We have drifted far afield, and I believe the topic has been discussed at sufficient length that we can move on.
-Crandell
DavidH Odie Yes, lawyers have their places. But then there are the ankle biters and ambulance chasers that completely stain the honor of the trade. We all need more lawyers like the one that Carl Truman, 19, of Los Angeles hired. He won $74,000 and medical expenses when his neighbor ran over his hand with a Honda Accord while he was stealing the hubcaps. Definitely worthwhile for society to have more of thee types out there defending my rights. A few seconds of research would show you that this is an urban legend . . . this is one of a number of preposterous stories concocted to support the call for tort reform. I am not a lawyer, BTW! David
Odie Yes, lawyers have their places. But then there are the ankle biters and ambulance chasers that completely stain the honor of the trade. We all need more lawyers like the one that Carl Truman, 19, of Los Angeles hired. He won $74,000 and medical expenses when his neighbor ran over his hand with a Honda Accord while he was stealing the hubcaps. Definitely worthwhile for society to have more of thee types out there defending my rights.
Yes, lawyers have their places. But then there are the ankle biters and ambulance chasers that completely stain the honor of the trade.
We all need more lawyers like the one that Carl Truman, 19, of Los Angeles hired. He won $74,000 and medical expenses when his neighbor ran over his hand with a Honda Accord while he was stealing the hubcaps. Definitely worthwhile for society to have more of thee types out there defending my rights.
A few seconds of research would show you that this is an urban legend . . . this is one of a number of preposterous stories concocted to support the call for tort reform. I am not a lawyer, BTW!
David
How dare you try to use facts in this thread!
lvanhen On the other point, What do you call 500 lawyers on a sinking ship? One **** of a good start!!
On the other point, What do you call 500 lawyers on a sinking ship?
One **** of a good start!!
On the other hand, the sharks will just swim around and not eat the lawyers.
It's called "professional courtesy."
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
mobilman44 You know, I have always felt that companies and sports teams should pass along their name/logo for models, apparel, and the like for free - for these items are advertisements for them. Mobilman44
You know, I have always felt that companies and sports teams should pass along their name/logo for models, apparel, and the like for free - for these items are advertisements for them.
Mobilman44
Sure, why not. I mean these companies/teams only spent millions developing their name into something that has become valuable. Why not let other companies enjoy the fruits of their labor by profiting from the use of the logo. Hey I have an idea, maybe the users can offer up some kind of compensation for using it.
mobilman44 You know, I have always felt that companies and sports teams should pass along their name/logo for models, apparel, and the like for free - for these items are advertisements for them.
You're not getting it.
Let's say you have a BNSF car--heck, a whole BNSF train--on your layout. How does that benefit BNSF?
No one comes to your house, sees the model and says, "Hey, I think I will pay BNSF to ship my freight."
That's how the railroad makes money, you know. So unless your model convinces people to do that, they don't get any advertising value out of your having models of their trains.
Best line on this thread:
This type of discussion however will never be over. We as a society, complain about working hard and want to protect what’s ours. But we don’t want others to be able to protect what is theirs,… if we want to use it. Human nature I guess.
Absolutely. And when the other guy does try to protect what's his, then people start with the "Oh, it's all about money" whining.
Hi!
The part that hurts me the most is that the fee probably will cover the predecessor roads (i.e. Santa Fe, Great Northern, Burlington, etc., etc.).
Oh well, where there's a way to get a buck, it will be used.
ENJOY !
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
rrinker This is where the primary flaw in the law is. They HAVE to charge in order to protect their branding - and it's absolutely silly that use on (and let's come clean on this) a toy would constitute abandonment of said brand.
Manufacturers make their entire profit by selling those "toys." You can try to minimize it by calling the product a toy, but the fact is, making and selling toys is a business designed to create profit for the owners of the company.
