Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

EMD Copyright

11239 views
51 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Ontario
  • 140 posts
EMD Copyright
Posted by dieselsmoke on Tuesday, July 12, 2011 3:24 PM

I see Caterpillar is demanding EMD manuals be removed from Fallen Flags website. I wonder what's next, no EMD photos, no EMD models.

It seems like corporations don't like model railroaders or railfans! Good grief!

Jim

  • Member since
    June 2004
  • From: Orig: Tyler Texas. Lived in seven countries, now live in Sundown, Louisiana
  • 25,640 posts
Posted by jeffrey-wimberly on Tuesday, July 12, 2011 3:38 PM

And here's a link to the letter of said demand: Caterpillar Letter.

Running Bear, Sundown, Louisiana
          Joined June, 2004

Dr. Frankendiesel aka Scott Running Bear
Space Mouse for president!
15 year veteran fire fighter
Collector of Apple //e's
Running Bear Enterprises
History Channel Club life member.
beatus homo qui invenit sapientiam


  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: Good ol' USA
  • 9,642 posts
Posted by AntonioFP45 on Tuesday, July 12, 2011 3:49 PM

Might not be so draconian if a similar deal that was worked out with the model manufactuers and the prototype roads could be agreed upon.

"I like my Pullman Standards & Budds in Stainless Steel flavors, thank you!"

 


  • Member since
    April 2009
  • From: Sweden
  • 1,468 posts
Posted by Graffen on Tuesday, July 12, 2011 4:06 PM

Just another nail in the coffin of Good Will!

Why don´t the big corporations have the ability to see beyond their shortsighted profit hunger......

I mean, anyone out there that have a warm, fuzzy feeling for UP???

This made me realise that I have to recommed my relatives to stop buying and using CAT equipment anymore and only use BM!

Wonder if they realise that their Good Will is taking a serious hit???

(I bet they are oblivious about the way this kind of info spreads!)

Swedish Custom painter and model maker. My Website:

My Railroad

My Youtube:

Graff´s channel

  • Member since
    April 2009
  • From: Sweden
  • 1,468 posts
Posted by Graffen on Tuesday, July 12, 2011 5:08 PM

Historical documents without copyright can NEVER be theirs to do what they want!

But they can do their best to scare people...

I suspect that this is VERY bad. Just see how CAT has exploited their brand!

It makes Disney and H-D look like benevolent companys.... I hate to think it, but it could make the UP situation look very insignificant in comparison.

Read the statement on the FallenFlags site...... He states that none of the documents he had on the site had copyright on them.

Swedish Custom painter and model maker. My Website:

My Railroad

My Youtube:

Graff´s channel

  • Member since
    April 2009
  • From: Sweden
  • 1,468 posts
Posted by Graffen on Tuesday, July 12, 2011 5:17 PM

BTW, I sent a message on FB to my relative who owns a big company that uses CAT equipment (big construction and demolition company). And after some discussions where i showed the letter from CAT and the FF site. He said that they had felt that the climate with CAT has been cooling off for the past years, and this made him think twice before he let the CAT salesmen comes to the office next time!

A small step in the right direction.....

Swedish Custom painter and model maker. My Website:

My Railroad

My Youtube:

Graff´s channel

  • Member since
    June 2004
  • From: roundhouse
  • 2,747 posts
Posted by Randy Stahl on Tuesday, July 12, 2011 5:19 PM

Darn it , I guess I should have downloaded the manual on the BL-2 and F-3 walking beam load regulators when I had the chance...Oh well , I guess I'll have to steal one from the Smithsonian. I guess its important to protect sensitive information about 1947 locomotive equipment , never know who might want to spend a ton of money on brass, slate and glass.

