we'd no longer receive free sets, etc if we didn't comply with all of these kinds of requests? NovaHawk 11:22, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Just been reading Brick Heroes- final, completely unwatermarked images are now up on Amazon Japan. And we're not meant to even acknowledge it exists. And Brickset (who is affiliated) has the pictures up on their database entry and front page in the news section. If it's still up there in say, 10 hours, permission to ignore this insane request and restore the page? NovaHawk 12:38, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
    • Agreed, I think that the set has officially been "revealed" in a sense, so it should be ok for us to make a page out of it right? --Omega X (talk) 12:52, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Wasn't this set at Toy Fair? If it was we would know it exists. We just can't have any pictures or know that it has an figures other than Doctor Strange.-Albus Potter (talk)
  • Photography was disallowed, but you are right that people have been reporting on it since at least February without an issue. Berrybrick (talk) 14:43, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
    • Quote from LEGO customer service/support, "Thanks for getting in touch with us. Isn’t it exciting that there are so many new LEGO® sets every year? We can understand why you want to share information with other fans. But until new toys are announced in the catalogue or on LEGO.com, even we aren’t able to share any details. That’s because it takes a long time to design and make new toys, and we sometimes need every minute until they hit the shelves to make them perfect. Besides... we look forward to surprising you!"

LegoFan4000 talk 00:34, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

      • I think that's an automated response. :P Someone real will probably respond in a couple more days, but even then customer service probably isn't who we want to talk to about this. It looks like a job for our ambassador. Berrybrick (talk) 01:13, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
        • Yep, as far as I know, any communications with TLG is meant to go through Ajr or Meiko who contact people in the ambassador program, customer service wouldn't have a clue what this is about :P But, I'm pretty sure this issue doesn't need to be pursued any further- no fansite has pulled the images and it's been 2 or 3 days, they appear to have given up trying to cover up this set. NovaHawk 09:05, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
  • For what its worth, I have gone to my much ignored email I use for this site:
Legalsupporter <(removed)@lego.com>
Jun 10

to me 
Dear Sirs/madams

I am a representative of the legal department of the LEGO Group. We have become aware that non-released, confidential and copyrighted LEGO® building instructions have been published on your website. Please kindly refer to this link:

http://en.brickimedia.org/wiki/76060_Doctor_Strange%27s_Sanctum_Sanctorum

The publication of this copyrighted material has not been authorized and we must therefore request that you immediately remove and delete the content from your website. In  case you have any questions, please reach out to us.

We hope that you will meet our request without hesitation.

Best regards
Simon Primdahl Jakobsen
Legal Assistant, Legal Support Group I

Legolegal <(removed)@lego.com>
Jun 21

to me 
Dear Sir/Madam

Please refer to the following link.

http://en.brickimedia.org/wiki/76060_Doctor_Strange%27s_Sanctum_Sanctorum

This text was by error published on the LEGO website.

Would you be so kind as to remove it, until we reach the launch for this product by august 1, 2016?

Best regards
Simon Primdahl Jakobsen
Legal Support at Lego System A/S

CJC95 (talk) 15:50, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Is that just about the S@H description? I don't think it's a big deal if we delete that. I just checked earlier though, and the images are still on Brickset. Berrybrick (talk) 16:17, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
I assume so, based on the second one. The first email refers to instructions, which I don't think we have? CJC95 (talk) 16:23, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
I'll delete it. I think the original leaked images were from their instruction .pdfs, but those have been replaced by photos from Amazon, which other fan sites still have up. Amazon still has them too, for that matter. Berrybrick (talk) 16:32, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm sure if they strongly wanted anything deleted, we'd have multiple emails or at least one in July. Soupperson1 Friends are Forever! <3Friends girls.jpg
The first image of the set was the instruction cover, which we did upload because there was no confidential watermark on it. Ajr deleted it as per that first email's request, no problems. Now by the looks of that second email, it was to remove the description not the images, but Ajr deleted the images and that's how that whole first conversation on this talk page started (unless he got a different email). This was all in June and I'm pretty sure that no longer applies, but I'm fine with leaving the description off just to be safe. NovaHawk 23:43, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.brickimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:76060_Doctor_Strange%27s_Sanctum_Sanctorum&oldid=1062427"