Question on Lionel Engines that were in the Law Suit

[Anonymous]

In the February 2005 Classic Trains Magazine there is a picture of a Western Maryland Challenger along with the article on the train engines that were involved in the Lionel / Mth Law Suit. In the article it said that Lionel can't continue to sell a Baby Challenger. The picture looks like a Lionmaster Challenger in the Western Maryland name. Question--- is the Baby Challenger the article refers to the Lionmaster Challenger or another engine. Was the past and present Lionmaster Challengers in all road names one of the engines banned by the court. Could someone post a list of the engines that are scale, semi-scale, baby etc. to help clear up my confusion.

[Bob Keller]

"Baby" was terminology from the trial, not a catalog, and was used to indicate non-scale models.

[Kooljock1]

It's a good question. I have two of the "Baby K4s" mentioned in the lawsuit, and when held side-by-side with an MTH model, you can see cause for worry.

But to compare a LionMaster Challenger with a MTH Rail King Challenger is like comparing Apples to Easter Bunnies!

Mechanically, they're quite different, with the LIONEL model using two "pivoting power trucks", much like a diesel locomotive. The MTH version is built like a real Challenger, with the rear engine fixed to the frame, while the front engine pivots with the pilot assembly.

The LIONEL model has a much larger, better proportioned tender than the MTH model.

The MTH model has cast-in class lights.

Jon [8D]

[wrmcclellan]

SF41, [#welcome]

The answer is as you suspect. The Lionmaster Challengers can no longer be manufactured per the lawsuit ruling, regardless of the road name on the engine.

Your other question regarding which engines are scale, semi-scale, etc., is too broad to easily answer. If you have a specific engine (and we would need the manufacturer, the manufacturers catalog or P/N, etc.), let us know and we can try to answer it for you.

Regards,
Roy

[Anonymous]

How many engines were copied. I first heard it was only 3 and they were premier. I guess the info was very wrong. Dave.

[Anonymous]

Hello All: Imagine what it was like in that courtroom, I bet you by the end of it all the court officials either loved or hated trains. I also wondered what the outcome would have been if it was held in another State? California comes to mind, with some of the wild lawsuits we have seen come out of there over the years. Just a few thoughts, Kind Regard's to All Steve

[wrmcclellan]

There was a posting here a few months back that gave a detailed list of all the engines covered by the suit results, but I was unable to recover it. Maybe another member can dig it up.

[prewardude]

Here's everything you ever wanted to know about the lawsuit:
http://www.trains.com/Content/Dynamic/Articles/000/000/005/709cdxzv.asp

Scroll down to November 1, 2004 for the complete list of engines involved.

Regards,
Clint

[eZAK]

I never realized it before, But there are engines on that list that Lionel made before Mike Wolf was born!

[nblum]

Yes, the judge ruled that Lionel had to PROVE that any new versions of these locos weren't in any way designed from MTH/Samhongsa materials. Good thinkin' judge :). One of many reasons I believe the case will be reversed or remanded for retrial. Who, other than someone completely ignorant about the subject could rule that the original owner of the rights to a model should have to prove they didn't use their chief competitor's designs? Speak of injustice and irrationality......... ;).

[seafoid]

Neil

Yes, speaking of irrationality, just put down the orange and blue Kool-Aid and slowly back away. It doesn't matter who initially produced the engine. If the CURRENT design is stolen, it is theft of intellectual property, and is improper. The decision will not IMHO be reversed. It might be reduced, but not reversed.

Here's a news bulletin--Lionel (and MTH) are not perfect, and can (and do) do things wrong. Get over it.

[nblum]

The issues are much more complex than you suggest. But that's what happens when you drink the purple Kool-Aid. Lionel's attorneys argued, correctly, that MTH had originally "stolen" the designs for several of Lionel's engines in question. The judge and jury didn't seem to be troubled by that theft. The judge also failed to require that MTH prove that Korea Brass actually used the materials in question. He accepted as proof of liability that the subcontractor merely had possession of materials that belonged to Samhongsa. And the judge didn't just state that Lionel had to create new dies and drawings, but that they had to prove to the court that they did so. Which is more than the proof he required of MTH in the first place. He created a bar so high and patently unfair that no sane appeals court should allow it to stand, IMO.

[seafoid]

Neil

Sorry to disapoint you, but I don't sip from any color of Kool-Aid, orange, purple, blue or yellow. I am merely looking at a jury verdict with the experience of three years of law school anf 25 years of experience, but hey--what do I know compared to the flamers on these forums. I hate to disappoint you, but the burden on Lionel will be to prove that there were substanital mistakes of law or fact which rendered the trial unfair, and the burden is on Lionel to show that the verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence, a very high burden (despite what Jerry C might say).

That said, I think, based on the documents I have read (including transcripts), that Lionel knowingly used stolen designs, and should pay. Whether it should be $40M is another issue, and (unlike many here, I don't pretend to know the financial documents an testimy presented to the judge and jury. Remember they saw the trial, we didn't, and it is the height of arrogance to think we knwo better than the people who sat through this case.

One other thing that might make your day--many of these cases result in the loser being liable for the winner's attorney's fees. That is a separate finding after appeals are exhausted (if these cases are like civil rights or Lanham Act trademark cases) and could increase the $40M, as would post judgment interest (unless eliminated by the bankruptcy court).

Sorry about tryring to bring a little prospective to this, particularily since I have (despite your suggestion about purple Kool-Aid) no ax to grind.

By the way--I have about 30% Lionel, 30% MTH, 30% K-Line and 10% Atlas, Ives, Industrial Rail, Weaver, Williams, etc. etc. etc., so draw you own conclusion. The plain fact is I am just sick and tired of the die hard Lionel worshipers (sorry Neil) and the die hard MTH worshipers (sorry Tony Lash) (not singling any one person out) who don't let the facts get in the way of their postings. That said, anyone can bash any of the manufacturers (MTH for the multi-year delays in shipping, PS-1, and incompatiability of DSC, K-Line for their delays, recent price increases, and everyone for quality problems) and be dorrect in what they say.

It's just that after reading this forum and OGR forum for the past several months, I just needed to have my say. I'm not trying to pick on you Neil, but I also feel that what I said above is accurate. Just my take on things.

[AlanRail]

seafoid

You are wasting your connect-time responding to those who fully understand "bar" law. You know the law that folks in bars talk about but has nothing what so ever to do with the law.

The fact is everyone on these threads writes as though they know what the law is because they read the statutes or have a brother-in-law that was sued for the very same thing…

Obviously, some, if not all, of the posters are legal experts.

My advice is stop wasting your time, trying to educate those who already know the law better than judges and lawyers.


AlanRail, Esq.

[seafoid]

Alan

You're right, but I guess sometimes you just have to vent. I know that it is useless to try to tell anything to those who already know it all, but I guess sometimes I just have to bang my head against the wall anyway, I'm not claiming to know it all, just putting out some facts and opinions, for whoever wants to consider them.

[macdannyk1]

Oy! [banghead]