TMarsh I see the reasons posted over and over. The owners of the trademark HAVE to pursue this way or the new Underwear and Pacific can have the same logo. As far as free advertising goes. Advertising for what? Or should I say who? I can pick UPS or USPS or Fed-Ex. But can I pick UP or BNSF? What advertising is the railroad getting for free? Model Railroaders ship a lot of stuff by rail? No. It’s the MRR manufacturers that are profiting from the railroad trademarks, and we want to buy them because they are marked with this trademark. So who is profiting from this? Advertising no, saleable yes. Does that make it worthless? No. So who’s trademark is it? The railroads. We want undecorated equipment? Fine let’s buy it, there is a market . We want the UP logo in decals don’t we. Guess we want someone to market them and sell them but not have to pay the railroad too, once again using their trademark for a profit right? If we want to use their Trademark and not have to pay, let’s practice and paint it ourselves. Just don’t sell it, or any other version of distribution that we may deem a loophole. I find it most comical that the main arguments (and I paraphrase) are that the railroads should not pursue the protection of their Trademarks because they have no worth other than to identify their trains on a track….so we can buy things, because they have that trademark, and not have to pay for it‘s use. Aaaannd…… they should be happy letting people profit from their Trademark because it is free advertising to a substantially non-rail shipping market. The only thing that profits from the BNSF logo in this market, is Atlas, Bachmann etc. etc…… This type of discussion however will never be over. We as a society, complain about working hard and want to protect what’s ours. But we don’t want others to be able to protect what is theirs,… if we want to use it. Human nature I guess. Fire away.
I see the reasons posted over and over. The owners of the trademark HAVE to pursue this way or the new Underwear and Pacific can have the same logo. As far as free advertising goes. Advertising for what? Or should I say who? I can pick UPS or USPS or Fed-Ex. But can I pick UP or BNSF? What advertising is the railroad getting for free? Model Railroaders ship a lot of stuff by rail? No. It’s the MRR manufacturers that are profiting from the railroad trademarks, and we want to buy them because they are marked with this trademark. So who is profiting from this? Advertising no, saleable yes. Does that make it worthless? No. So who’s trademark is it? The railroads. We want undecorated equipment? Fine let’s buy it, there is a market . We want the UP logo in decals don’t we. Guess we want someone to market them and sell them but not have to pay the railroad too, once again using their trademark for a profit right? If we want to use their Trademark and not have to pay, let’s practice and paint it ourselves. Just don’t sell it, or any other version of distribution that we may deem a loophole.
I find it most comical that the main arguments (and I paraphrase) are that the railroads should not pursue the protection of their Trademarks because they have no worth other than to identify their trains on a track….so we can buy things, because they have that trademark, and not have to pay for it‘s use. Aaaannd…… they should be happy letting people profit from their Trademark because it is free advertising to a substantially non-rail shipping market. The only thing that profits from the BNSF logo in this market, is Atlas, Bachmann etc. etc……
Fire away.
Whistling,clapping of hands,stomping of feet with a chorus of BRAVO! Well said!
I can't remember when a shipping manager visited my past ISLs or any of the clubs..So,no free advertising here or at the clubs.
I can assure you most shipping managers are well aware of rail service as well as truck service and their inherited faults..He/she chooses the mode best suited for his needs according to company shipping guide lines.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
Todd
Central Illinoyz
In order to keep my position as Master and Supreme Ruler of the House, I don't argue with my wife.
I'm a small town boy. A product of two people from even smaller towns. I don’t talk on topic….. I just talk.
Well, after wading through this thread, I am reminded of the old saying "much ado about nothing", sorry Shakespeare. As a long time Santa Fe modeler, I have purchased more than enough Santa Fe equipment to keep my railroad running until I am buried with the railroad (my wife's saying). But I am not going to get my knickers all bunched up over the royalty thing. Certainly today if something is made in Santa Fe that I want, I will find a way, and a lousy buck isn't going to stop me from buying it.
So rave on, but it will not change things if BNSF chooses to do it.
Bob
Like any animal on this planet has its turf ---we are seeing people in these companies doing the same thing---it is called marking territory. We still have these bio-territorial circuits in the brain, hence----
Any argument carried far enough will end up in Semantics--Hartz's law of rhetoric Emerald. Leemer and Southern The route of the Sceptre Express Barry
I just started my blog site...more stuff to come...
http://modeltrainswithmusic.blogspot.ca/
NittanyLion I may have missed a mention of it, but they are almost obligated to defend their marks. Even if they aren't using them right now, and someone else starts profiting from them (which a model company is), the original company could lose out on those rights. If the time comes that they DO want to use them again, and they didn't defend them, they're out of luck. See, that's why they have to charge a fee too and not just be like "ok you have permission but we're not going to make you pay us." Because if another company DOES use those marks and BNSF goes to defend them a good lawyer will try to make it look like BNSF abandoned those marks through free usage by another party.
I may have missed a mention of it, but they are almost obligated to defend their marks. Even if they aren't using them right now, and someone else starts profiting from them (which a model company is), the original company could lose out on those rights. If the time comes that they DO want to use them again, and they didn't defend them, they're out of luck. See, that's why they have to charge a fee too and not just be like "ok you have permission but we're not going to make you pay us." Because if another company DOES use those marks and BNSF goes to defend them a good lawyer will try to make it look like BNSF abandoned those marks through free usage by another party.
