M.T.H. Responds To DCC Lawsuit Allegations

[Anonymous]

Interesting that MTH has no problem whatsoever about using DCC when it suits them. Let others develope technology that MTH can access and use for free and then if they make improvements to it charge others to play.

Seems like a one way street to me.

Probably perfectly legal, but no where does it say it is illegal to be a jerk.

[jfugate]

The whole philosophy with DCC was to get away from proprietary systems and to move the hobby forward.

Had MTH joined with this philosphy, they would be heros today if they had opened DCS up as an advancement of DCC. As it is, they have thrown a serious monkey wrench into this whole part of the hobby.

The MTH posts are all about "our rights", "what we own", "other firm's ulterior motives" and so on. It may all be very true, but when that's your constant focus you come across sounding like a self-serving predator and not especially interested in what's best for moving the hobby forward for the most number of people.

It's going to take some major benevolent moves on the part of MTH to change the perception of their company now. As for myself, I'm not interested in another proprietary system no matter how good it is. If that company ever goes out of business, your stuck. With lots of manufacturers supporting the DCC standard, you are covered.

It's like the IBM PC open standards model and the Mac closed standards model. The Mac might be the superior technology, but because of their proprietary stance, they lost market share. I forsee the same happening to MTH with their proprietary stance on DCS unless they can figure out some way to save face and get on the open standards band wagon.

[rrinker]

Many of those "DCS Only" features for sound control are ALREADY available in all but the simplest of starter DCC systems. So again, what's the compelling reason to switch?
And if many useful features will not be accessible to the DCC user, what's the compelling reason to purchase the product, when I can get a similar model elsewhere that DOES allow me access to those features, without scrapping my existing control system?
There's been over 10 years of development of DCC control systems. A lot of issues have arisen as more and more users adopt the technology, and they have been solved in various ways by the various vendors. Some things to think about - current limiting for the smaller scale, reverse loop control, LARGE layouts needing multiple power supplies to mee the demands. DCC handles all this in a nice seamless manner.
Will this kill MTH? I highly doubt it. The 'traditional' MTH customer is still there, at least I see plenty of MTH product moving at the shows I attend. Legally right or wrong, I don't see any action by MTH that would increase support from the traditional scale HO modeler. Quite the contrary. Scale HO has the NMRA, tinplate O does not. There's a reason all the other command control systems disappeared once the NMRA DCC standard was established.
Which reminds me of another point - I see nothing in the link provided, but can an analog DC locomotive run on a DCS system like it can on DCC? Can a DCC locomotive run on DCS? Given the increasing number of retail products with DCC and/or sound factory equipped, if this is not possible then there is a compelling reason NOT to use a DCS system.

[Phil1361]

What I'd like to know is why wasn't there an uproar when Lionel came out with TMCC? The public relations reason was just like MTH's-the AC amperage.

Well, gee whiz a company came out with it later on but you know what there was no interest in it. Why? Because it wan't Lionel. I personally talked to the owner and saw it run first hand at York. It was called "3RailDCC". It worked great.

But there were no outcries like you see here. Why couldn't Lionel stick to the NMRA Standards. I'll tell you why so they could have a proprietary system that was better than what everyone else out there hed. Lionel had NO Intention of licensing TMCC until they got wind of MTH's DCS. Lionel wanted to be the only player on the block.

And if somone had tried to come with something similar to TMCC does anyone here think for a second that Lionel would act differently than MTH?

I applaud Andy Edleman for coming on here and stating his case but it is sort of like a Red Sox fan trying to convert the views of a Yankee fan. Just ain't gonna happen. I wouldn't blame him if he left all future PR to the magazines.

Personally I wish neither company came out with their system and instead used 3RailDCC mainly because we would then have the compatability HO has.


Nuff said!