  • Member since
    January 2007
  • From: Mobile Alabama
  • 694 posts
Posted by carknocker1 on Tuesday, July 12, 2011 5:33 PM

I work for a CAT owned company , so I am quite familiar with CAT and the use of their logo's and other material . What no one here understands is that CAT will let you use their logos and other items if you ask for permission  . They are actually pretty easy to get along with as long as you ask them and explain what you are doing with the copyrighted stuff

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • From: Indiana
  • 3,549 posts
Posted by Flashwave on Tuesday, July 12, 2011 6:11 PM

Graffen

Read the statement on the FallenFlags site...... He states that none of the documents he had on the site had copyright on them.

Fill me on, did he scan those and put them up? Or just link to them? Which begs the question, did they have copyrights? or were they "remove" to be internet-friendly? How many times have we seen RR paintshop pics come up without copyrights?

-Morgan

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: Clinton, MO, US
  • 4,261 posts
Posted by Medina1128 on Tuesday, July 12, 2011 6:23 PM

jeffrey-wimberly

And here's a link to the letter of said demand: Caterpillar Letter.

Jeffrey-Wimberly, thank you for posting the link to the letter. I fired off an email to Ms. Gothard, Corporate Counsel for CAT, asking her client to reconsider their stance. Maybe if more of us did the same, we could convince CAT to change their mind. (Yeah, I know, and maybe Congress will actually act to HELP the country instead just helping themselves). As for me, until they do, I refuse to give any of my money, paid through purchasing anything with their logo on it.

  • Member since
    August 2007
  • From: Red Lodge, MT
  • 893 posts
Posted by sfcouple on Tuesday, July 12, 2011 10:47 PM

jeffrey-wimberly

And here's a link to the letter of said demand: Caterpillar Letter.

Jeff,

Nice job on getting the letter posted.  You always seem to find just the right link to help others on this Forum.....thanks. 

Wayne 

Modeling HO Freelance Logging Railroad.

  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: OH
  • 17,574 posts
Posted by BRAKIE on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 7:02 AM

I wonder about all those manuals found at railroad memorabilia meets?

I even seen locomotive manuals at train shows.

Larry

Conductor.

Summerset Ry.


"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt  Safety First!"

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Southeast Texas
  • 5,449 posts
Posted by mobilman44 on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 7:24 AM

Hi,

Well, the situation sure has come a long way since the Santa Fe, NYC, & EMC pitched in bucks and support to the Lionel Corporation in the late '40s so they could build the master molds for EMD F3s.

I'm sure today's corporations have their reasons for what they allow - or don't allow - but especially when it comes to "fallen flags", why should they care?

 

ENJOY  !

 

Mobilman44

 

Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central 

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 7:41 AM

... and the Queen was not amused!

This is getting ridiculous. It escapes my understanding why any company would allow their counselor to spend endless hours searching hobby web sites for possible copyright infringements and even write silly letters.

Caterpillar is better advised to invest this effort into product design and marketing, instead of waisting the money on issues where there will be no gain for them.

  • Member since
    March 2007
  • 599 posts
Posted by Milepost 266.2 on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 7:46 AM

This is a fuzzy area.  If Caterpillar owns EMD, they also own all EMD trademarks, and can enforce as they see fit.  I remember the Safety Kleen people were pretty strict about the use of their logo on models at one point.  The thing is, this material is obsolete and being distributed for free for historical and entertainment value only.  But if they want it down, it's within their rights to ask for it to be removed.

I found the letter linked to above to be very poorly written with several grammatical and punctuation errors.  I wouldn't be surprised if Crystal Gothard (*snicker*) is a very young and inexperienced member of the Caterpillar legal team.  

  • Member since
    March 2002
  • From: Milwaukee WI (Fox Point)
  • 11,439 posts
Posted by dknelson on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 8:11 AM

Just to clarify an earlier point, an item of original authorship -- and a manual would qualify -- might be protected by copyright without itself bearing a copyright notice.  The notice is currently relevant to copyright litigation and damages perhaps but not to the validity of the copyright itself.  However if the item was published before January 1, 1978 then it needed a copyright notice to be protected by copyright.