This is where the primary flaw in the law is. They HAVE to charge in order to protect their branding - and it's absolutely silly that use on (and let's come clean on this) a toy would constitute abandonment of said brand. It's absolutely silly to think peopel would confuse the issue. It's as bad at Tony's Train Exchange - who in their right mind would POSSIBLY confuse Trailer Train with a hobby shop? It's absurd.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Ah for the good old days when the railroads PAID to put their logos on models, because it was free advertising!
AltonFan I'm sorry, but if they abandoned those trademarks long ago, they should be out of luck. It's one thing to defend a trademark that has been in recent or more or less continuous use, but for a product (or a railroad line) that disappeared thirty, forty, fifty or more years ago? Just because something is legal, doesn't make it the right, or even the prudent thing to do.
I'm sorry, but if they abandoned those trademarks long ago, they should be out of luck. It's one thing to defend a trademark that has been in recent or more or less continuous use, but for a product (or a railroad line) that disappeared thirty, forty, fifty or more years ago?
Just because something is legal, doesn't make it the right, or even the prudent thing to do.
Just because they don't use it does not mean it has been abandoned. It is still an asset of the company.
Example:
ABC company buys all assets of XYZ company. It recieves all assets and liabilities of the company it purchased. One of these assets is the name of the company it bought. It has the right then to do what ever it wants to do with that name. They can stop using it, keep using it or sell it if they want. From the day they purchase it, it is theirs to do with as they please with no expiration date on it. Another example would be if Ronnalds Hamburgers chain were to buy out Whopper World, they would own the stores and the name associated with it. In this example you can not go out and open a restaraunt using the Whopper World name and try to capitalize on the popularity of that now defunct chain. The name has not been abandond as it is owned by the company that bought it.
Its not that difficult to understand. I have worked long and hard to get to a certain level in life. Now suppose someone decided that they wanted my name, address, looks (can not imagine that one) but you get the idea. It is similiar to copyright/logo/identity. They are protecting an image or relfection of themselves. Who would not want to protect that? I do have a problem with forcing licensing so that they can make a profit from it. We're talking about toys. There is absolutely no competition or conflict of interest with toys. (unless they are upset because the shipping container, from China, was loaded with BNSF models and shipped on UP rails) Whats next....EMD, GE, TTX, or any number of manufacturers demanding payment? How about the manufacturer of the paint/colors/stickers used on cars/locomotives? Like I said...I have no problem with protecting your good name/image/history. There will always be someone trying to take advantage of a situation and profit from someone elses hard work but it aint me. I just wanna play with my trains.
AltonFanI'm sorry, but if they abandoned those trademarks long ago, they should be out of luck. It's one thing to defend a trademark that has been in recent or more or less continuous use, but for a product (or a railroad line) that disappeared thirty, forty, fifty or more years ago?
They haven't abandoned them, which is sorta the point. They're taking the measure to ensure that they haven't done that.
If BN and later BNSF had no defended or abandon their trademark colors of predecessor companies, they could have run into legal issues if another railroad had operated orange and green locomotives in the 30 years between the orange GN power and the orange BNSF power. They don't know what their future holds and they have to defend all their cards in that case.
Let us call it ---Marking Behaviour;It's all in the territory my friends----
twhite Dang, guys, I sure owe a lot of Royalties, don't I? Tom
Dang, guys, I sure owe a lot of Royalties, don't I?
Tom
Only if you sell your models commercially.
OdieWe all need more lawyers like the one that Carl Truman, 19, of Los Angeles hired. He won $74,000 and medical expenses when his neighbor ran over his hand with a Honda Accord while he was stealing the hubcaps. Definitely worthwhile for society to have more of thee types out there defending my rights.
Check snopes.com. That one's not real, just for the record.
I'm here to tell you folks, my line of work involves settling the auto insurance claims on one of the largest fleets of cars in the country. I swear I see every sleeze ball and their lawyer you could imagine.
When the 2 "ladies" in Oklahoma were rear-ended by our driver --- who took his foot off the brake at a stop light and edged forward at less than a mile per hour --- and they literally fell into the street screaming in terror and pain, that's when I thought I lost my faith in humanity. Then I found out it was their 5th such "accident" and used the same lawyer each time. They only want about $50K each for their severe injuries.
