Lawyers Lay Waste to Military Models Industry

[Anonymous]

There is an answer to the licensing costs. Scratch built items are very hard to charge a licensing fee for. I do predict that inspite of the grumbling and gripeing, the sales of licensed models will continue into the foreseeable future. Just another cost to be factored into the hobby budget, not a reason to give it up. It ain't fun, it doesn't seem right, but there you have it. It is a fait accompli and we must live with it.

Tom

[Anonymous]

Corporations who use another corporations trade names and logos for profit must surely be liable to pay for that use (if the first company is willing to even allow it under license). So Atlas (say) who make models for profit, pay Union Pacific or CSX for the use of their logos. The license fee either eats into their profit margin, or more likely, they pass it on to the end consumer if the market will bear it.

If however I go to my workshop and make a model of something I have seen (maybe even taken some photos of) for my own use thats art - I'm not doing it for profit. It would be a brave lawyer who tried to sue me for making a representation of something which is already in the public domain. Profiting from copying something, and publishing it in the public domain, are two of the cornerstones of copyright law (both here in the UK, and as I understand it in the US also).

At the moment it seems that this is only affecting the US market - I have heard no rumours of this affecting either German or British models. It seems that the big railroads and loco manufacturers have taken a fairly sensible line in terms of the level of license they are demanding (unlike the aircraft industry it would seem), as its only adding a dollar or two to the price of a loco, car or decal sheet - it isn't the end of the hobby as we know it.

I believe copyright controls cease after 50 years, so if it does get crazy we will all have to look back to the late steam era for royalty free models (I guess that takes in some of the early diesels too now).

[Anonymous]

OK, I wrote the serious post before; now the fun view.

The companies are licensing the logos etc to protect themselves from liability caused by hobbyists!

Model railroaders strive to make their models more and more realistic with a goal of being just like the protoype. What is the hobbyist succeeds? The model is a perfect replica of the prototype and is proudly run on the owners layout and those of friends. Then a derailment occurs.

Will the prototype be recalled or outlawed because the model is unsafe? What kind of product liability will ensue?

"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you have heard testimony that Dave's prototypically modeled engine has derailed. UP has taken no steps to determine whether the problem lie in Dave's engine model or in his trackwork. Clearly, the UP has no business runnning that model until Dave has solved the problem, especially if they have not undertaken a study themselves. You must find for the plaintiff!"

Pete
Just a poor tax guy taking a break during the season.

[Bikerdad]

Military models: The only thing that allows these licensing fees to proceed is the unwillingness of manufacturers to challenge them. If I produce a model of an F-15 Eagle, who can collect the licensing fee? Mind you, I'm producing a model of an existing aircraft wholly owned by the United States gov't, with no mention of McDonnell-Douglas. The same can be done for ANY military model, simply omit any mention of the manufacturer except quotes from gov't sources. The argument that Revell/Monogram is somehow infringing on Boeing's trademarks can't fly for two reasons. The first is that nobody is going to mistake the model for the real thing, at least no reasonable person will. Second, and even more important, the market for the prototypes is extremely tightly controlled, so the argument that Revell/Monogram has somehow hurt Boeing is ludicrous.

Nonetheless, the surest solution to resolving this is simple: place into the next DoD contract for Boeing, Lockheed, Sikorsky, GM, Ford, etc, etc, a provision that the contractor waives any past, present and future licensing fees vis a vis any scale models of any and all vehicles developed primarily for military use. In the interest of patriotism, limit the licensing waiver to domestic model manufacturers.

[davekelly]

Chuck,

LOL. You caught me! Of course folks that know me say I've been long winded way before I got admitted to the bar (others say I should be hit with a bar - of steel that is!).

Fazby,

You must have seen the result of some of my modeling projects. I need to model a plastic scrapyard on my layout - the thing will make a mint of all my projects gone bad. Of course in your scenario, the jury result would be simple - it was the fault of Dave's model and track work. There is no way I could keep a straight face and say otherwise!

Bikerdad (I ride a FXST - what's your fun?)

Unfortunately you are right. I doubt very much Monogram, or Athearn or any model manufacturer has the assets and war chest to fight off the Boeings and UP's. They'd be bankrupt even before trial. What we need to do is find out if any modelers (military, railroad or otherwise) are in Congress. Perhaps that might help. I love your solution concerning the military models!!

James and Tom,

Yup - you guys are right, scratchbuilding would solve the problem except for those like myself that struggle with a blue box kit!

[Pruitt]

This is very interesting.

I work in the defense industry, in aerospace. As we are working under a defense contract, everything we produce belongs to the government, not to the company. It's the same for all programs, as far as I know. I'm surprised the producer can claim intellectual property rights to the government's property. Then again, I'm no lawyer.

Maybe I'll call the company's legal office and ask them about this....

[Pruitt]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Big_Boy_4005

What changed???? Intellectual property laws?

Yup. A few years ago there was a major revamping of all intellectual property laws. Even though I'm not a lawyer, I did follow some of the changes, and one was that, if a copyright or trademark is not enforced in one instance, it became harder to enforce it in others. That's what's behind the UP demand for licensing fees, and now, apparently, the plastic model industry.

Another wonderful illustration of unintended consequences, courtesy of our elected officials in Washington. To paraphrase Bugs Bunny, "What a bunch of maroons!"

[vsmith]

So far I like the idea of just modeling Soviet jets and tanks, Hah, I always thought the Mig21 looked cooler than the F15 anyway....

[davekelly]

Vssmith,

I'd be careful. Being that we brought capitalism etc. to what used to be the Soviet Union, I wouldn't be surprised if the Mig folks (I forget their formal name) gets in on the licensing bandwagon.

[Anonymous]

There are times when Mass Murder seems like a tempting thought.