[Anonymous]

Last April I had the opportunity to chat with Mike Wolf one on one for at least an hour while he was visiting my local hobby shop. He is a very nice man and very interested in his train systems. The subject turned to the lawsuit with BLI. I had recently purchased a BLI On30 2-8-0. I said that I was disappointed that I did not get all I paid for. Mr. Wolf explained that the whole point of the suit against BLI was the one mph speed increments. He pointed out that MTH engines could be timed with a stopwatch to prove that they were running at the rate of scale mph they were set for. I asked about Lionel and the rest. He said that they were all OK. As he seemed to be getting a little testy I did not ask how anybody could patent a rate of acceleration. It seems like somebody trying to copyright the alphabet or an arithmetic operation like long division. Since I have no training in electronics I would like to know how the electronics involved in making the trains accelerate in one MPH increments differs from the electronics needed for any OTHER rate of acceleration. Isn't it just a matter of settings? Shows how much I know....Odd-d

[Anonymous]

Having used DCS now for two years, I will NEVER go back to anything less! And it is now exciting for me to hear of DCS coming to HO.

I am 56 years old but I still embrace new technologies. The DCS system provides many new and awesome features that are ONLY possible with it's "two way communication".

I upgraded from VHS to DVD. And when Hi-Def DVD comes out I will ugrade to that. And Hi-Def DVD will be backwards compatible with today's DVD. Just like DCS is to DCC. And as software upgrades are available to DCS, it will continue to provide new features and enhancements.

But I am probably wasting my time as did Mr. Edleman. Too many people are afraid of change (or is it of a new brand name.)

Most of you guys are just plain nuts!!! And some even quite rude.

R.H.

[Anonymous]

Good Golly! Did some of you even finish reading the initial post before spouting off? I can't help but wonder if these aren't the very same people bashing MTH on the other internet boards. The language appears to be the same.

Mr Edleman, I admire your fortitude. You had the composure to reply to the naysayers. Keep up the good work. As you might guess from my moniker, I prefer "the other" control system. But I don't hold animosity against DCC or DCS.

[Paul3]

amedleman wrote:

QUOTE: 1. Sorry about the lack of a signature. It was checked in my profile and appeared in the Preview window but not in the actual posting.

Hmm... It's still not showing up.

QUOTE: 2. I am not familiar with the actual specifics of the speed control methods the other manufacturers utilize. If they aren't in violation then there is no problem. Their engineers need to determine those issues which is why they received notification in the first place.

Ok. How about explaining how DCS scale MPH increment works? Does it adjust the speed of the motor to match the scale MPH reading on the throttle? Or does it only repeat on the throttle what the loco is actually doing?

QUOTE: 3. Please remember that you do not need a new control system (DCS) to operate an M.T.H. HO locomotive. Any exisiting DCC controller will work. If you have already invested in a DCC system it will run the M.T.H. engine in command mode.

What is command mode? Oh, and will DCS operate DCC locos?

QUOTE: Below are the features you will have access to when using a DCC controller:

- Operate Locomotive At Scale Speeds

Do you mean that DCS locos will operate at 1 scale MPH increments on DCC? Or something else?

QUOTE: Next, are the features you will have access to when using a DCS system:

- 16 Adjustable Chuff Rate Setting.

How is this different from the above DCC ability?

QUOTE: - 3 Adjustable Smoke Intensity Settings

You know, I've never been a big fan of scale smoke. It never looks very realistic (even the old American Flyer), it smells, and it usually leaves a film of oil on the roofs of equipment.

QUOTE: - Adjustable Brake Sound Effects

How so? Squealing brakes sound like squealing brakes.

QUOTE: - 4 Adjustable Diesel Engine Ditch Lighting Effects

Hmm... AFAIK, there are only two ditch light effects, oscillating "wig-wag" when the horn blows (US-style), and always on (Canadian-style). What are the other effects?

QUOTE: - 3 Adjustable Locomotive Direction Start-up Engines

I don't understand what that means...

QUOTE: - Simple Lash-up Creation
- Simple Route Creation
- Simple Scene Creation

I'm still clueless. Is all this explained on MTH's website?

QUOTE: - 120 Speed Steps – Control engines speed in increments of 1 smph.

- 120 Adjustable Engine Speed Settings

Aren't these the same?

QUOTE: - Diesel Rev Up/Down Sound Control

This I know you can do already with DCC. I've seen it done.

QUOTE: - Engine Sounds Mute Button
- One Touch Headlight On/Off Control

That is "F8" on my Digitrax DT400 or Zephyr controller for mute, and "F0" for the headlight.

