Another Lawsuit -- We need a commemorative Litigation Train

[MilesWRich]

I just made a purchase on his auction. I wish i had read about this suit and his other suit. I may be an attorney but I avoid people who litigate like that like the black plague.

[phillyreading]

Don't forget the MINT cars!  And maybe a hobo car, modified with characters carrying briefcases.

You mean an attorney car? Correct?

Lee F.

[Deputy]

Deputy, we have a deal!!!  But..,, a couple other thoughts; if you were thinking of a 1:1 scale statue of Judge Milan on the courthouse lawn on your layout, it may be a little off scale.....as far as Judge  Judy, maybe her figure could be added to the halloween train..

Ahhh...now we have a meeting of minds!!!!

[BDT in Minnesota]

I have come to the conclusion that what this hobby needs is an O Gauge      Judge Judy Courthouse.....made in the USA

Make it Judge Milan Courthouse and it's a deal. She's hotter looking and has a nice personality. Judge Judy is a witch. And I think I misspelled witch

 

Deputy, we have a deal!!!  But..,, a couple other thoughts; if you were thinking of a 1:1 scale statue of Judge Milan on the courthouse lawn on your layout, it may be a little off scale.....as far as Judge  Judy, maybe her figure could be added to the halloween train..

[Deputy]

I have come to the conclusion that what this hobby needs is an O Gauge      Judge Judy Courthouse.....made in the USA

Make it Judge Milan Courthouse and it's a deal. She's hotter looking and has a nice personality. Judge Judy is a witch. And I think I misspelled witch

[BDT in Minnesota]

I have come to the conclusion that what this hobby needs is an O Gauge      Judge Judy Courthouse.....made in the USA

[Deputy]

I would like to see an Orange Juice Tank Car on the litigation train set. (Orange Juice = OJ.) On the side the motto should read "You Can't Beat Our Juice", and the emblem should be a hand with a glove halfway on.

[DMUinCT]

   ABT may, or may not, have a good case, as items appear to be copied "word for word".   The "Greenberg" books have been a great help to the hobby by giving a "ball park" estimate of value and details of collectable products.

    But --- TCA is a non-profit Association, who stated mission is to Promote The Toy Train Hobby. They make available ALL new books on the subject and in some cases allow a "book signing" on there property.  

    TCA is the largest Association devoted to the toy train hobby with 30,000 members.   Is there any reason to try to BANKRUPT a non-profit Association for promoting a member's book about the hobby?      Did ABT take there complaint about a fellow member to TCA, as required by the Bylaws?   Did TCA try to help?  

Don U. TCA 73-5735

[kpolak]

I have the 2004 version of the Doyle book, and from what I understand, not having first hand knowlege, the new(er) version is not as complete.  I understand a great deal of information on  accessories does not appear in the updated book.

Now that Ambrose holds the copywright will they re-issue the 2004 version of the Doyle book under the Ambrose name?

Kurt

[Berk765]

Whew!!! I thought it was another lawsuit between Lionel and MTH. Lawsuits Lawsuits Lawsuits!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[rtraincollector]

And dont forget the "merchandise car" That ejects little briefcases at the touch of a button onto the milk platform.

How about a little twist to that a passenger car that ejects lawers with there breif case on to a train station platform and who would care if they landed standing or on there head

[BDT in Minnesota]

Don;  I allready have one of those litigation trains, but I think it will stay hidden in a tunnel so nobody ever sees that bugger........I don't want to be sued!!!

[lionelsoni]

Did I miss the ending to this?  A mention of Doyle in a recent topic inspired me to google the subject; and I came up with this press release:

David Doyle and Paul V. Ambrose Settle Lawsuit

Pittsburgh, PA, December 31, 2007.

The lawsuit filed by Paul V. Ambrose in late June against Krause Publications and David Doyle alleging that the Standard Catalog of Lionel Train Sets, 1945-1969 infringed upon the copyrights in earlier works written by Mr. Ambrose has been settled by Mr. Ambrose and Mr. Doyle. The Publisher, Krause Publications, Inc., earlier had settled with Mr. Ambrose.

Mr. Doyle has issued the following statement regarding this settlement: "In my preparation of The Standard Catalog of Lionel Train Sets, 1945-1969 and The Collector Guide to Lionel Trains, 1945-1969 I made a mistake. Portions of books previously written by Mr. Paul V. Ambrose on Lionel Post-War Toy Trains appeared in my books. Even more regrettably, Mr. Ambrose's contributions over the past decades to the hobby of collecting postwar Lionel trains was not acknowledged in my books. I have apologized to Mr. Ambrose for my actions and have assigned him the copyrights to these, and other, books of mine as part of our settlement. Mr. Ambrose has graciously accepted my apology. I would also like to apologize to the collecting community.

