UP vs Model Railroaders This Madness has to end. (Lawyers I want options)

[feltonhill]

Lotus098 posted a link to the application, which did not contain any terms and conditions that would be imposed upon approval. That's why I was interested in finding them because I've been led to believe they are very broad and intrusive. I'm just trying to find the raw material, so-to-speak, and form my own opinion.

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by feltonhill

Somewhere along the line, I recall that the major problem with UP's licensing agreement was extremely broad wording that gave them the right to examine the model manufacturing company's books, and confiscate tooling paid for by the company. This was argued in several model publications. I found no link to the contract's wording in this thread, only the application for license found on UP's website, and referenced here. Does anyone have a copy or source for the entire contract? I recall seeing the first several pages of it, but not the last. That's where most of the argument was early-on, not necessarily with the up-front fee. Without seeing the entire contract, we're guessing at what UP is asking for in total.

Lotus098 posted a link to it on the first page of this thread.

[Anonymous]

I could understand what UP is doing it is very bad for the RR when someone goffs up on the Logo for there use. But this madness won't stop for a while if ever.

[dinwitty]

ok, well, it seems to me anything produced with the UP logo isnt money lost.
Its money not made.

Handing over equipment and destroying it works against their goals.
But I suggest no one make UP stuff anymore now.
If the railroad wants to promote themselves, they will have to pay.

[Anonymous]

Here are the Price range from Firsthobby on those new HO Athearn SD40-2's.
The BNSF ones are $53.99.
The UPRR ones are $57.39.
The UPRR ones cost $3.40 more than the BNSF's. But I have to admit! I realy like those UP's because of the UP Shield on the nose. The ONLY thing I don't like......Is that "We will Deliver" on them. That looks realy dumb. Allan.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by 4884bigboy

QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSFrailfan

UP hates Model Railroaders.

Just like George Bush supposedly hates black people? Lies.

I am not going to go there.........

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSFrailfan

UP hates Model Railroaders.

Just like George Bush supposedly hates black people? Lies.

[Anonymous]

They could argue that they were making models of american icons in ho scale. that would p!$$ them off for sure.

[Paul3]

Ok, I know it's from two weeks ago, but Tom Diehl made an interesting point about where the extra money that is being charged is going.

Well, remember that for every $1 in cost to a manufacturer, the retail price increases as well. Not by that $1, however, but instead by a factor approaching 3 if using typical retail and wholesale price structure.

For example, say you are a manufacturer that has an item that costs $100 MSRP. Now suddenly, you must tack on $3 in expenses at your end to pay for something that's always been free. The MSRP now goes up to $108.42.

Where does that extra $8.42 go? First, $3 goes to the manufacturer (or UP in this case), $2.06 goes to the wholesaler, and $3.37 to the retailer (rounding up). Therefore, the manufacturer sees nothing extra at all (in fact, it's a negative cost because now they have to keep track of it all), but the distribution chain gets a little boost.

Paul A. Cutler III
*****************
Weather Or No Go New Haven
*****************

[Anonymous]

UP hates Model Railroaders.

[feltonhill]

Somewhere along the line, I recall that the major problem with UP's licensing agreement was extremely broad wording that gave them the right to examine the model manufacturing company's books, and confiscate tooling paid for by the company. This was argued in several model publications. I found no link to the contract's wording in this thread, only the application for license found on UP's website, and referenced here. Does anyone have a copy or source for the entire contract? I recall seeing the first several pages of it, but not the last. That's where most of the argument was early-on, not necessarily with the up-front fee. Without seeing the entire contract, we're guessing at what UP is asking for in total.

[TomDiehl]

You'd think somebody trying to ba***he UP would make up "facts" that actually SUPPORT his point of view.

[cjcrescent]

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl

And in case you're unable to go back to page 1:

QUOTE: Originally posted by dingoix

QUOTE: Actually BNSF does require licensing permission

i fiqured that -but stUPid goes overboard with it- list price for the new Athearn Sd40-2 is $10 higher for the stUP one compared to the BNSF one.

Tom;
I understand that you're using dingiox price quotes as an example but it doesn't help if the "quotes" are wrong.

MSRP off of Athearns OWN web site.

Please note the difference in price,$5.00 not $10.00. Plus the kits are even cheaper.

UP SD40-2 $84.98 RTR
UP/Desert Victory SD40-2 RTR $79.98
Other Road names vary between $79.98 & $84.98
Kits ANY roadname $56.50

If dingiox is paying $100.00 for an RTR Athearn SD40-2, which depending on the road name is 15-20% ABOVE MSRP, & almost 100% above kit MSRP, then I got a bridge I'll sell him cheap.

There hasn't been an SD40 announced in UP , but MSRP is $89.98 for what road names have been announced.