I have officially lost my faith in humanity and the lawyers that represent them in court. Boy, could I tell you stories.
Well, not to get into the legal ramifications of it all, I just started thinking about my model railroad. I model Denver and Rio Grande Western and Southern Pacific WWII steam (UP) and due to wartime motive power shortages I've leased a couple of Colorado and Southern steamers (BNSF) to say nothing of a couple of ATSF steamers (BNSF) and my fictional Yuba River Sub also has an off-layout connection to the WP (UP) 'Highline', which means that occasionally I have GN (BNSF) motive power running through. And to top it off, part of my roster consists of three 'never was' Rio Grande (UP) Yellowstones built on Missabe copies (CN?).
Tom View my layout photos! http://s299.photobucket.com/albums/mm310/TWhite-014/Rio%20Grande%20Yuba%20River%20Sub One can NEVER have too many Articulateds!
Midnight Railroader N737AA You would think someone would realize the value of the free advertising they get. There's only value if it increases the number of customers the railroad has. I don't know why people don't understand this; the point of advertising is to convince potentional customers to use the service. If that does not happen, then there is no value to the "free advertising." Unless you got someone to ship via UP because they saw a model of a UP car on your layout, your model of a UP car did not have any value as "free advertising."
N737AA You would think someone would realize the value of the free advertising they get.
You would think someone would realize the value of the free advertising they get.
There's only value if it increases the number of customers the railroad has.
I don't know why people don't understand this; the point of advertising is to convince potentional customers to use the service. If that does not happen, then there is no value to the "free advertising."
Unless you got someone to ship via UP because they saw a model of a UP car on your layout, your model of a UP car did not have any value as "free advertising."
There is also, Corporate Advertising where a company will have advertisements inserted into various publications in order to create a good feeling towards that company. Or a company may insert advertising in some kind of magazine or news paper feature that creates good feeling about the company. This is aimed at current customers yet dosen't nessesarily and directly promote a product or service. All this means that they are not as a main priority trying to attract new custom direct, but they are endevouring to create or modify a change in attitude or a change in perception.
An oil company who has been found responsible for an enviromental maritime disaster bought about by bulk oil spillage my create advertising to show that they are really tree huggers and not the heartless corporate pirates they are percieved to be. Or, as is more usual, a company may have a corporate advertisement running in say a publication that also features advertising of one of it's customers. This is the kind of thing where a companies advertisement may be a heart warminmg pictiure from nature or puppies and kittens with just say the corporations name or logo at the bottom of the ad. On TV they do the same thing with furry animals and soft mood inducing music.
I find it difficult to imagine that any company would consider signage on a locomotive or box car to fall into this catagory. Usually the Liscence Fee is set to cover administration costs the company incurs having to police their new agreements with manufactures.
Lawyers; Not all of these folks are as you imagine them to be. Most don't appear in court litigating actions or defending or proscecuting those who have been charged with a crime. For every kind of law on the books there is a lawyer who specializes in this law be it; tax, maritime, civil rights, aviation, industrial, company, torts, realty, The Consitiution and so on.
It's the shyster type lawyer we like to play with and kid around with when we make jokes about them, but these are often court actor types and celebrity lawyers whose reason for being is more about having their ego's inflated that serious back room head in a book kind of lawyer who is more typical of the profession.
Bruce
Well, one way around it is to misspell the company name. Several years ago when UPS was demanding royalty payments from anyone who wanted to model a UPS truck or trailer, Walthers was selling a model of a UPS truck made in China (what isn't) where the logo was "USP".
Packers#1 Heartland Division CB&Q Imagine, if you will, a world with no lawyers. ..................... Ah, that would be nice, except if you got busted for a crime (which i never intend to do, btw).
Heartland Division CB&Q Imagine, if you will, a world with no lawyers. .....................
Imagine, if you will, a world with no lawyers. .....................
Ah, that would be nice, except if you got busted for a crime (which i never intend to do, btw).
Or are wrongly accused of one.
Or are the victim of a scam.
Or are the victim of an auto accident and the other guy won't pay.
Or...you name it.
Everyone loves to bash attorneys. Until they need one.
2
one for the defendent, one for the accused
"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination."-Albert Einstein
http://gearedsteam.blogspot.com/
MrKLUKE Regarding the lawyer sympathizers here...yes, we know sometimes they are important. BUT many more times they are a complete drain on society and productivity. Sorry, there are just TOO MANY and our system is a wreck that can not be fixed.
How many would be the "right" number?