42113 launch in trouble

Lordmoral

  According to a German organization article (https://www.dfg-vk.de/unsere-themen/anti-militarisierung/friedensorganisation-kritisiert-lego-kooperiert-mit-rüstungskonzernen) and LEGO themselves the impressive Rescue Osprey is the latest in the ongoing world of cancel culture, you might recall that LEGO reduced advertisement for certain sets in the wake of the US protest for the horrific treatment of George Floyd (that people from all over the US political spectrum cried against), there were rumors they were simply removing all the sets and hence the LEGO community outrage until the company said it was only reducing advertisement. The Osprey is a wonderful aircraft and this particular set is clearly marked as a Rescue with six stickers. 
   The other thing that angers me is that there is already an example of Osprey in the LEGO City line being hilariously used by the crooks in a robbery (60209) and as a civillian cargo helicopter (60021). Perhaps the collaboration with Boing is their problem but are we going to renounce to Passenger planes in sets as well? 

560Heliport

#60209 is not an Osprey. It bears a superficial resemblance to one, but the rotors don't tilt- and that is the defining characteristic of the Osprey! 

Fizyx

Before I get into this, I want to say that:

1. I love the set.  It's a great looking Technic build, and I was looking forward to it. 

2. I am not defending LEGO's military sets policy.  It clearly needs a review in light of things like the Super Heroes lines especially, as well as sets like #31039 (Blue Power Jet) that clearly violate the spirit of the policy, but not the letter.

Those two things said, the V-22 Osprey was built with Bell and Boeing in conjunction with the DoD explicitly for military use.  Primary users are the US Marine Corps, US Air Force, US Navy, and Japan Ground Self-Defence Force, which you will notice are all military organizations.  While the Osprey has been shopped around for search and rescue, as of now I do not believe that any specific sales for that purpose have been made to any organization outside of a military organization.  Even if one such purchase had been made, the vehicle itself is still overwhelmingly a modern military vehicle, even if this specific version has been badged as 'Search and Rescue'.

The explicitness of these military ties for the vehicle is further exacerbated in this case by the fact that the set is ALSO explicitly branded as a V-22 Osprey.  If it had been branded as a VTOL aircraft or something similar, LEGO would have at least had plausible deniability or could have made an argument that the set was not intended to actually represent a real world vehicle.  I have a feeling that many of the examples called out here and elsewhere fall under this line of thought.

With those two things in mind, it's pretty clear that the set clearly violates both the spirit and the letter of the LEGO military policy, and given that, I'm quite shocked that it made it through review at all.  Aside from any 'debate' about 'cancel culture' or 'PC gone amok' or what have you, if LEGO is actually interested in continuing to enforce their own policies with respect to military sets, it makes 100% sense for them to NOT release this set.  Even if this set triggers a review of that policy, it makes sense for the set to be delayed until such a time that the review happens, with the set then being reviewed to determine if it meets the guidelines laid out in the NEW policy, rather than it being shoved through and potentially failing to meet the requirements laid out in either policy.

TLDR: Delaying or canceling this set is totally in-line with LEGO enforcing their own current internal policy, and the fact is that 'cancel culture' likely has little to nothing to do with it, aside from some group pointing out that LEGO was violating their own policy and triggering an internal review of the set.

560Heliport

Today is July 20th. A lot of these must already be at stores, possibly even on shelves! Good luck recalling them all, if that's what TLG decides to do.

560Heliport

I wonder if this might be a test case. Maybe TLG wants to change their "no modern war" policy, and this set is to see what people say.

Astrobricks

Maybe this set is a Boeing marketing tie-in to get sales in the rescue “biz” :)

If you’re right @560Heliport, this could be a hell of a collector’s item!

560Heliport

Some idiot will buy a dozen with the idea that they'll be recalled, and he can sell them for a thousand dollars each. Then it will be released, and he'll be stuck with them.😄

Astrobricks

^ But it will still be a cool set :).  I want one, but I won’t be surprised if it’s cancelled.

560Heliport

I want one, but can't afford it. I'll have to settle for my #8856 Whirlwind Rescue.

daewoo

TLG's policy is stupid and hypocritical.  They produce historical military items and they  produce science fiction military items, but heaven forbid they make a current military item.  If I could talk to the founder I would vociferously call that out.

560Heliport

daewoo said:

TLG's policy is stupid and hypocritical.  They produce historical military items and they  produce science fiction military items, but heaven forbid they make a current military item.  If I could talk to the founder I would vociferously call that out.

