UP puts screws to model railroad companies

[dehusman]

The license fee is NOT 5%.

Its either 3% of UP stuff or 1/2% of all sales. Its also based on wholesale prices. The example was give of $5 on a $100 locomotive. That was wrong. The wholsale price on a locomotive is less than $100. I pick $75. 3% of $75 is $2.25. So the fee on a $100 (retail )/$75 (wholesale) locomotive is only $2.25. If you buy it in a hobby shop, you'll proably pay twice that in sales tax.

Dave H.

Dave H.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by bruce22

American corporate GREED what else would you expect !!!! It's time that all American's reassessed their values.

bruce22: There's no sense in isolating on Americans in your rant...there's lots of the SAME kind of "corporate greed" , if that's what this is, up here in Canada...AND in Europe, Asia, Africa, South America, Australasia...everywhere that there are corporations of any kind.
If you must jump up and down (and flap both left wings), at the evils of corporations, why not at least be grown up enough to be Global in your accusations ?

I think this UP thing may be more a matter of bureaucracy gone wild, and corporate legal departments sucking up to their CFO's, and trying to reinforce the sheer necessity of their anal-retentive and miserable bottom-feeding existences.
A politically-incorrect Merry Christmas to All,
Mike

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by 4884bigboy

Does this mean they'll stop making UP models??!!!!!

We can only hope!!!

[Anonymous]

Interesting problem. We've had similar difficulties over here in the UK with the new privatised train operators. Many of them would not allow decal companies to produce "their" decals, but they would allow Hornby et al to use their logos and paint schemes on RTR models. Apparently this is because they would have no control over the use of their logos if they were produced as decals, which could supposedly reflect badly on them. However, this point was made in many a letter to magazines over here, if model train enthusiasts are forced to create their own decals (this was before the availability of decal paper that would go in a normal printer), the results may not be very good. Surely the company would rather see decent renditions of their logo instead of a selection of hand-painted versions of varying quality?

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by bruce22

American corporate GREED what else would you expect !!!! It's time that all American's reassessed their values.

Again, it's THEIR property. Others are making money--a great deal of money--from the UP's property. It's unrealistic to call it "greed"--it's called "fair."

[bruce22]

American corporate GREED what else would you expect !!!! It's time that all American's reassessed their values.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by brothaslide

UP should look at it this way - they are getting free advertising. I think UP should have logo use guidelines but with no cost.

That's not very realistic. No one's going to look at a model train and say, "Hey, I should ship with UP," because of it. That is, of course, their business. If the "advertising" doesn't help support their service, then it's of no use to them.

Thery are in business to make money. If someone else uses their trademark to generate revenue, they deserve a cut of it. They have the legal right to expect that.
If someone used something YOU created to make money, YOU'd want a cut, too.

And, no, "they" won't stop making UP models. Because UP models generate revenue for the model manufacturers.

[Anonymous]

Does this mean they'll stop making UP models??!!!!!

[brothaslide]

UP should look at it this way - they are getting free advertising. I think UP should have logo use guidelines but with no cost.

[SteelMonsters]

5% is just pocket change. I could go on and on about American taxes but I'll just say one thing about it. From the time you gross money at a job, till the time the money gets into someone elses hand, such as a hobby shop, taxes easily take 40%. Intellectual Property fees won't hurt the model companys, it's the modeler that will pay for it in the end. 5% isn't even a pin ***.

One could argue that the market difference from a real train and a model train as well as UP's lack of an attempt at the modeling market doesn't justify such a charge. From the link it is stated that UP's revenue is up, I could see the charge as legit if they were LOSING money especially because of the model railroad industry. I only see vague connections between the two makets, and no affect on the train market.

[Jacktal]

Just wondering.........if we are to pay UP for royalties through model manufacturer's because we use their logo on our layouts,does it mean thast we'll have to pay royalties to EMD,GE,Alco,etc?After all,we're running stunningly ressembling models of their products.Would make sense,wouldn't it?