Other terms of the settlement were not disclosed.

[palallin]

For fear of ABT trying to sue me for something, I will say only the following:

 

I have never and will NEVER even contemplate buying from ABTrains.

 

I know and respect Dave Doyle.

[FJ and G]

Bob's link to a previous thread with the "author" is rather interesting.

 

It's despicable to knowingly violate copyright laws (unknowingly would be difficult). So much stuff gets repeated on the Web that it's hard to trust. As for facts, I like to sometimes put up a so-called fact or 2 on the forum to see just how factual others may think it is. The forum is a good sounding board, but not a substitute for research, of course.

[dougdagrump]

How about a paper shredding car, complete with law clerks, that would leave a trail of confetti whenever the papershredding sounds are activated. It could also be used in place of a tender for steamer.

Not to mention a "Lawyer Joke Caboose" with updatable files. 

[EIS2]

Just because Mr Doyle's book has some identical wording as Mr. Ambrose's book does not necessarily mean that Mr. Doyle copied Mr. Ambrose's book.  Both author's relied on information from third parties for at least part of their material.  I haven't read Mr. Ambrose's book but Mr. Doyle cited a huge list of contributors.  If the third party gave the same written information to both authors, both authors could have the identical wording in their books and neither author would be guilty of plagerism or copywrite infringement.

Earl 

[nblum]

I was willing to give Ambrose the benefit, if only partial, of the doubt about his claims against Krause/Doyle until he filed a complaint against the TCA.  This is utterly unethical, ruthless behavior.  He is an enemy of anyone in the hobby for that action, which is utterly unconscionable and without either merit or excuse.  I wish him the absolute worst in his pursuit of these claims.  May he and his partner go bankrupt for their inexcusable behavior towards an organization that, after all, represents only their fellow hobbiests.  This is legal thuggery and nothing else.

[lionelsoni]

I agree that plagiarism and copyright violation are not the same thing, and I should not have used that term.  However, in this case, I believe that both plagiarism and copyright violation have occurred.  Plagiarism is the use of someone else's work without attribution; and it seems to me that Doyle has done this.  Copyright gives Ambrose the exclusive right to the particular expression of the information in his books, except for certain specific kinds of "fair use" which do not seem to apply here; and I believe Doyle has violated that copyright.

I would agree that Ambrose's claims are overreaching, in that he is making the most sweeping claims and asking for the greatest compensation possible; but the court will presumably cut that back to whatever it deems just.  I think that he is entitled at least to the injunction against further publication and destruction of existing copies.

[chuck]

The original copyright rules were 28 years with an option for renewal.  The laws were changed  (about 10 years ago) to allow for copyright lengths of up to 120 years.  Some of these changes include retro-active time-lines (aka new rules that apply to older works).  There have been concerns raised regarding these changes as new works tend to be based on what was done before (aka prior art).  120 years seems a bit excessive.

I find it hard to justify claimed losses on publication of a similar work when the original is out of print.   If the original was as valuable as the original author believes, why isn't it still in print?  The claim that he deliberately included mis/dis information is his original work leads me to question the validity or value of the original, especially if the original is supposed to be an authoritative source to be used to place on allegedly "rare" objects.

I'm sure Mr. Ambrose has some legal legs to stand on but I think the problems lie more with the laws themselves.

[nblum]

Actually, those words apply more to MTH's lawsuit against Lionel than Ambrose's against Krause and Doyle.  MTH's version of their trade secrets, Lionel's benefits from Korea Brass having access to them, and MTH's injuries are clever distortions of the facts, and thoroughly unbelievable to anyone with technical knowledge and a knowledge of the toy train marketplace during 1998 through present.

With regards to Ambrose's lawsuit, it appears to me to be a fantasy world description of the benefits to others and his injuries.  The factual description of actual products made in the past is not subject to copyright.  It is courtesy and mandated behavior in academic life, which this certainly isn't,  to credit your sources.  Thus if Doyle took notes from an Ambrose book for use in his own, he certainly should have credited him for whatever facts he derived from Ambrose's books.  But such use of factual information isn't legally actionable. There is nothing unique about Ambrose's findings and writings, which are based upon observation of the real world. There is absolutely nothing creative in the description of a set's contents, and in fact, Ambrose's descriptions admittedly depend on the observations and information provided him by many others.  There is no intellectual property here to speak of, in terms of unique creative activity, in my view. 

