Union Pacific trademark lawsuit

[overall]

Lionel has made trains, at least since the thirties, that were modelled after UP prototypes. They did not pay any royalties all that time. Why is UP demanding royalties now after 70 years of allowing Lionel and others to model them at no cost? What has changed? Isn't a court going to ask that question?

Thanks,

George

[Anonymous]

Preface: I'm no lawyer.

My understanding of the trademark laws is that it doesn't matter that UP hasn't asked for royalties from the model train manufacturers for the past 70 years. They're asking for them now. And it's within their legal rights to do so.

And, legally, Lionel has to pay.

But, again, I'm no lawyer. Which means my understanding could be flawed.

Tony

[Anonymous]

A trademark, unlike a copyright or patent can last FOREVER, therefore there is no limitation as to how long the owner's rights exist.

However, that said, UP will not be permitted to go back in time to collect from Lionel and they won't because the Dilution Act that they are suing under is relatively new. It was created to protect famous marks from being used in ways that dilute the value of the owner's mark even though there are no products that that owner produces or will ever produce.

Trademarks you won’t see because of the Dilution Act:
Ford Condoms or General Motors Vaginal Hygiene Spray or Disney *** Deodorant or Microsoft Anal Bacterial Killer

Or of course UP Lionel engines or cars.

Alan

[Anonymous]

Alan,

Nice touch at the end. Gave me a good chuckel.

[overall]

In the case where a railroad is split between one or more aquiring railroads. For example, the Tennessee Central was divided between Illinois Central, L&N and Southern when it went bankrupt in 1968. If Lionel wanted to make a model of a Tennessee Central locomotive, would CSX , NS or CN get the royalties from it?

George

[Anonymous]

iTS THERE LOGO rIGHT

[FJ and G]

Almost missed that humorous ending till Alan pointed it out.

-----------------------------------------------

I'd like to add something new here. The press releases coming out of UP are flawed, IMO. They are saying the reason for the trademark lawsuit is to control quality of their UP logo and trademark paint etc.

I haven't seen UP trademarks used negatively by ANY model train company. So their reasoning sounds completely misleading.

What they should have said is that they want to make some money off of it. That would have been much more truthfull. But I don't think you can sue UP for being misleading or dishonest. Then again, I'm not a lawyer.

Dave Vergun

[Anonymous]

dave

We are all just not getting the subtlety of UPs action; It is not about the money ; UP is a multi billion dollar concern; Lionel's "royalty" contribution is a pittance and will likely cost more for UP to administer than they will ever get out of it

If the value to UP was so great why did UP wait all this time while Lionel and others were using their trademarks. And I think that fact has everyone nauseated.

Well for one the Dilution Act is new; recall that McDonalds tried at first and failed to stop everyone from using the "Mc" on their products like Molly McButter. They claimed that Jolly Molly was cashing in on McDonalds heavily paid for Mc-trademark. Although Sears Tower won a suit against a barber shop that called Shears Tower, many other “famous” marks have failed, look at Ford Motors and Ford Modeling Agency.

So now with the new Dilution Act it is easier to go after users of your trademark if it is famous.

More importantly, I think UP is sensing that its marks are being used without any control by UP. And after all UP has paid big bucks for the UP mark. They feel that they and not any maker of toys should have the final say as to whether or not their mark is used and on what.

That is all this is about … C O N T R O L

As to the other marks that UP owns; well why would they relinquish control over those as well..

Alan

[Anonymous]

I CAN TELL YOU EXACTLY WHY!!!!!!

Because everyone else is wrong, or misled, or is just guessing, or has some idea but not the complete one.

My neighbor is a the manager of a regional office of UP and she told me that the main reason why UP would be suing for royalties is because Union Pacific actually makes its OWN model trains in HO, and if you all remember right, Lionel just recently entered the HO market with it's veranda turbine(anything else? I don't remember). So basically, UP is having to compete with others in the market who are using their name to eat away at their profit margins.

[Robert Langford]

UP can have their trade mark. There will be NO UP engines or cars on MY model RR>

[Anonymous]

This wooden train is listed for sale on UP's website
This is the competition for Lionel HO??


Alan

[Anonymous]

NO! sorry I was wrong this is the wooden engine that UP is seeking to protect with its lawsuit against Lionel:




Alan

[Frank in Steam]

& they are supposedly worried about the logos appropriate use and that it is rendered correctly? & they are selling that?

[Anonymous]

Talk about keeping the price of the hobby under control. [:D]

[Anonymous]

Can you think of a better reason? All the makers that use the UP logo are basically giving UP a trainload of FREE ADVERTISING. Every time someone buys a UP model they are showing some connection to the railroad, either working for it, or living near it, whatever. Now that's all fine and dandy, EXCEPT when it starts cutting into UP profit margins with their OWN models/contracts to build with other model makers. Personally I think the lawsuit is trivial and pointless, it won't win them much, and it is a publicity nightmare for them. I think they should just sit back and enjoy the free advertizing.

[Anonymous]

And don't forget that Lionel did just start making those little miniature die cast models of locomotives, the ones that are like the size of hot wheels. If in fact those bio-like things are the only models that UP makes/has contracts for, then I suppose those little die cast models might have gotten them peeved. Either way UP has their head way to far up their *** on this one.

[wallyworld]

The lawsuit is really a ploy by UP to take over Lionel. The name of UP will be changed to UPLionel and the first trainset will feature an innovative consist where the last car will be butted up to the first and will not require a transformer so like the prototype, the train will not move. It will also have the latest accessory based on it's NYT expose and features a non operational grade crossing where the gates fail to close which also includes a exploding automobile that derails the train upon impact. .One exciting addition to this line is the new attorney mail car which violently jetisons minature legal briefs and grabs money bags off a crane arm attached to a colorful courthouse . Rumor has that next years line will include an SD40 that resembles a shark complete with large teeth and jaws that go up and down that chases a handcar labelled in Korean "MTH" on which a prototype Mike Wolf pumps furiously away to escape being eaten.

[Anonymous]

I think this trademark issue is a bunch of bunk but it is NOT something new. Caterpillar has been this way for years and years. Take a look the next time you see a model of a "true" CAT model, it will have a statement somewhere on the box or in the paper work regarding "CAT is a registered trademark....." Other than that nothing is different.

The REAL issue is HOW MUCH royalties the greedy bumbs in OMAHA want as that will affect our prices at the hobby shop. I used to work for a major auto manufacturer in the PR department and while we never serious monetary compensation from someone seeking to use the logo, we did ensure that dimensionally and color wise everything was "just so". We would even provide the artwork if they wanted at a price comparable to the "set up and art fee" charged by a screen printer. Basically, we just gave it a blessing.

All the railroads are already in this type of arrangement with their "trinkets and trash" like golf balls, etc. It ain't new but knowing the greed of UP, I wouldn't put my hopes on them doing this for a reasonable price.

Heck, the good sources within EMD and UPRR say UPRR is blaming the derailment in Bond CO on the SD70ACe demo unit! The demo unit was a mid train DPU and the rail broke underneath it. I am sorry but I have a little trouble accepting a locomotive caused this when the wheels, bearings, and trucks on the locomotive were found just fine. EMD was charging them $1 [:Ito try out the unit yet UP wants EMD to pay for derailment costs and to fix the engine themselves! Try that the next time you get in a accident while on a test drive on a new car!

All I have to say is I am glad I don't have to deal with those morons in Omaha as they are just plain greedy and sue happy.[:(!]


Ahhhh..... I feel better now.