[Anonymous]

There is another old way to add logos and it is called "silkscreen", but has been a long time. Will have to look up the process and see it it would work on a small scale. Need to look at what computer graphics can do here also.

There are solutions to all problems (issues nowadays I guess) and model railroaders are not lax in the ingenuity department as far as I know.

I still want to know about any railfan issues that might be out there. Anyone know for sure?

[Anonymous]

I wonder if this will force the model manufactures to paint but not decal?

After purchasing a model with a "specified color scheme" we would need to buy software, printer and decal material to add the road name ourselves.

If this trend does come about I wonder how many future layouts will be running painted but not named railroads? Or will there be a transistion in model RR where we run our favorite road "colors" but use our own name.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by samart

Ya know.........I was talking to some guys in from Cheyenne, who are in the steam department. They said that the UP is even making them pay out for their logo, to show that they aren't holding favorites. So think about that one :) heheheh

I would think however, even though they have bought these companies (some a long time ago), that they would run into having some public domain issues. If something hasn't been used for sometime, doesn't it become public domain??

Craig

It's public domain if it's abandoned for 99 years last I heard. FRED

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Grayhound Challenger

, (Any inovation made by a UP employee is property of Union Pacific)

James.

Any company of any size has this rule in their application and terms of employment, not just UP. It also only applies to work done at company expence, so if you want to set up a lab in YOUR backyard and work on YOUR time on YOUR ideas, and collect pay from YOUR fund, that's ok. But if UP is paying for any of it, and you signed the application its theirs. FRED

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Sask_Tinplater

I can certainly see licensing their logo, it makes a lot of sense. The thing that really angers me, though, is that they have to charge money for manufacturers to use it. Aren't they making enough cash, already? My advice for the model train manufacturers is to make as many UP trains as they possibly can now before UP actually goes ahead with this, so that they will have lots of UP trains already on hand for later on.

That wouldn't be very smart, UP would just get an injunction and not allow them to sell them. The copyright laws are old so they can't claim grandfather. They are in violation of the law now, not on some magic date in the future. FRED

[Anonymous]

Unfortunately, we the hobbyist are the recipients of any and all fallout generated by this sordid affair. UP has a right to gain profit from the use of their property after all it's a $400 million dollar industry and people buy certain items because they can identify with them. Yes I have several UP engines because they're UP. And the companies who make the engines make the money because many of us want UP. How many people would buy the same item, be it a locomotive or what ever if the loco was marked "UPPER PLODSVILLE".

Saying that the question remains what should be considered a fair price for copy right use. Personally I feel 3 to 5 % is gouging and would result in UP recieving more than their fair share of the profit margin once it's divided amongst the manufacturer, distributer, retailer, advertiser, etcetera.
Hopefully UP will look at this as an opportunity for free advertising, after all we don't charge UP to advertise on our railways. UP should see this for what it really is. People paying homage to one of the industries leaders in inovation and ability to do what they do best.
And if UP still wishes to charge us royalties hopefully it will be an amount that won't drive the cost of the hobby any higher and maybe the money can be put to good use like a preservation trust fund.

Just my two cents

[FJ and G]

Actual form to be used, indicating 3 to 5 percent royalty is at:

http://www.uprr.com/aboutup/licensing/up_licensee_model.pdf

UP has not been charging this for the last 2 centuries. Unsure of legal ramifications.

Will other roads start demanding royalties too?

What about GM, GE demanding royalties for using their road colors? And so on?

[dehusman]

The actual policy is at :

http://www.uprr.com/aboutup/licensing/

[Jetrock]

What's next--UP joins the RIAA's anti-piracy fight to stop the spread of "Trainster" railroad logo file-sharing software???

[Anonymous]

Well folks it now seems some people will have to learn how to duplicate their own logos to use on their locomotives and rollingstock or pay the tariff for commercial usage of the UP logos.

I expect the following position will result in some flak but it wouldn't give me heartburn to see the current generation of RTR buyers actually learn some modeling skills.

