Mainline Modeler still scrapping with UP/CSX

[Anonymous]

I find it wonderful that people are still upset with Union Pacific's decision to require licensing the use of their trademark to model railroad manufacturers! It appears that CSX is getting on board with this stupid idea also, as can be read about in the November Issue of Mainline Modeler. Two of the five letters to the editor deal with this issue and the Publisher's Comments in Mainline Commentary "Give No Quarter" to the Union Pacific over this issue.

Made especially clear is the "Fallen Flags" debate. These flags have fallen and are no longer in use. Unless being used in day to day service, the truth appears that they have become public property and are not Union Pacific's, CSX's or anyone's except American History.

My opinion on this whole matter is; if you have enough money, are stupid enough and are a bully, you can waste everyones time and money!

I am glad to see a publication take a stand! Maybe there is some courage left in American business!

[mecovey]

Go Hundman!

[Anonymous]

I don't see what all the fuss is about. Me being a big fan of UP and CSX, $10.00 more on a model isn't a big deal. I wish everyone would get over it. Besides, it's only a matter of time before BNSF, NS, KCS, CP, FEC, and CN start doing this too.

[Anonymous]

Jonathan,

I'm assuming you mean adding $10.00 to a high priced engine. Would be a bummer to tack $10 onto a athearn blue box box car. lol

I have no problem with UP and CSX wanting to license their logo, but to require licenses for "fallen flags" ie: SP, DRGW, etc etc is ludicrous.

[Anonymous]

The fuss for me is that the idea of doing this is just plain STUPID! Who does this benefit? Why, after 75 years of there being model and toy trains using their logos, has this become an issue? It has nothing to do with the licensing fees, although I hate the idea of throwing money away on a stupid licensing fee. It's just plain corporate dumb think and creating bad publicity for for the big wigs at UP and CSX, which they deserve. It sounds like it just a matter of time before the rest of the big rails will be getting aboard with this.

It certainly is within everyones right to go ahead and endorse UP and CSX's actions, if that is what you choose.

[Anonymous]

I'm not saying I agree with UP and CSX's actions. I just don't really care. As long as I get UP models, I'm happy.

[Anonymous]

Being happy is what it's all about!

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dkelly

Jonathan,

I'm assuming you mean adding $10.00 to a high priced engine. Would be a bummer to tack $10 onto a athearn blue box box car. lol

I have no problem with UP and CSX wanting to license their logo, but to require licenses for "fallen flags" ie: SP, DRGW, etc etc is ludicrous.

[#ditto].

[Anonymous]

well, im not going to stop buying CSX models, although i dont endorse this. a few dollars more isnt really a huge deal, not that i enjoy price spikes but like i said, im not stopping modelling what i like just because a few execs are bieng idiots.

[Anonymous]

JPM335, I certainly am not asking you or anyone to stop modeling the UP or CSX in reference to the above. I am just stating that I think all of this is a ridiculous and stupid endeavor and is helpful to no one and bad PR for the heads of these companies. Just because they are stupid, doesn't mean their whole company is or should be made to look stupid by them!

[chutton01]

QUOTE: Originally posted by 4884bigboy

I'm not saying I agree with UP and CSX's actions. I just don't really care. As long as I get UP models, I'm happy.

Well, if some distributors don't want to pay the licensing fee, then you may not get their models in UP or predecessors...
And to go to a extreme (but certainly thinkable) case, what if UP said no manufacturer can create any further models with UP (or predessor) markings (perhaps because they want to market an exclusive 'toy train' line of their own). So you wouldn't be getting any more UP models, and I guess you wouldn't be so happy then...

[dehusman]

First the Union Pacific Railroad did not decide to license its logos. The Union Pacific Corporation did. The Union Pacific is not just a railroad. During its history it has been a land developer, a communications company, mining company, a cement plant, ski resorts, an air freight company, several trucking companies, a freight forwarder, a logistics company, a software developer and many others. Probably nobody will confuse a model engine with a real one. But if a truck pulls up in front of your house to deliver an express package and it has a UP shield and a "UP Express Delivery" on the side one could reasonably think that that truck was affiliated with the UP. If your company is solicited by "UP Information Technologies" concerning logistics tracking software would you assume it was affiliated with the UP? (one of the two above examples could actually happen, one is fake).
The UP licensed its logos to protect ALL of its business activities from being infringed upon. If it licenses part, it licenses all. That includes logos used on model railroad equipment.

The fallen flags are "fallen" in your minds only. They still exist in contracts and legal obligations and in some cases as corporate entities. Regardless of whether they paint a boxcar or not. The American Regrigerator Transit company is long gone correct?

Wrong.

UP's rebuilt reefers have ARMH reporting marks, those were marks used by ART. The UP has to uphold thousands of contracts written by the "Rio Grande", how can you say they aren't the "Rio Grande"? Oldsmobile is a "fallen flag". Try marketing something with the "Oldsmobile" emblem on it and see how fast a horde of GM lawyers show up asking, "What's in your wallet?"