QUOTE: 3. The K-4 is just our first HO engine. We have made over 200 models in our Premier Line O Gauge product line having long ago recognized that O consumers have different tastes. We expect no different a reaction from HO consumers. If the K-4 isn't your bag, wait for the next engine. Incidentally, the K-4 is $50.00 less than the Broadway version and contains many more features as detailed in both the DCC and DCS lists above.

Well, I've never bought a BLI loco, so I'm not up on the prices for their steam (I know that the E-units are going for about $200 a pop). But for me, both BLI and you would have to do something pretty spectacular for the New Haven in order for me to shell out that much change. Sound is neat and all, but if it's not New Haven, then I'm not interested. I'd rather shell out for a nice sound decoder and install it in one of my New Haven brass engines.

QUOTE: 4. Amperage draw is a big factor in O because most of the locomotives are produced from die-cast metal and are thus quite heavy...Our experience in testing DCC in an AC, hi-amp environment (a locomotive and string of seven passenger cars can easily draw 6 or more amps) was very underwhelming.

I would imagine so considering that I don't think anybody's ever made a 6 or 7 amp DCC decoder (I could be wrong). Any use of a DCC decoder under those circumstances would "let the magic smoke out" pretty darn fast.

QUOTE: More importantly, DCC is limited by the number of features it offers and the complexity of its operation.

Really? Why is that? DCS sounds just as complex if not more so. And number of features? I suppose, but Bi-D will take care of that. It's simply too useful to remain on the shelf.

QUOTE: If we were going to invest in a control system (DCC or otherwise) we needed to be very confident that the return on the investment to develop the control system would be worthwhile.

To me, it doesn't sound like an all-new command protocol, you sound like you are simply making a new DCC system with extra features. Because up 'till now, I have to tell you that I thought DCS was a whole new system that was not DCC based at all. But since they are cross compatible (apparently), DCS is like Lenz, NCE, or Digitrax.

QUOTE: 5. Since none of the DCC manufacturers ever bothered to inquire what our licensing terms would be, they can't comment on whether they were favorable. As with any legal agreement, the terms would be confidential anyway.

Understood. However, in as broad and general terms as possible, would licensing of DCS technology to other companies be more or less than "a little"?

Thanks for your time.

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

[AntonioFP45]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rhales

Having used DCS now for two years, I will NEVER go back to anything less! And it is now exciting for me to hear of DCS coming to HO.

Good that you've had success with the products.

QUOTE: I am 56 years old but I still embrace new technologies.

O.K. So do many modelers, including the ones on this forum.

QUOTE: The DCS system provides many new and awesome features that are ONLY possible with it's "two way communication".

You mean transponding? Just coming around the corner in DCC.

QUOTE: I upgraded from VHS to DVD. And when Hi-Def DVD comes out I will ugrade to that. And Hi-Def DVD will be backwards compatible with today's DVD. Just like DCS is to DCC. And as software upgrades are available to DCS, it will continue to provide new features and enhancements.

With a couple of exceptions, DCC technology products on the market are also "backwards" compatible. With the increasing popularity and size of the DCC market, MULTIPLE manufacturers (instead of JUST ONE), the cooperation and support with the NMRA, customer feedback, and the strong support from the manufacturers, DCC is pretty much on the same boat only with a MUCH BIGGER network. But AGAIN, this post is not about which of these two technologies is better. That's like comparing Toyota and Honda. This is about what seems to be the legally right, ethically wrong litigation.

QUOTE: But I am probably wasting my time as did Mr. Edleman.

No. This forum is about ideas and opinions whether one's opinions are in the minority or the majority. We're all hobbyists here.

QUOTE: Too many people are afraid of change (or is it of a new brand name.)

Sorry, can't agree here. Who on this forum has indicated a "fear of change" when in fact change (and advancements) are what most of us are looking forward to. However, the DCS system, while a very good product, has not shown itself to be "overwhlemingly superior to DCC" as far as user friendliness, and cost, and support. Again Toyota vs. Honda. Chevy vs. Ford. (though in this case the DCC market dwarfs DCS in size and customer base in the HO arena. And not to forget N scale).

QUOTE: Most of you guys are just plain nuts!!! And some even quite rude.