You don't see the difference? 

KungFuKenny

@Fizyx
That was a really well thought out and reasonable opinion.  I don’t know how this passed review - I doubt that LEGO is just now finding out that the Osprey is a primarily military vehicle.  I’ll be interested to see if this applies to Germany only or is recalled worldwide...

CCC

I wonder if there is an alternative helicopter build. They could recall them and repackage them as helicopters. In fact, maybe this was planned all along to get another helicopter out without AFOLs complaining about it. We really wanted to do that set, but these darned protests mean we have to do this helicopter instead.

Lordmoral

At one point LEGO will have to decide what it does, there have been multiple modern jets in City sets (specifically the Creator and Sky Show series) that this only got in trouble for it's ties to a company like Boeing and not that it resembles a military aircraft.

madforLEGO

Like I said on the main page. Obviously this group has no issues with Marvel and Batman sets, so slap a Bat insignia on it and call it the Batcopter

This is what happens with Covid.. Too many morons with nothing better to do than be outraged.

Astrobricks

Bat Osprey (TM)

Astrobricks

The link in OP's post now results in a 404 Not Found error. Are we being trolled, or did they take down the page?

KungFuKenny

Looks like it is still on their website:
https://www.dfg-vk.de/unsere-themen/anti-militarisierung/german-peace-organisation-warns-lego-cooperates-with-arms-companies

One of the larger points the group makes is that license fees are likely being paid to Boeing and Bell... that in effect if you buy this set you will be funding (indirectly) the 2nd and 27th largest global arms companies in the world.  Although, taken to that extreme, I will have to swim to Billund for the Inside Tour to avoid supporting Boeing...

davetheoxygenman

KungFuKenny said:

One of the larger points the group makes is that license fees are likely being paid to Boeing and Bell... that in effect if you buy this set you will be funding (indirectly) the 2nd and 27th largest global arms companies in the world.  Although, taken to that extreme, I will have to swim to Billund for the Inside Tour to avoid supporting Boeing...

One has to wonder, did the same people make the same dust up about indirectly contributing to Boeing when they released a co-branded #10177 Boeing Dreamliner?  Not that it is a military aircraft, as we all know it is not but Boeing has been in the same business since prior to the 787 Dreamliner coming out.  Just yet another angle to consider.

Lordmoral

Astrobricks said:

The link in OP's post now results in a 404 Not Found error. Are we being trolled, or did they take down the page?

Yep, apperantly they were getting hammered.

Lordmoral

KungFuKenny said:

Looks like it is still on their website:
https://www.dfg-vk.de/unsere-themen/anti-militarisierung/german-peace-organisation-warns-lego-cooperates-with-arms-companies

One of the larger points the group makes is that license fees are likely being paid to Boeing and Bell... that in effect if you buy this set you will be funding (indirectly) the 2nd and 27th largest global arms companies in the world.  Although, taken to that extreme, I will have to swim to Billund for the Inside Tour to avoid supporting Boeing...

😄😄😄😄😄, good points. Thr new story link and thanks for that:
https://www.dfg-vk.de/unsere-themen/anti-militarisierung/german-peace-organisation-warns-lego-cooperates-with-arms-companies

daewoo

560Heliport said:

daewoo said:

TLG's policy is stupid and hypocritical.  They produce historical military items and they  produce science fiction military items, but heaven forbid they make a current military item.  If I could talk to the founder I would vociferously call that out.

You don't see the difference? 

No, I don't.  Weapons made for killing people are weapons made for killing people, regardless of the level of technology.  Pirates murdered and plundered and raped and pillaged, yet Lego has no issues celebrating them in sets.  Vikings did the same, still no issues.  But issue a modern vehicle that was specifically designed to transport things for the military?  Nope, won't make that, but they will make a Shield vehicle that's designed to carry things for a military organization.  And guns?  No worries there either.  So I reject your assertion that there is a difference.

LostInTranslation

It has been cancelled 
https://brickset.com/article/52715/official-technic-bell-boeing-v-22-osprey-cancelled

Lordmoral

Because LEGO would never release a military vehicle (seems the set wpuld have been better off without the Boeing brand):

Lordmoral

daewoo said:

560Heliport said:

daewoo said:

TLG's policy is stupid and hypocritical.  They produce historical military items and they  produce science fiction military items, but heaven forbid they make a current military item.  If I could talk to the founder I would vociferously call that out.

You don't see the difference? 