Trademark is another matter as UP as demonstrated to all of us

Dave Nelson

 

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 8:15 AM

What I think model railroaders seem to forget is that if you look in other industries, they guard their trademarks and brand names pretty strictly.  Its standard operating procedure.  Think Harley Davidson, Coke, UPS, etc.  CAT is a brand name, people buy stuff with CAT on it just as they buy John Deere stuff.

Too much stuff is pirated and they have to establish their rights to their property.

Before everybody piles on CAT has anybody asked them what it would take to display the books etc?  It might be a very minimal task or cost.

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    January 2011
  • From: Brooklyn, NY
  • 426 posts
Posted by Mike Kieran on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 8:25 AM

Legally, Caterpillar can enforce a trademark restriction. What they don't realize is the free publicity they get by their products constantly being displayed in model form and the negative publicity they receive by such actions.Major corporations and organizations don't care about bad publicity as evidenced by Ford constantly recalling cars because they explode when they get rear ended (Pinto and Crown Victorias in Police Specs), Walmart stripping municipality coffers, and cities building brand new stadiums despite cutbacks accross the board. Ford is still one of the best selling cars worldwide, Walmart enjoys a constant stream of profits, and stadiums are still being celebrated.We can all email Cat

The bottom line, as long as they are at the top of the profit food chain, who cares what the little guy thinks? It's all about the Benjamins. Guys like George Elwood who operate their railfan sites at no profit and relying on donations to help support the site (notice the lack of advertisements on the website) do not have the resources to take on companies like Caterpillar in the legal arena. We can all mail their legal team, but the legal team also has delete options in their email. If we are going to email anyone, we should email Caterpillar's Public Relations Department, the CEO of Caterpillar, and emails of support to George Elwood in case he needs it for legal purposes later on as well as moral support. It's tough being picked on by bullies.

This brings me to my next point. What happens to models of EMD's products? Will there be licensing on all models of E&F Units, NWs, SWs, GPs, ans SDs? If model builders have to pay licensing fees due to their profiting from these models, will that drive the cost of a model without DC to prices that are higher than brass?

__________________________________________________________________

Mike Kieran

Port Able Railway

I just do what the majority of the voices in my head vote on.

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Reading, PA
  • 30,002 posts
Posted by rrinker on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 8:28 AM

 There's a difference, though, between using a logo without license and displaying something like an oeprator's manual. In displaying the oeprator's manuals, no one is creating or selling somethign with the protected corporate logo. Those books get around because they were given by the box full to the railroads buying the locos.

 The whole thing is just silly. EMD didn't seem to mind, but now Cat buys the rights and suddenly their most important thing is to make sure no one displays 50+ year old operator manuals to the public?

                               --Randy

 


Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's

 

Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.

  • Member since
    January 2007
  • From: Mobile Alabama
  • 694 posts
Posted by carknocker1 on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 8:34 AM

the point everyone is missing is there is so much pirated CAT material out there , CAT will let you use their stuff you just have to ask and tell them what you are doing with it

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: BC, CANADA
  • 1,279 posts
Posted by Pathfinder on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 9:48 AM

As a business owner, I fully support businesses that protect their intellectual property rights.  I too would be a wee bit upset if I found that my copyright/trademark materials were being used without my knowledge or permission.  I have a hard time understanding why people think that corporations should make their property available for free to anyone to use anyway they see fit.

It would appear that Cat does not have any issues with allowing companies to use their trademarks and copyrights, see Norscot as an example.  And in this specific situation we are only getting one side of the story, Fallen Flags.  Has there been any dialogue prior to the letter?  Has FF tried to see what it would take use Cat/EMD material?

I agree the letter, if that is the only correspondence, is a little off base and it could have been handled better.