Mr. Rhales, that's really uncalled for ("most of you guys"). Sir, with all due respect, you're the gentleman that is being quite RUDE! [V] Are you forgetting that we're fellow modlers, just like you?!

From what I've read no one here disputes MTH's product quality, even though most have likely never purchased them. THE ACTIONS OF MTH are what have been in dispute here, nothing else. Please re-read the posts. Some of these guys that you're referring to as "plaint nuts" are hard working people that replied with the utmost sincerity and intelligent wording.

If a modeler chooses to purchase MTH products, no one here is going to "hang him".

Best wishes to you Mr. Rhales.[:D][;)]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Paul3

amedleman wrote:

QUOTE: 1. Sorry about the lack of a signature. It was checked in my profile and appeared in the Preview window but not in the actual posting.

Hmm... It's still not showing up.

I can see it.

[Anonymous]

Why doesn't the industry have an organization who could patent technology intended to be shared so that some unethical entity could not come along after the fact ant patent it. free licenses could be offered to all comers and the technology would be protected from someone who would take it from the hobby for selfish benefit.

[Anonymous]

Thanks to Andy Edleman for his professional and rational response to this issue. I'm also excited about DCS coming to HO. MTH is the leader in O gauge trains and will become the same in HO in a matter of time. HO really needs a shot in the arm and Mike Wolf is capable of doing it.

[Anonymous]

My apologies to Mr. AntonioFP45.

I re-read your posts and they were all very professional. Before writing mine I should have taken your advice given to others who have posted in this thread:

"......... stay cool! It took me years to learn that when we get nasty, we often are not taken seriously!"

R.H.

[Anonymous]

MTH is taking a big risk going into the HO market. I personally don't see why MTH chose a K4 when BLI announced their's first. Could it just be to get back at BLI. Maybe. Also, there's so many features on those MTH locomotives, do you really want them all?!
I mean, adjusting the smoke chuff rate? Seems a bit ''overdone'' to me. And, how many HO people really want smoke? I know I don't.
MTH also should have joined the NMRA. They should have made a system that will be easily compatible with other systems. There are so many ''should haves'', I can't list them all.
That being said, long live Athearn, BLI, Bachmann, Atlas, Proto, Stewart and countless other respectable HO manufacturers!!

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by 4884bigboy
And, how many HO people really want smoke? I know I don't.

It matters for me, if its like the Bachmann smoke, no, if its like the MTH O Gauge smoke, yes, I've seen many of them and they look great!

[Anonymous]

I'm a die-hard TMCC user, but I do appreciate Mr. Edleman's professional responses to this issue.

I wouldn't even be involved in this hobby if it wasn't for MTH's superior starter-sets.

Ed

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

MTH got me back into the hobby after 20 years on the sidelines. Andy Edleman has taken the time to personally respond to a number of my e-mails over the years. Not everyone is in love with MTH, but I have always found them to be "train people" who care passionately about what they do. They make great products in tremendous variety and I alwasy feel that I get at least as much as I paid for, and often more.

There are certainly plenty of folks out there who revel in MTH bashing, and I find a number of the posts contained in this topic to be outlandishly negative and critical. MTH has a right to protect their business interests. You have a right not to buy their products. But you should be a bit more open minded.

[Anonymous]

I wouldn't buy an M.T.H. product . First they are not lthat good. Second, they are overpriced for what you get. Third, Edleman acts so pious while trying to rip all of us off. If all of us walked the thin line of legallity that M.T.H.does this hobby would never get advanced. The market place will eventually deal with the likes of M.T.H.

[ben10ben]

Although I certainly don't buy MTH products, I think that we should all appreciate Mr. Edelman taking the time to type of three very lengthy and informative posts on this forum.

Paul 3, I think that I can answer a couple of your questions. First of all, with DC, your remote has a LCD display and a thumbwheel. You use the thumbwheel to dial in a speed in scale miles per hour, as read by the LCD display. It starts out as 0 when you first turn your engine on, and advancing the thumbwheel causes the engine speed to advance in scale miles per hour. The engine will maintain this speed right on the mark.
I assume that when MTH says altering the start-up direction, they mean the direction that the engines moves when you first tell it to move without pushing the direction button.

[AggroJones]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dougal

QUOTE: Originally posted by 4884bigboy
And, how many HO people really want smoke? I know I don't.