No, I don't.  Weapons made for killing people are weapons made for killing people, regardless of the level of technology.  Pirates murdered and plundered and raped and pillaged, yet Lego has no issues celebrating them in sets.  Vikings did the same, still no issues.  But issue a modern vehicle that was specifically designed to transport things for the military?  Nope, won't make that, but they will make a Shield vehicle that's designed to carry things for a military organization.  And guns?  No worries there either.  So I reject your assertion that there is a difference.

Those sets, alomg with the two pictured above are just vans for aoccer moms.

Wrecknbuild

davetheoxygenman said:

KungFuKenny said:

One of the larger points the group makes is that license fees are likely being paid to Boeing and Bell... that in effect if you buy this set you will be funding (indirectly) the 2nd and 27th largest global arms companies in the world.  Although, taken to that extreme, I will have to swim to Billund for the Inside Tour to avoid supporting Boeing...

One has to wonder, did the same people make the same dust up about indirectly contributing to Boeing when they released a co-branded #10177 Boeing Dreamliner?  Not that it is a military aircraft, as we all know it is not but Boeing has been in the same business since prior to the 787 Dreamliner coming out.  Just yet another angle to consider.

I think it also has to do with the times that have changed. Nowadays everything that might maybe possibly remotely eventually be considered controversial is investigated, and when there is any fear of doing something wrong, the safest option is chosen.
Companies and governments should show more balls imho. Surprisingly, someone like the US president can get away with anything and still stay in place. It's a strange world...

CCC

It would be great if a Lepin like company got hold of the design and made a version. It would be funny to see it become a best seller clone set when Lego caved in to a tiny amount of pressure and didn't release it.

Shib

I feel like something like this has been on the cards for a long time, LEGO have been playing very loose with their rules for a long time - anyone else remember the drunk Elves in the Hobbit sets?

funnily enough, as I’m not particularly into aircraft or military vehicles the link worth this set would have gone completely over my head without it being bought up. While the “air race” planes flirt with the line of the rules and have quite obvious real world inspirations that have links to military aircraft they can easily be handwaved away with the LEGO universe not having military. Ironically I think sets like #60206 or #60208 which have police in high power jet aircraft are a bit of a worse situation as although they may lack military weapons on them have a closer purpose to real world military aircraft.

Ultimately I think it’s having the specific branding on this that made it an issue, had LEGO put this out without the Bell & Boeing branding it would have gone under the Radar with no real issue. 

What LEGO need to do as a company now is review:

1. How this set got so close to release without anyone seeing the potential issue with their brand guidelines.

2. Consider updating the brand guidelines in full as an exception to sets marketed 16+ not having to conform to such rules - this I think is especially relevant as LEGO are clearly reaching more and more for the adult market and there’s likely to be more stuff like this that they might want to consider as part of that market.

daewoo

Once you cave to the mob, they will be back, again and again and again.  My view of TLG just declined a little bit more.

klinton

This is far and away the single whiniest thread I've ever seen on here. It's a freaking LEGO helicopter. A set that no one was talking about before it was canceled (probably because it's the 8 millionth helicopter LEGO has made). There was no hype. This isn't the key piece in a beloved theme. It's just another freaking LEGO helicopter.

The 'outrage' is beyond comical.

Brainslugged

daewoo said:

Once you cave to the mob, they will be back, again and again and again.  My view of TLG just declined a little bit more.

Agreed! As soon as you take one step back, they will take one step forward... and continue to do so.

Lordmoral

Wrecknbuild said:

davetheoxygenman said:

KungFuKenny said:

One of the larger points the group makes is that license fees are likely being paid to Boeing and Bell... that in effect if you buy this set you will be funding (indirectly) the 2nd and 27th largest global arms companies in the world.  Although, taken to that extreme, I will have to swim to Billund for the Inside Tour to avoid supporting Boeing...

One has to wonder, did the same people make the same dust up about indirectly contributing to Boeing when they released a co-branded #10177 Boeing Dreamliner?  Not that it is a military aircraft, as we all know it is not but Boeing has been in the same business since prior to the 787 Dreamliner coming out.  Just yet another angle to consider.

I think it also has to do with the times that have changed. Nowadays everything that might maybe possibly remotely eventually be considered controversial is investigated, and when there is any fear of doing something wrong, the safest option is chosen.
Companies and governments should show more balls imho. Surprisingly, someone like the US president can get away with anything and still stay in place. It's a strange world...