Lets hope that this whole thing does not backfire on the railway hobby.  It would be a shame if Cat thought that comments posted to internet forums were a true representation of the hobbies ideals.  They could easily say that its just not worth the hassle and bad PR and deny any kind of usage rights.  Lets keep this all in perspective.

Keep on Trucking, By Train! Where I Live: BC Hobbies: Model Railroading (HO): CP in the 70's in BC and logging in BC
  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Bedford, MA, USA
  • 21,481 posts
Posted by MisterBeasley on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 10:19 AM

We really should wait to see what happens downstream.  The letter sounded to me like legalistic boilerplate.  In a situation like this, CAT has to "defend" its copyright, particularly for names and logos, so that someone else can't come along, point to the Fallen Flags site, and then poach the copyrights because CAT is not "defending" them.

They haven't asked for damages or licensing fees.  My guess is, the FF guys could call them up, draft an agreement that indicates they are not making commercial use of these things (as evidenced by their dot-org URL) and CAT will agree to let them use the stuff again.

And if they don't agree, then we can tell them what we think of them.

It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse. 

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: BC, CANADA
  • 1,279 posts
Posted by Pathfinder on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 10:38 AM

MisterBeasley

We really should wait to see what happens downstream.  The letter sounded to me like legalistic boilerplate.  In a situation like this, CAT has to "defend" its copyright, particularly for names and logos, so that someone else can't come along, point to the Fallen Flags site, and then poach the copyrights because CAT is not "defending" them.

They haven't asked for damages or licensing fees.  My guess is, the FF guys could call them up, draft an agreement that indicates they are not making commercial use of these things (as evidenced by their dot-org URL) and CAT will agree to let them use the stuff again.

And if they don't agree, then we can tell them what we think of them.

Well spoken and bang on.

Keep on Trucking, By Train! Where I Live: BC Hobbies: Model Railroading (HO): CP in the 70's in BC and logging in BC
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Chamberlain, ME
  • 5,084 posts
Posted by G Paine on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 11:02 AM

And I am SURE ALL those people who make and sell CAT hats have permission to use the CAT logo! MischiefPirate

I own a cat; hopefully, they will not come after me next!! ConfusedSmile, Wink & Grin

George In Midcoast Maine, 'bout halfway up the Rockland branch 

  • Member since
    January 2011
  • From: Brooklyn, NY
  • 426 posts
Posted by Mike Kieran on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 12:49 PM

I agree, but UP, CSX, & now EMD are just the tip of the iceberg. What worries me is how this plays out down the road. Will various components of the railroad industries (railroads and equipment manufacturing companies) claim licensing and charge a fee? If they do that, how does the model railroad industry deal with that.

The argument against the rail industry is that it was common practice for models to be made without license. The models are emulations and do not pose a competitive threat to their prototype offerings.The rail industry's tactic will be to tie the case up in court with cease and desist orders.

If hobby manufacturers pay licensing fees to the various members of the railroad industry, how much would that drive up the cost of models, and for that matter, how it would affect swap meets and online auction sites for "selling their intellectual property."

Life gets exponentially more difficult thanks to some shady rainmaker lawyers out there.

P.S., I already emailed George Elwood and he said that they wanted him to remove 70 year old manuals from his website (FTs, NW2s, etc.)

__________________________________________________________________

Mike Kieran

Port Able Railway

I just do what the majority of the voices in my head vote on.

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • From: Indiana
  • 3,549 posts
Posted by Flashwave on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 2:00 PM

Mike Kieran

I agree, but UP, CSX, & now EMD are just the tip of the iceberg. What worries me is how this plays out down the road. Will various components of the railroad industries (railroads and equipment manufacturing companies) claim licensing and charge a fee? If they do that, how does the model railroad industry deal with that.

The argument against the rail industry is that it was common practice for models to be made without license. The models are emulations and do not pose a competitive threat to their prototype offerings.The rail industry's tactic will be to tie the case up in court with cease and desist orders.

