body: It's my understanding that Lego System A/S, doing business as The Lego Group, no longer holds a registered design protection or design patents on the Lego interlocking block system itself, hence the proliferation of other systems such as Mega Bloks, Best Lock etc., although they hold some related patents. I believe the patent on the brick design was lost as a result of the decision in [Interlego A.G v Tyco Industries Inc & Ors (Hong Kong) [1988] UKPC 3 (05 May 1988)](http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKPC/1988/3.html), but I might be mistaken - I'm rather confused by 
  INTERLEGO AG v. Tianjin COKO Toy Co., Ltd 2002 not least because I can't find the full text online. I'm aware that Lego won a case in 2003 against Biltema's Coko products based on the similarity of the packaging materials. 
  
  
  With that in mind, I have a question about the following article describing a company marketing Lego-like products likely to offend a reasonable number of people:
  <https://news.vice.com/amp/en_us/article/vbad43/fox-news-is-hawking-a-racist-lego-build-the-wall-knockoff>
  
  
  It seems likely to me that people might reasonably muddle this with Lego in a way which could damage their reputation. In principle, would Lego have any recourse to prevent the sale of these products? What would they have to demonstrate to stand a chance of winning such a case?
  
  
  
title: In principle, what actions might be open to Lego in this situation?