Like the US Federal Goverment showing restraint after 50+ days of rioters attacking the Federal Courthouse in Portland were the media is neglecting to mention that the rioters have been tearing the city for over 60 days now? Or how in complete media neglect showing that the US Federal Goverment (which I formed part of) did provide help to Puerto Rico both after the two hurricanes Irma and Maria and early this year after an earthquake situation when we found the followimg thanks to a social media poster?
https://youtu.be/4xilLDkv8zU

Legoboy

Sigh.  I recall standing next to @Huw at LEGO's last military reveal and don't remember it being a problem.

https://youtu.be/jVeLHr93uqc

Fizyx

Going to be honest here, there is no bigger turn-off in the LEGO community than the absolutely toxic reactionary anger of portions of the AFOL fan base.  I'm not calling out anyone specific here but please, for the love of LEGO, take a step back and ask yourselves if the reactions that we're seeing are really reasonable.  Political and personal attacks for days, and just continuously spewing hatred against a significant portion of the population because a TOY COMPANY conducted an internal review and decided to follow their own internal polices with regard to less than a 1/5th of a percent of their entire released product line for the year.

All this overblown talk about cancel culture and TLG giving in to the PC police or whatever, and how they 'caved to pressure'.... WHAT PRESSURE?  There was ONE ARTICLE from a small group calling TLG out for violating it's own internal policies with a single minor protest at ONE STORE.  That is IT.  There were no ongoing protests happening.  There was no campaign, extended, wide spread, or otherwise, to get LEGO to cancel the release of this set outside of this ONE SMALL GROUP.  There was NOTHING for LEGO to cave TO!  There was no freaking mob.  It is quite clear that, AT THE MOST, this article triggered an internal review by LEGO, and they decided that it broke their own internal policy on current day military sets. And then they decided that they actually cared about enforcing that internal policy and canceled it.  That is not caving to the mob or cancel culture or the PC police or whatever euphemism you want to use.  It is a corporate entity conducting an internal review of their corporate policies and then making a business decision to enforce those policies.

So then, if you want to be angry at LEGO over their policy, fine, be angry with LEGO OVER THEIR POLICY.  I absolutely agree that they are exceptionally inconsistent with the way that they apply their military sets policy, and they themselves skirt around it continuously by following it to the letter and completely ignoring the spirit, as I laid out in a post above.  But you know what's ridiculous?  Incandescent rage directed at all things LEGO or anyone that disagrees with your stance when what you really have a problem with is LEGO's own internal enforcement practices with regards to this one policy.  It doesn't help discourse, it doesn't do anything to improve the situation for WHATEVER your definition of improve is, it doesn't do anything but make AFOLs as a whole look like they will throw whiny entitled tantrums at the drop of a hat.  It sure as heck isn't going to make anyone at LEGO want to listen to the things you have to say.

Given the prevailing political and social commentary in the AFOL community whenever topics like this come up, I'm sure I'm going to get plenty more hate and push back for this post.  But I seriously hope at least some people in the community here will take this as an opportunity to take a minute to step the heck away from the computer, calm the heck down, and ask themselves if all this rage and political hatred is really worth getting stressing yourself out so much over, and if it's going to ever actually have the effect that you want, or if it's just going to alienate people and drive away others who may have agreed with you are some level, but don't want to be involved with the ridiculous responses we've been seeing on the front page or these threads.

CCC

I don't think this is just about Lego following their own policies. If they followed their own policies, they wouldn't have had the set ready for sale in the first place, a step further back they wouldn't have designed it, they wouldn't have tested or internally reviewed it,  a step further back they wouldn't have even had agreements with the warmongers they are against. For me, it is them deciding to follow their own policies only after a small group, that were known of by probably even less people than have heard of this helicopter, told them they will protest it. 

Either they knew it was military and thought they would get away with it but caved at the first barrier or they did no research whatsoever. 

It would not surprise me if other groups attack Lego in future given how they crumbled so quickly here and have given publicity to this group.

CCC

There's a review of it on Eurobricks here:

https://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?/forums/topic/179228-review-42113-bell-boeing-v-22-osprey/

It was prematurely released by a vendor in Vietnam. I wonder how many other distributors will release it rather than return them. The retailers can probably double the RRP and people will still buy them, and those customers could double the price they paid and still flip them.

Shib

But the danger to the retailer is being cut off from LEGO’s future releases. Would be short term gain for long term loss.

CCC

Yes, possibly. Excuses:

It was an accident that they got put on the shop floor and sold.
They were returned to you but seem to have been lost on return.