If Hobby manufacturers how much would licensing fees to the various members of the railroad industry, how much would that drive up the cost of models, and for that matter, how it would affect swap meets and online auction sites for "selling their intellectual property."

Live gets exponentially more difficult thanks to some shady rainmaker lawyers out there.

P.S., I already emailed George Elwood and he said that they wanted him to remove 70 year old manuals from his website (FTs, NW2s, etc.)

Playing a hunch, do they still sell those manuals, to musuems and shortlines? Are they afraid of those third hand companies printing them for free?

-Morgan

  • Member since
    January 2008
  • From: Tampa, Florida
  • 1,481 posts
Posted by cedarwoodron on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 2:12 PM

Perhaps this lawyer's skills could be used more productively by ensuring that litigation costs are kept to a minumum fo her employer/client. If that were the case, a more conciliatory approach might be to remind the Fallen Flags site that a copyright concern exists as regards EMD and make an initial offer to negotiate a licensing or permissory agreement. One would think that she would have reearched the matter sufficiently to be informed about the UP situation, etc- but I forget, she may be young and less well-educated than lawyers of another era, despite her access to far more comprehensive information thru LEXIS/Nexus and other on-line tools.

At any rate, it would seem that the secondary/tertiary resale markets that exist in the form of periodic flea markets/ swap meets, would bevirtually impossible to control as to EMD copyright materials. The fact that modeling production has gone on for a significant time frame (over 60 years?) may well factor into the viability of a lawsuit against manufacturers. I would think that is a case were brought, a reasonable alternative might well be suggested by the judge, vis-a-vis the licensing agreement aggrangement obtained by UP previously.

Are things that bad in Peoria these days?

My 2 cents (sorry, inflation and present economic circumstances have reduced that to .02 cents!)

Cedarwoodron

  • Member since
    January 2008
  • From: Tampa, Florida
  • 1,481 posts
Posted by cedarwoodron on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 2:18 PM

One other thought:

Much of this material is used as research for personal use by hobbyists, not for profit. I have a boatload of photos and drawings that I use for modeling and scratchbuilding purposes only- the results of which are for my own enjoyment. The derivative results of that material I collect (the structures, cars, etc) are not for profit, to be sure!

That is also similar to me, as a teacher, copying a copyrighted news article or photo to use in my non-profit public school classroom for education purposes on an incidental basis.

 

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 4:29 PM

The only reason I can see for them doing this is because they want to sell copies of the manuals. Which seems pretty unlikely.

 

Also, that letter was confusing. She starts out talking about Trademarks and then switches over to a copyright complaint without explaining what copyright is being violated. Trademarks and copyrights are different things. 

 

I agree though, it could be as simple as working out an agreement with EMD. It could be that CAT simply has more time and money to follow up on this than EMD did or GM cared to.

 

 

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: Clinton, MO, US
  • 4,261 posts
Posted by Medina1128 on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 5:00 PM

Pathfinder

As a business owner, I fully support businesses that protect their intellectual property rights.  I too would be a wee bit upset if I found that my copyright/trademark materials were being used without my knowledge or permission.  I have a hard time understanding why people think that corporations should make their property available for free to anyone to use anyway they see fit.

It would appear that Cat does not have any issues with allowing companies to use their trademarks and copyrights, see Norscot as an example.  And in this specific situation we are only getting one side of the story, Fallen Flags.  Has there been any dialogue prior to the letter?  Has FF tried to see what it would take use Cat/EMD material?

I agree the letter, if that is the only correspondence, is a little off base and it could have been handled better.

Lets hope that this whole thing does not backfire on the railway hobby.  It would be a shame if Cat thought that comments posted to internet forums were a true representation of the hobbies ideals.  They could easily say that its just not worth the hassle and bad PR and deny any kind of usage rights.  Lets keep this all in perspective.

I'd just switch to John Deere. Smile, Wink & Grin


Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!