 

Now if Ambrose could show that a substantial portion of Doyle's descriptions were word for word copied from his books (say 25-75%), he might have a case for plagiarism. Plagiarism has no real legal meaning, it's a scholarly term.  Since Ambrose's books aren't in print, and haven't been for years, he suffered zero economic injury, and there is no basis for a lawsuit for damages.  The courts aren't there to determine if scholarly rules of behavior have been violated.  At most, Ambrose may be owed an apology and Krause might be obligated to pay him the amount they paid to Doyle if the work wasn't done at all by Doyle.  But we know Doyle has been all over the country taking photos of actual models, the real shoe leather wear,  heavy lifting for such a book.  Thus I find Ambrose's charges both incredible and reprehensible. A few paragraphs of identical description of toy trains isn't plagiarism, at worst it's a failure to cite previous sources. My guess, purely based upon  40 years in academic life, is Ambrose's lawsuit has more to do with jealousy and ego than any economic or legally actionable injury.  I wouldn't patronize one of his auctions or buy one of his future books if they were the last such auctions or books on the planet :).  Ambrose, like Mike Wolf, is wasting our judicial system's efforts on their personal and insupportable, to me repugnant goals. He's contributing to the wasting of social resources and all of our money on their personal crusade for control and self-enrichment. Sure it's a little deal compared with most things, and it's entirely legal and defensible, except when the facts are examined, whereupon, to me at least, it's unethical, however legal, and to be condemned.

[lionelsoni]

You say that Ambrose's lawsuit is a "clever...distortion...of what happened".  Yet he seems to have numerous examples of exact or near-exact duplication of his text in Doyle's books.  How can such patent plagiarism be considered a distortion?

[nblum]

All humor aside, there are some serious issues for those who wish to consider them.  While use of the courts to redress harm or illegal behavior is a corner stone of our civilization, the use of the courts to achieve personal ambitions or harm others is a major downside of this system.   The system is slow and inefficient at identifying unjustified and illegitimate attempts to subvert the free flow of the economy.  Both Ambrose's and MTH's lawsuits represent clever and fully crafted distortions of what happened, in an attempt to harm competitors or gain personal advantage or vengeance. 

 

In a small industry such as this, this diverts scarce dollars from  product development, customer service, and advertising revenues for the hobby media.  And it victimizes the target of the lawsuit as well.  There's a reason that neither MTH nor Lionel have done much advertising in recent years, compared with the period before the lawsuit.  There is something you can do to send the message to Ambrose and MTH.  Stop buying their products and stop using their services. That's what I've done and others have suggested in this thread.  If enough people send this message, it will be heard. I'd rather spend my money on companies and individuals who are not trying to destroy the diversity of the hobby and who are not seeking personal aggrandizement and  unfair advantage at the expense of others.

[chuck]

Stock car filled with lawyers with briefcases (optional sound effects have them utter "I object" as the car rocks along).  If you intermix this with pig oinking sounds it might be enve more effective.

"Fertilizer" car, actually a gondola full of writs and motions with a smoke unit that emits manure scented smoke?

Jailbox car (Walther'es had one of these in HO many years ago).  "Next Time any Crime" instead of the "Next Load and Road" logo. 

 

[kpolak]

I was thinking of a bobbing head type caboose with an operating gavel, and Lionel VS. MTH on the sides.  Since it's been in appeal forever, perhaps a couple of lawyers dragging their feet behind.

OR

What about a lawyer chase handcar????  Similar to the gang car when it hits the Lionel train it reverses and chases after the MTH?

Remember...you heard it here first!

Kurt

[Brutus]

We need a Chase Gondola with a lawyer and an ambulance!    Then maybe a shark aquarium car and the sharks have little briefcases....

[pennsy_fan]

And dont forget the "merchandise car" That ejects little briefcases at the touch of a button onto the milk platform.

[alexweiihman]

-...and let's not forget to have a string of  Ambulances on flat cars...-

 

Yeah With this whole situation we'll need a whole lot of those.

[fifedog]

Well, looks like it's time to break out my white Ford Bronco hi-rail truck again...

Johnny Cochran...Oh, guess we can't include him now.

...and let's not forget to have a string of  Ambulances on flat cars...hey, that might look cool anyway.  Spank, you out there?