If LEGO can accidentally design, produce and distribute a set that goes against their own policies, then a store accidentally selling what was sent to them seems quite minor. More so if there is only one distributor of LEGO in that region.

andhe

And subsequently the instructions are now scanned and available online for those wanting to build their own (minus the exclusive parts...)

CCC

It will probably lead to it being built more and getting more publicity than if it was released. And if you cannot get hold of the "rescue" version due to exclusive parts, then just go for the plain old grey military version.

Lordmoral

Stores have to pay LEGO for the items to sell us, a lot of companies have already invested big $$$$ in new sets that they'll just see what they can get back especially in today markets with the ongoing pandemic, they will prefer to get afloat rather than go under.

klinton

Lordmoral said:

Stores have to pay LEGO for the items to sell us, a lot of companies have already invested big $$$$ in new sets that they'll just see what they can get back especially in today markets with the ongoing pandemic, they will prefer to get afloat rather than go under.

LEGO would reimburse retailers for recalled product. They don't just demand a recall and pocket the money. Hahaha.

CCC

Yes of course they will be refunded, and they might not have even paid for it yet. But given what these are going to be worth, some will not make it back to LEGO. Boxes in warehouses or loaded on vans will disappear.

560Heliport

Plenty on Ebay already.

CCC

Bumblepants has mentioned on the other thread that LEGO is not asking for returns, they just won't be replenishing stock. So it is a situation where they apologize as they don't agree with what they have designed, produced and shipped, but they won't pay to correct their mistake and recall the offending items.

If that is so, it makes them look even worse than just a company that doesn't know what the other hand is doing.

CCC

560Heliport said:

Plenty on Ebay already.

It looks like New Zealand is the place to be!

Lordmoral

For the first time in years my father asked me to send him a picture of the set, I suspect he intends to keep a lookout to nab a few as he agrees with me how much the set will.be worth. 

Mynatt

How would a licensing deal between LEGO and Boeing work in a situation like this? Does LEGO have to compensate Boeing for the loss of royalties?

I don't expect to know the actual contract between the two companies but is there a way companies deal with situations and relationships like this?

MrShinyAndNew

I'm amused at how many places (here, on the LAN, etc) people have attributed to LEGO motives that aren't in evidence. The reasoning seems to be "too many people worked on this, they couldn't have violated the policy by accident. Therefore they are caving to cancel culture pressure, giving in to the mob, letting the terrorists win, etc."

I've worked in a company where dozens of people might be working on a project, and elsewhere in the company dozens of others are completely unaware of it. Sometimes this leads to annoying violations of company policy, like when one department signs a contract to buy a piece of tech without first checking that that tech meets the company's ISO certification, data security, privacy, or other requirements.

The most likely story is that Lego's no-military policy doesn't apply to made-up aircraft even if they're similar to military planes, as long as they're not military colours - this explains the various jets and osprey-look-alikes. Here a team of people thought they had a strategy that would meet the requirements: design an osprey-alike that is rescue-themed. But someone somewhere got the idea to license the plane, and it's the combination of the license with an arms-maker of a plan that's only used by militaries that breaks the deal. There are really several pieces that have to be connected just right for this problem to occur, if past kits are any indication. Various decision makers obviously had not put all the pieces together to form the chain, and the rest assumed that some aspect of this kit made it okay (the rescue branding, for example).

Why this has to be some sinister plot, I don't know. Lego is a big company. They have many business units that don't cooperate that much. They make mistakes. This one just got closer to market before being found.

Shib

The difference here to that example is that this product would have had to go through multiple committees to reach this point so it seems highly unlikely that at no point did anybody question whether it was in line with their brand values. It is possible it’s oversight but it seems a pretty big bit of oversight. 

 While it’s possible it was originally a model that didn’t have the Bell and Boeing branding, once that was added the designers almost certainly would have then been redesigning the model with the actual V-22 in mind. There were a lot of points where this should have been caught before going to production. 

 I don’t think this is “part of some sinister plot” but I do think LEGO have been pushing the limits of their brand values and guidelines for a long time and really need to review whether or not they are still truly relevant to how the company wish to proceed. Personally I’m indifferent to the whole thing (in that I’m not bothered either way of LEGO produce this model) but I find the situation very interesting.

560Heliport

I think this might have been a test. Maybe TLG wants to change their "no military subjects" policy, so they put out the Osprey to see what the reaction is.