Randy

[Anonymous]

What's with railfans and the UP? Had not heard about this.

[Anonymous]

The UP can dump a couple hundred logs on a comunity to avert a " catastrophe ", but I guess if we dump a few cars on our layout they are worrying what their corporate image looks like if UP engines are in the lead. PLEASE!!!!

This will NOT just affect model makers......Train SIM games, clock and sign makers, DECAL companies..... THIS IS JUST ANOTHER WAY OF MAKING AN EASY BUCK !
Microsoft and other companies have done marketing research and see that there is a high interest in trains from the 30 to 50 age group....and we will all pay for it .....

[Jetrock]

One problem is that UP also owns a lot of "fallen flags" that fall under this too--which means it isn't just UP equipment that will require fees--but also SP, WP, Sacramento Northern and any other company absorbed by UP (or SP, as a UP subsidiary) over the past century and a half!

It's just silly. Sure, they have a right to do whatever they want with their logos, but if "whatever they want" includes alienating the folks who are the most in love with trains, and effectively stifling a fabulous form of free advertising, then they're hurting themselves as well as the hobby.

The decision will also impact small manufacturers--mom and pop operations--because the expenses involved are more than just a percentage--there's also added overhead for reporting everything from logo usage to informing UP of the locations, materials, pay scales, etc. of the production sites where these products are made, as well as associated legal fees and paperwork. That's where the other 2% goes.

[Anonymous]

Grayhound Challenger,


Most companies state that anything you create pertaining to the business is the property of the company. Yes, even if you do it on you own time. Now if you work for a railroad and invent a new micowave oven in your spare time that should be yours. Most people in engineering have something sort of paperwork in their file that states this.

DT

[dehusman]

Since the license fee is 3%, somebody is nearly doubling the fee if a 3% fee causes a 5% price increase. What did the manufacturers say they were doing with the other 2% they are charging the er?

Dave H.

[Anonymous]

I look at it this way, UP owns the the name and shield, if you want to use it for your own personal use, you don't have to pay for the use, once you start to profit from the use, then you owe UP period. My dad worked the advertising department with the Santa Fe for 31 years and I can remember him constantly saying they (the Santa Fe) were experiencing problems with people/business using their logo and name and profit from it and not even getting permission or paying the Santa Fe for the rights.
Ch

[vsmith]

UP does have to right to protect thier logo, but if what the article said is accurate and they want to charge $5 for each $100 of merchandise, then charging a 5% fee is ROBBERY, pure and simple. Some states dont have SALES TAX that high. It sounds like the PENCIL NECK laywers have found another way to make their company look like a bunch of greedy, unsympathitic, money grubbing ASSES!

Uncle Pete's (Uncle Poo''s?) lawyers seem to be able to act this way without the slightlest idea of how it makes them look to the rest of us in the free world. Shows how connected they are with the rest of the universe. STUPID< STUPID< STUPID.

Ya know, if they had quietly approached the hobby manufacturers and negotiated a licensing agreement, I doubt if any of us would be making a big fuss about it. But NOOO! The laywers have to put on thier best "This is ours and screw you all !" attitude, they are really looking pretty ridiculous to me. Glad I dont run any Uncle Poo's

[Anonymous]

Ya know.........I was talking to some guys in from Cheyenne, who are in the steam department. They said that the UP is even making them pay out for their logo, to show that they aren't holding favorites. So think about that one :) heheheh

I would think however, even though they have bought these companies (some a long time ago), that they would run into having some public domain issues. If something hasn't been used for sometime, doesn't it become public domain??

Craig

[dharmon]

It's their perogative to do as they please with their trademark. That is how businesses in this country make money, protect their image and market share. I'm not saying it's right, but it's legal. It's also my perogative NOT to purchase model railroad products with their logo on it. Funny how that works. I expect that you will start seeing ads for undecorated ALCO 4-8-4 Northerns based on a western railroad prototype. [xx(]