It matters for me, if its like the Bachmann smoke, no, if its like the MTH O Gauge smoke, yes, I've seen many of them and they look great!

If a smoke system had that much output, it would look fine. But, since I would be trapped in a 9 x 11 room with a robustly puffing steamer, I wouldn't utilize the smoke system.

[Anonymous]

Andy:

All I can say is that you are to be commended for taking the time to respond to the string of often irrational, misinformed, and even vitriolic posts presented here, and for doing so in a highly professional manner. That reflects great credit on you and the firm you work with.

Unfortunately, some of those who have posted here most certainly do not show the same level of class for the hobby they pretend to represent. Thank goodness they and their spitefull, ill-tempered comments represent nothing but the views of a small and insignificant minority!

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Allan Miller

Andy:

All I can say is that you are to be commended for taking the time to respond to the string of often irrational, misinformed, and even vitriolic posts presented here, and for doing so in a highly professional manner. That reflects great credit on you and the firm you work with.

Unfortunately, some of those who have posted here most certainly do not show the same level of class for the hobby they pretend to represent. Thank goodness they and their spitefull, ill-tempered comments represent nothing but the views of a small and insignificant minority!

Allan's comments are right on! The Rock also commends Andy for his professional and accurate response. These negative posts are a lot of hot air from people who are ignorant about MTH and DCS.

[jacon12]

As the new guy in the hobby I'm still trying to fathom it all... and I mean ALL..... but I get the feeling that if anyone bought an MTH HO locomotive and posted something about it here, he'd get crucified. That leaves me wondering if I want to even get in this hobby. But, like I said... I'm new.. so what do I know yet.
In the end though I believe everyone should run what they want to run on their own layout, I don't like censorship.. IF this is what this is.

[Anonymous]

I think that MTH needs to reassure the HO community that the NMRA S.9 and RP-9 (DCC) Standards will not be litigated, patented or otherwise threatened by MTH as those standards exist today. Furthermore, MTH should affiliate itself with the NMRA and MRIA. If MTH does these things, they have a chance of prospering, if not...

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jacon12

but I get the feeling that if anyone bought an MTH HO locomotive and posted something about it here, he'd get crucified.

No you won't get crucified, hardly anyone would chastize you for buying MTH. Ity's just that most of us have been left with a bad taste in our mouths by MTH, if someone buys their product, that's great, fi they like it. But most of us realize there's better products out there for a better value, you just have to sift through all the BS to find the right stuff for you.

[Anonymous]

Ouch I have a Headach now, I just read the 3 pages of this topic and let me tell you I am more confused than ever!

Mr Edelmen,

Since your company is shall we say causing this storm, would you be so kind to explain to me in laymens terms why your products should interest me. I am a new modeler and I do look for any information about a product based on it ability to work with the NMRA and work within there standards, its my way of knowing if one product will work with another. I also firmly believe that any company large or small should be a good corprate citizen to both the consumer and competitors. It is never in anyones interest to be the bad guy on either side. I am not a lawyer so all the legal speeches dont phase me so if your truley interested in the HO market may I suggest your company work with the DCC industry and the HO modelers. Find common ground Sir and we will all benefit from the fruits of our labor.


Too all the guys who have stayed on top of this topic thank you. This type of information is very importamt to everyone because we do pay for it all in the end. If MTH wins we will still pay for it from the losers who will raise there prices to pay the judgment.

Above all else lets be nice to each other we are all in this for the same reasons it our hobbies and our time to relax. Nothing good will ever come from fighting. We all lose.

If I wanted to fight and call names all the time with people I would take up Hockey.

Sincerly Polizi
AKA Will

[Big_Boy_4005]

I too appreciate Mr Edleman taking the time to discuss these issues. For the record, I own and am very pleased with a large quantity of MTH Premier line rolling stock. I am not an MTH "basher", but rather a concerned hobbyist, and 30 year member of the NMRA. (That happens to be longer than MTH has been in business.)

I don't think that it is fair or proper for my fellow O gaugers to simply jump into this conversation and give glowing testimonials for DCS. I find it rude and counter produvtive. If you aren't a member of the NMRA or an active HO modeler, this isn't your fight.