[ericsp]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dehusman

UP's rebuilt reefers have ARMH reporting marks, those were marks used by ART.

I saw some ex-FGE reefers with ARMH reporting marks a few years ago. However, all of the rebuilt UP reefers I have seen have ARMN reporting marks.

[lupo]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dehusman

First the Union Pacific Railroad did not decide to license its logos. The Union Pacific Corporation did. The Union Pacific is not just a railroad. During its history it has been a land developer, a communications company, mining company, a cement plant, ski resorts, an air freight company, several trucking companies, a freight forwarder, a logistics company, a software developer and many others. Probably nobody will confuse a model engine with a real one. But if a truck pulls up in front of your house to deliver an express package and it has a UP shield and a "UP Express Delivery" on the side one could reasonably think that that truck was affiliated with the UP. If your company is solicited by "UP Information Technologies" concerning logistics tracking software would you assume it was affiliated with the UP? (one of the two above examples could actually happen, one is fake).
The UP licensed its logos to protect ALL of its business activities from being infringed upon. If it licenses part, it licenses all. That includes logos used on model railroad equipment.

The fallen flags are "fallen" in your minds only. They still exist in contracts and legal obligations and in some cases as corporate entities. Regardless of whether they paint a boxcar or not. The American Regrigerator Transit company is long gone correct?

Wrong.

UP's rebuilt reefers have ARMH reporting marks, those were marks used by ART. The UP has to uphold thousands of contracts written by the "Rio Grande", how can you say they aren't the "Rio Grande"? Oldsmobile is a "fallen flag". Try marketing something with the "Oldsmobile" emblem on it and see how fast a horde of GM lawyers show up asking, "What's in your wallet?"

Thanks [tup] now that is a clear explanation,
should be on top of every "don't know what to post let's kick the Union Pacific" topic
thanks!

QUOTE: bigboy4884:
I'm not saying I agree with UP and CSX's actions. I just don't really care. As long as I get UP models, I'm happy.

[#ditto]

[Anonymous]

Lupo,
You need to take everything stated on here with a grain of salt! Not to besmirch Mr. dehusman, but, who's to say he has his facts "right"? What are his credentials which makes him an authority on this subject. I'm not saying he is not, I'm saying this is, after all, the internet, the purveyor of truth as well as, and easily as, lies!

Also, I attempt to post interesting topics and am not a UP/CSX basher. If you don't care about this subject, why would you take the time to post?

Submitted with respect.

Mark DeSchane

[lupo]

Mark, I thought dehusman´s answer quite clarifying about what the reason behind the whole licencing deal could be.
( you are right, do not believe all things you read, specilally on the internet )

BTW: to me your topic is not of the "don't know what to post let's kick the Union Pacific" type as we saw a lot this spring and summer ( when the atlas forum was shut down ?? )
the fact that you started this topic was one of the reasons I read it.
I should have been more specific! ( and ship. . . . )[:D]

[prostreetamx]

Ford almost lost the rights to thier blue oval symbol so the chose to start using it again. Car manufactures have been on the liscencing band wagon for years. Try to make a model of a Hudson or any AMC product without Diamler Chryslers permission. I have even seen recent books where Chrysler takes credit for the AMC AMX when AMC wasn't even part of Chrysler until 1986. I'm sure that any railroad that buys up another railroad and disbands or absorbs thier assets has also aquired all thier rights to name usage. Get used to it, In this age of lawyers everyone wants to get in your pocket. Vote with your wallet. I personally will buy whatever I want if I feel the price is fair.
Richard Payne
Las Vegas

[BRAKIE]

Guys,Its past time that this UP/CSX thing is laid to rest. Atlas and Athearn wised up to this and sign a agreement and that was the best solution as all other manufacturers already sign except maybe Lionel.
Now I am sure NS,CP,CN,KCS and other railroads including short lines will have a licensing agreement before long..
So grow up and let it rest as there isn't a dang thing that can be done about it except quit the hobby or continue to cry over spill milk...[;)]

[Anonymous]

Just my 2 cents. What is the licensing fee? If it is some small amount, then no problem as an argument can be made that the model manufacturer is able to make a sale by using the railroad's property. I remember reading once that some railroad just wanted to give its OK to a product using its trademarks - which I have absolutely no problem with as that fits with the "official line" used by UP (protecting what folks think of the railroad). And yes the UP and DRGW does exist in the form of contracts - but only because those contracts have either language obligating "SP and its successors" or because UP bought SP's assets and liabilities. I believe any suit on these contracts would involve UP, not SP as it is my understanding that SP no longer legally exists.

I do believe, however, that some of the railroads miss out on an important aspect. While I can only speak for myself, I'm sure others out here would agree. My modeling of railroads is what sparked my interst in reading and learning more about them - first to increase the quality of my modeling. I then became more interested in the history of railroads and how they operate. If I wasn't a modelrailroader, I doubt I would care that the PC merger flopped, hope for the success of Conrail and a desire to see Amtrack continue. I dare say that modelrailroaders as a group are probably the most supportive non-railroad industry of the railroad industry. We've become a free spokesperson for the industry. How many of us have explained to others the importance of maintaining a rail system? How many young adults learned first hand about the importance of railroads at the Boy Scout National Jamboree working the model railroad merit badge and obtained the operation lifesaver information (which I'm sure saves the railroads millions of dollars with each avoided accident)?