We all know that the street price will be lower.

[Anonymous]

I havn't had time to read all the posts, so if this has been suggested sorry. If we all pull together and just boycott there product for this reason than maybe the money grap might stop. It would not hurt the manufacture because they would just build other road names until U.P. backed of. After all way beat a dead horse. Sometimes we have to do har***hings to be heard. Anyways it would get the point acrooed of the consumer. Just a thought guys.

[Tracklayer]

I say go after UP and make an example out of them... If they didn't run around here, I probably wouldn't even model them.

Tracklayer

[TomDiehl]

And in case you're unable to go back to page 1:

QUOTE: Originally posted by dingoix

QUOTE: Actually BNSF does require licensing permission

i fiqured that -but stUPid goes overboard with it- list price for the new Athearn Sd40-2 is $10 higher for the stUP one compared to the BNSF one.

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BRAKIE

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl

QUOTE: Originally posted by BRAKIE

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl

The mathmatics of this are very interesting.

Taking from examples given above:

Athearn SD40 model carries a $90 retail price for all road names, but they're going to charge an extra $10 for the UP decorated ones. 3% of $90 is $2.70 which is to be paid to the Union Pacific, so where does the other $7.30 go? Plus if you read the licensing agreement (bottom of page 4) the royalty is based on the WHOLESALE price, not retail, so the amount paid to the UP will be even LESS than $2.70.

Sounds like the accusations of "profiteering" are aimed at the wrong company.

Tom,Cheap attack but lacks facts like all cheap attacks.Athearn hasn't even announce the SD40 in UP!

http://www.athearn.com/Search/Default.aspx?SearchTerm=sd40

Maybe you need to read the whole post, especially the second line.

Perhaps you should check the prices first before yelling "foul"..I still see no real proof of a $100.00 UP SD40..Nor do I see a $100.00 UP SD40-2.

http://www.athearn.com/Search/Default.aspx?SearchTerm=SD40+RTR&CatID=THLD&RN=UP

And perhaps YOU should read "Taking from examples given above::

In particular page 1 post 7 by a user named "dingoix"

Ironically, he seems to be trying to ba***he UP with the "prices I need to check."

[BRAKIE]

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl

QUOTE: Originally posted by BRAKIE

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl

The mathmatics of this are very interesting.

Taking from examples given above:

Athearn SD40 model carries a $90 retail price for all road names, but they're going to charge an extra $10 for the UP decorated ones. 3% of $90 is $2.70 which is to be paid to the Union Pacific, so where does the other $7.30 go? Plus if you read the licensing agreement (bottom of page 4) the royalty is based on the WHOLESALE price, not retail, so the amount paid to the UP will be even LESS than $2.70.

Sounds like the accusations of "profiteering" are aimed at the wrong company.

Tom,Cheap attack but lacks facts like all cheap attacks.Athearn hasn't even announce the SD40 in UP!

http://www.athearn.com/Search/Default.aspx?SearchTerm=sd40

Maybe you need to read the whole post, especially the second line.

Perhaps you should check the prices first before yelling "foul"..I still see no real proof of a $100.00 UP SD40..Nor do I see a $100.00 UP SD40-2.

http://www.athearn.com/Search/Default.aspx?SearchTerm=SD40+RTR&CatID=THLD&RN=UP

[BRAKIE]

QUOTE: Originally posted by davekelly

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl

Taken to ridiculous levels (which some ambulance-chasing lawyers are known to do) say someone was killed by being bashed over the head with an Athearn locomotive, that happens to be painted and lettered for the UP.

Of course what does that say about the jurors that believe it? [:)]

Just about the same thing they would say about any other law suit that a company gets sue from morons that hurt their selves through stupidity and sues.
Nobody is liable these days for their moronic acts...I am shocked that nobody has sued a model manufacturer because they got hurt by doing a stupid act while enjoying the hobby..

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BRAKIE

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl

The mathmatics of this are very interesting.

Taking from examples given above:

Athearn SD40 model carries a $90 retail price for all road names, but they're going to charge an extra $10 for the UP decorated ones. 3% of $90 is $2.70 which is to be paid to the Union Pacific, so where does the other $7.30 go? Plus if you read the licensing agreement (bottom of page 4) the royalty is based on the WHOLESALE price, not retail, so the amount paid to the UP will be even LESS than $2.70.

Sounds like the accusations of "profiteering" are aimed at the wrong company.

Tom,Cheap attack but lacks facts like all cheap attacks.Athearn hasn't even announce the SD40 in UP!

http://www.athearn.com/Search/Default.aspx?SearchTerm=sd40

Maybe you need to read the whole post, especially the second line.

[BRAKIE]

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl

The mathmatics of this are very interesting.

