Lego isn't trying to bury or hide the history. The instruction guide talks about the history of the plane and who the original companies were.

The other point I touched on above is that Lego worked with the Airbus Heritage team in putting this model together, which likely also contributed to putting the Airbus logo on the box.

To counter your Revell DC-10 example, here's their Concorde model kit.

https://www.revell.de/en/products/modelmaking/aircraft/civil-aircraft/concorde-british-airways.html?listtype=search&searchparam=concorde

I don't see the original company names anywhere obvious on the front of the box.

For me this isn't a serious debate, just how I see it,  True Aviation Enthusiasts support the history and the pure story behind it rather then lawsplaining things, lawsplaining doesn;t make this world a better place 🤣

29 minutes ago, Matthew Kane said:

True Aviation Enthusiasts

Ah, the good old No True Scotsman argument. 🙄

One more point, the sticker on the stand one builds for this lists the original companies as well. Sounds like something a "True Aviation Enthusiast" would be happy about. Still not seeing how Lego is burying or changing history here, and certainly no where close to Hollywood.

1 hour ago, goates said:

Ah, the good old No True Scotsman argument. 🙄

One more point, the sticker on the stand one builds for this lists the original companies as well. Sounds like something a "True Aviation Enthusiast" would be happy about. Still not seeing how Lego is burying or changing history here, and certainly no where close to Hollywood.

This is Hangar Chat where conversations are open, not let's take it literally chat, I just made my view and it wasn't meant to be a debate on my part or taken literally, you must be a blast at your local pub 🤣

You ask a guy for the time and he'll tell you how to make a watch 🤣

13 hours ago, Matthew Kane said:

Now Volvo is owned by Geely but you would still see Volvo on a box not Geely but the Geely Trademark in the small print, but its still a Volvo

You just made my point: Airbus, the owner of the IP, decided it was in their best interest to have an Airbus logo on a 3rd party product that asked to a license to use their IP, instead of the one of an historic company that doesn't exists anymore. Geely knows their brand is not as valuable as Volvo, so they choose to show Volvo. The owner of the IP always decides which brand to us on his own accord, not the licensee, if any.

Again, Revell use either the original manufacture name (DC10) or the current owner (F16) not consistently, because they clearly haven't licensed those trademarks, so they are just citing the company, which is allowed if you are not using logos that could suggest users it's an officially endorsed product. Which when they do ( the 747 ), fact it's licensed, is clearly indicated together with the Boeing logo.

Quote

Doesn't change anything,

It does change everything, if usage of the official logos are involved.

Again, is not as if Lego is trying to "forget history": the airplane stand has a plaque saying "designed by Sud Aviation and British Aircraft Corporation", with a *copyright* sign indicating both Lego and Airbus, because those are the holders of the IPs in THIS package.

Citing the historic manufacturer or indicating copyright are two completely different matters.

Edited September 14, 20232 yr by virtuali

8 hours ago, virtuali said:

You just made my point: Airbus, the owner of the IP, decided it was in their best interest to have an Airbus logo on a 3rd party product that asked to a license to use their IP, instead of the one of an historic company that doesn't exists anymore. Geely knows their brand is not as valuable as Volvo, so they choose to show Volvo. The owner of the IP always decides which brand to us on his own accord, not the licensee, if any.

Again, Revell use either the original manufacture name (DC10) or the current owner (F16) not consistently, because they clearly haven't licensed those trademarks, so they are just citing the company, which is allowed if you are not using logos that could suggest users it's an officially endorsed product. Which when they do ( the 747 ), fact it's licensed, is clearly indicated together with the Boeing logo.

It does change everything, if usage of the official logos are involved.

Again, is not as if Lego is trying to "forget history": the airplane stand has a plaque saying "designed by Sud Aviation and British Aircraft Corporation", with a *copyright* sign indicating both Lego and Airbus, because those are the holders of the IPs in THIS package.

Citing the historic manufacturer or indicating copyright are two completely different matters.

WHY ARE YOU STiLL DEBATING ME???

you my friend are a clueless social misfit that can’t read people, my original post says it all nothing more to say other then Good Day 🤣

I'm just excited mine is downstairs ready to assemble 🙂 

13 hours ago, Matthew Kane said:

WHY ARE YOU STiLL DEBATING ME???

you my friend are a clueless social misfit that can’t read people, my original post says it all nothing more to say other then Good Da

You were also debating me, and I obviously haven't missed what you were trying to say. Instead, you seem to have missed this sentence:

Quote

That doesn't mean I, as an aviation fan, I personally think this is the best solution, because it would have been nice to see also the original historic logos on the box

Which clearly indicated my own stance which makes also clear I perfectly understood you said it was your preference, which I was agreeing to.

That doesn't mean the other things you said about usage of logos, citations, were right, that was the only thing I was pointing out.

However, opposite to you, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt, and I guess just might just missed that part of my post but, but I'm not calling you a "social misfit" for your continued arguing and your failure to read me.

As a thread about plastic bricks that many consider to be toys, on an aviation forum, quite on the expensive side as plastic toys are concerned, it has a very high rate of Nerdiness Attraction Factor, and that can be even stronger than the "True Aviation Fan", so should you have expected that kind of reaction, and not just from me...

Edited September 15, 20232 yr by virtuali

1 hour ago, virtuali said:

You were also debating me, and I obviously haven't missed what you were trying to say. Instead, you seem to have missed this sentence:

Which clearly indicated my own stance which makes also clear I perfectly understood you said it was your preference, which I was agreeing to.

That doesn't mean the other things you said about usage of logos, citations, were right, that was the only thing I was pointing out.

However, opposite to you, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt, and I guess just might just missed that part of my post but, but I'm not calling you a "social misfit" for your continued arguing and your failure to read me.

As a thread about plastic bricks that many consider to be toys, on an aviation forum, quite on the expensive side as plastic toys are concerned, it has a very high rate of Nerdiness Attraction Factor, and that can be even stronger than the "True Aviation Fan", so should you have expected that kind of reaction, and not just from me...

I SAID GOOD DAY

You said that already...but you may have the last word...so far..Now go cut the grass..

17 minutes ago, Delta111 said:

You said that already...but you may have the last word...so far..Now go cut the grass..

What I said was 
 

Quote

I just didn't get why the AIRBUS logo is on the box, AIRBUS wasn't a company yet when the Concord was developed, I guess they bought the name or something???

•  

and GOOD DAY

Coming soon to a thread near you;

Bottled water. Brand X or Brand Y. Which one is wetter? True water fans discuss...

I've found that dehydrated water is much easier and lighter to carry for emergencies... 🤭