I think that it is clear that MTH has some serious public relations issues when it comes to the HO marketplace. This isn't about the details of any lawsuit, it's about respect and image within the model railroading community. I feel that in order for MTH to expand into this new market, they are going to have to stop being perceived as a bully by their potential customers.

For MTH this is a business, for everyone else this is a hobby. The HO guys never asked for a "better" system, something MTH seems hell bent on giving them. What they want is hassle free compatability. It isn't hassle free if they have to buy additional equipment to take advantage of all the features, ie proprietary.

What these guys want is an olive branch, something that may violate every business principle that Mr Wolfe stands for. It is safe to say that he has spent a lot of money to develop this system and win the patent rights, but in his vigorous persuit of satisfaction, he has stepped on the toes of those whose support he needs the most for this to be successful.

[Anonymous]

"The HO guys never asked for a "better" system, something MTH seems hell bent on giving them. What they want is hassle free compatability. It isn't hassle free if they have to buy additional equipment to take advantage of all the features, ie proprietary. "
-----------------------------------

I'm certain that you don't presume to speak for the HO community as a whole, but it's wrong to assert that folks may not want a better system (added versatility and features). Why should HO be any more reluctant to move forward in terms of technology than any other scale?

From what I have read, those who enjoy the level of features available with conventional DC operation will have that capability with the MTH models without buying any additional equipment. Those who have an enjoy DCC will also have that same capability and compatibility, again without the requirement to spend money for additional components. But those who may want to enjoy the additional capabilities that DCS offers will be able to access those features with the addition of DCS components--an entirely optional choice as far as the consumer is concerned. So I fail to see where the door is closed on anybody's existing or potential interest in regard to control system of choice.

I also fail to see a logical basis for bashing MTH simply because they have announced their intention to enter the HO segment of the hobby--a logical extension of their current activities in O gauge/scale, Standard Gauge, and Large Scale. The vast majority of hobbyists will, quite properly, judge them on the basis of the products they produce once these products become available. As always, the marketplace will make the ultimate case for or against MTH HO, as it would for any other manufacturer's line. Why slam the door on innovation even before it has been given a chance to be tried and tested in the hands of those who may be looking for something more or something a bit different?

Allan Miller
NMRA Life Member 4459

[jacon12]

I'd just like everybody to get along and be reasonable, a lot of this[:D]
and very little if any of this[}:)]. Maybe throw in some of this[:o)] When the fighting starts the whole place gets a[B)].
Personally I like BFI's Class A 2-6-6-4 with these features:
Articulated Engine Sounds
Synchronized Chuff
Authentic Class A Whistle
Authentic Class A Bell
Squealing brakes
Doppler effect
Steam Dynamo (Sound of steam electric generator (dynamo) when lights turn on. Includes gradual headlight turn-on effect as dynamo speeds up.)

Sound of Power (change in chuff sounds with differing loads for more realism)
Coupler Crash
Air let off (in neutral)
Air pumps (in neutral)
Numerous Water sounds (in neutral - blow down, pop off & injector)
Blower hiss
Headlight (dim head light in neutral)
Slave (mutes whistle and bell for double heading)

Mechanical features will include:
Powerful 5-pole can motor with flywheel
Die-cast locomotive chassis
Die-cast tender chassis
Detailed tender underbody
Plated bell & whistle
Deck plate from cab to tender
Prototypical Swing Out Scale Coupler
Provision for Double-heading with Replaceable Coupler
Seuthe® Smoke Unit compatible
Many exceptional prototypical added-on details like piping and appliances

Prototypical cab interior, including backhead, etc.
Operating headlight
Directional backup light
Firebox Glow
Illuminated Headlight Number Board
Authentic paint scheme and correct locomotive numbers
Magnetic knuckle coupler on tender
RP-25 contour on drivers and wheels
Will operate on Code 70, 83 and 100 rail
Minimum 22" Radius recommended for best results

Though it has an msrp of $499
MTH's yet to be released K-4 has, what seems to a new person, all this and maybe a little more and operates on 18 inch curves and it's $100 less. The strictly business side of me says that this is good to compete with BFI in this segment of the hobby.
So, I'm a learnin' and its fascinatin' and I sincerely hope everybody can get along.