IMHO the railroads are missing out on an excellent opportunity to advance their own interests by the licensing of their logos. Instead they should become involved in the hobby. Write articles in the magazines describing their newest technology and why it increases the efficiency of transportation. Would make an interesting sidebar to a construction/kitbashing piece. Imagine an article about intermodel with a sidebar written by BNSF on how their new port facility and cars decrease shipping costs and save the consumer money. Or a grade crossing article with a sidebar on how CSX is upgrading their grade crossing and how it has cut down accidents. Seems to me that would increase the perception of the railroads as good guys much more than getting a couple dollars for every model sold.

Of course just my 2 cents worth here.

[Anonymous]

dkelly, I could not agree with you more! My point is these actions are counter productive and leave a bad taste in MY mouth. I really don't care what the amount of the licensing fee is, this just seems to me to be another corruption of the old honorable American way of doing business! I guess it ALL boils down to "My lawyer is bigger than yours"!

However, Our father who art "Brakie" feels we should grow up and drop this subject. We all know he doesn't really want this, as it would leave him with little to say to us Yung'ns!

Hey, this subject could be the basis for another "great" reality program on TV! Let's see, we've got political intrigue, The big guy kickin' stuffin' outa the little guy and being overall stupid and throwing his weight around. The little guy picking up the tab for all the foolishness and Lawyers making a good cut!

Now, what should we name it?

[dehusman]

The fee is 3% of the WHOLESALE cost of merchandise with a UP logo or ,5% of the wholesale price of all merchandise sold.

So if Athearn sells an engine to the hobby shop for $50, and the hobby shop sells it for $75, the fee is 3% of $50 or $1.50.

If the engine is being distributed by a historical society the license is free.

Dave H.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dehusman

The fee is 3% of the WHOLESALE cost of merchandise with a UP logo or ,5% of the wholesale price of all merchandise sold.

So if Athearn sells an engine to the hobby shop for $50, and the hobby shop sells it for $75, the fee is 3% of $50 or $1.50.

I've seen some HO scale UP diesels listed in magazine ads at $5.00 more than other ones, so someone is charging $5.00 for the licensing fee.

Bob Boudreau

[dehusman]

They are charging more for a UP engine. That doesn't mean UP is getting all that. For all of that $5 to be license that would mean the wholesale price would have to be about $160. If the markup on the item was 25% then it would be a retail $200+ engine.

What was the price of the engine? One thing I have never seen anybody post is what is the markup between manufacturer and hobby shop.

Dave H.

[Anonymous]

Surprise, surprise! Could it be that someone is using the UP fees to rip buyers off? Or, might it be that the extra work and book keeping to comply, might cost the manufacturer, then the wholesaler, then the retailer, some extra time and money? This would seem reasonable to me. All of a sudden, it's not just 3% anymore.

I can be spiteful at times, if I were a manufacturer, I'd have stopped making UP stuff, when this all came to a head. Then it would be up to the decal manufacturers to collect the fees, if they wanted to fool with producing them.

[Anonymous]

Ever notice that there has been more UP stuff being made in the past few months?

[Anonymous]

Interesting thought. What happens if Athearn made two types of UP diesels. One painted and lettered - giving UP 3% of let's just say $50.00. The other UP diesel would just be painted and include a set of MicroScale decals for the modeler to put on. UP would then get 3% of let's say $3.00. Hmmmmmm. Would be pretty humerous!!

[BRAKIE]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dkelly

Interesting thought. What happens if Athearn made two types of UP diesels. One painted and lettered - giving UP 3% of let's just say $50.00. The other UP diesel would just be painted and include a set of MicroScale decals for the modeler to put on. UP would then get 3% of let's say $3.00. Hmmmmmm. Would be pretty humerous!!

Nope! Don't work that way..You see the decal company also pays that fee.

[dehusman]

The decal company would pay 3% of the cost of the decals, so if the wholesale cost of the decals was $2 then the UP would get 6 cents.

Now the question I would have is would Athearn have to pay a royalty on its challengers?

Steam engines rarely have a logo on them. The only catch is the sheild number plate and that UP used a unique type style. On the other hand a Missouri Pacific early switcher or steam engine has nothing but a generic roman text. Would they require a license?

Dave H.

[PennsyHoosier]

Good grief! You KNOW who will pay for the licensing fees? WE WILL OF COURSE! [|(]

I'm about to buy a lifetime supply of decals and prepare to paint undecorated motive power and rolling stock for the rest of my modeling days.

Is model railroading that lucrative that the companies believe this is necessary?

I'm ready to bash on the UP at this point--but I'll take on the others who follow suit. This is so disappointing.

Come to think of it, it sounds like the MTH's approach to model railroading.

[Anonymous]

an extra dollar or two is no big deal to me.