Taking from examples given above:

Athearn SD40 model carries a $90 retail price for all road names, but they're going to charge an extra $10 for the UP decorated ones. 3% of $90 is $2.70 which is to be paid to the Union Pacific, so where does the other $7.30 go? Plus if you read the licensing agreement (bottom of page 4) the royalty is based on the WHOLESALE price, not retail, so the amount paid to the UP will be even LESS than $2.70.

Sounds like the accusations of "profiteering" are aimed at the wrong company.

Tom,Cheap attack but lacks facts like all cheap attacks.Athearn hasn't even announce the SD40 in UP!

http://www.athearn.com/Search/Default.aspx?SearchTerm=sd40

[davekelly]

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl

Taken to ridiculous levels (which some ambulance-chasing lawyers are known to do) say someone was killed by being bashed over the head with an Athearn locomotive, that happens to be painted and lettered for the UP.

Of course what does that say about the jurors that believe it? [:)]

[TomDiehl]

If you read the licencing agreement (there's a link in James's [lotus098] post), you'll see that the UP is trying to protect themselves from any lawsuits. Taken to ridiculous levels (which some ambulance-chasing lawyers are known to do) say someone was killed by being bashed over the head with an Athearn locomotive, that happens to be painted and lettered for the UP. The AC lawyer might perceive that the UP has "deeper pockets" than the model manufacturer. So who do you think will be named in the lawsuit?

Besides, as I see it (and I'm sure the UP does), the administration costs of this will exceed any money taken in for these fees.

[davekelly]

Tom,

You silly guy. Why are you bringing fact into this? You take all the fun out of bashing!!

Seriously,

I remember several months ago I did a similar calculation and came to a very similar conclusion. I've never had a beef with the licensing. If anything, for me it was the way UP went about it - but that is neither here nor there. Of course maybe the manufacturers are adding in a little to cover the administrative costs of handling the licensing, but I agree it does sound a little steep to me.

[TomDiehl]

The mathmatics of this are very interesting.

Taking from examples given above:

Athearn SD40 model carries a $90 retail price for all road names, but they're going to charge an extra $10 for the UP decorated ones. 3% of $90 is $2.70 which is to be paid to the Union Pacific, so where does the other $7.30 go? Plus if you read the licensing agreement (bottom of page 4) the royalty is based on the WHOLESALE price, not retail, so the amount paid to the UP will be even LESS than $2.70.

Sounds like the accusations of "profiteering" are aimed at the wrong company.

[emdgp92]

What rights are we giving up here? I'd rather pay an extra dollar or two for a model...than not be able to buy them at all!

...and lets quit calling UP stupid, ok? They weren't the only ones with trains that were "Usually Parked." NS and CSX ran into the same thing when Conrail was split up.

[Pruitt]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Student of Big Sky Blue

It is reassuring to know that the thing to do is just sit on our duff and let our rights slowly be stripped away...

Get real! What rights? You can run all the UP stuff you want. Even if UP didn't allow any manufacturer to use their trademanrks, you still can, for personal use only. All you'd have to do is decorate the locos and rolling stock yourself. NOBODY is telling you you can't. Your rights are being stripped away? Sounds like an argument a child porn dealer might try and make. Pathetic!

QUOTE:

QUOTE: Originally posted by BRAKIE
Student of Big Sky Blue,Your comment can be taken as a terroristic threat to do harm and you could be arrested on Federal charages...Think twice before typing threats.

And as for being a terroristic threat, I don't care. This country is so messed up in how it does things anymore I am strongly considering leaving it.

Don't let the door hit you in the fanny on the way across the border, buckwheat! And you'd better hurry - the Feds take threats like the one you made very seriously these days.

You make it embarrassing to be from Wyoming.

[AntonioFP45]

Ed,

You have a realistic grasp of how the corporate world functions!

10-4.

[edkowal]

This is all a case of a subgroup of model railroaders getting into a snit because they've been suddenly awakened to how it works in the rest of the world. For years, model railroad manufacturers were able to produce models with other companies logos on them without paying fees to those companies. They were thus able to either, produce these models for less, or, realize a greater profit from those sales, or both. Now, UP and other railroads finally realize that they should be collecting part of the profits being realized from the sale of their company image by somebody else, and folks are getting all apoplectic.

Look at Coca Cola, as an example. You can't produce those collector items or even produce a decal of a Coca Cola sign, without paying a license fee, or you'll receive a cease and desist order. It's the same principle here, with the modifying condition mentioned by rails5 above.

Plus, as has been alluded to in other posts, it would appear that the licensing cost demanded by UP per item may in fact be _less_ than the premium that is being charged by model railroad manufacturers for UP items. So it may be that our friends the model railroad manufacturers are realizing a bonus by charging more for use of the logo than they're paying out. Who should you be getting upset at here?

-Ed