Manufacturers Want Royalties for Model War Planes

[eastside]

Looks like a sign of the times. Now airplane makers want royalties. This was on the CBS news last night:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/09/27/eveningnews/main887340.shtml

One difference here is that the manufacturer's logo, Boeing, Lockheed, doesn't appear on the airplane. It would be as if GM or GE were to start demanding royalties for models of their locomotives, whatever the railroad livery.

[samfp1943]

This is surely a case of too many lawyers with too much time on their hands!

[samfp1943]

This is surely a case of too many lawyers with too much time on their hands!

[Anonymous]

Just another excuse to [censored] the Modeler out of more money.
Allan.

[Anonymous]

What's next? royalties on Cabbage patch dolls in walmart?

Shows how old I am aint it?

[vsmith]

As someone pointed out, these are aircraft that were designed and built with taxpayer dollars, bought by the government with taxpayer dollars, now they want money from the modeler whos taxes funded them for licensing fees?

PURE GREED!

[Kurn]

Trademark Rights???????-Like Smith's Machine Shop is gonna build a real F16 and "infringe" on their trademark.Maybe Boeing should sue the Russians for building the TU-4,the reverse engineered B29,back in 1946.

[vsmith]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Kurn

Trademark Rights???????-Like Smith's Machine Shop is gonna build a real F16 and "infringe" on their trademark.Maybe Boeing should sue the Russians for building the TU-4,the reverse engineered B29,back in 1946.

Include several other Tupolev jets blatently ripped off from Boing back in the 60's, Should Rockwell sue the ruskies over the B1 clone, the Blackjack? and my favorite, the Buran, a xerox of the Space Shuttle, complete copy only without the rocket technology.

[DSchmitt]

I saw a boxed set of 4 diecast planes at ToysRUs that ad a blub about royalties having been paid to Boeing. Three of the planes were British, the fourth was a WW1 era Curtis Jenny.

[Anonymous]

I haven't done a model plane in a long time. How much will these royalities make the price go up?
If a $150 locomotive goes up $5 to make UP happy, how much can they tack on for a $30 plane? It may not make much difference.
mike

[bobwilcox]

I beleve the car manufactures have gotten royalties from model car makers for many years.

[egmurphy]

QUOTE: Eastside: It would be as if GM or GE were to start demanding royalties for models of their locomotives, whatever the railroad livery.

That's coming............. to be followed shortly by the demands of the car manufacturers (railroad, not auto).


Ed

[Anonymous]

Well the railroad locomotive makers wont get much royalty out of me for the modern diesals. I plan just two or three main and one or two switcher/local in the future and that is it. There will be no more as I am mainly steam and that roster is almost complete.

The royalties on that is what?? 50 dollars gross? Hardly worth the effort.

[M636C]

The early Triang (later Hornby) model of the British Class 31, earlier called the Bru***ype 2 after its manufacturer, had the Brush Engineering trademark on the bottom of the fuel tank. This was a good model for its period (early to mid 1960s) and I wondered if it was used by Brush for publicity.

Hornby now have an improved and closer to scale model, but the trademark always intrigued me about the older model, but t must have indicated approval at the very least.

M636C

[dehusman]

That will make the old Athearn and MDC shake the box kits more attractive, since any railroad car expert will point out that most of those cars weren't based on any prototype.

Dave H.

[ChuckCobleigh]

QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith

As someone pointed out, these are aircraft that were designed and built with taxpayer dollars, bought by the government with taxpayer dollars, now they want money from the modeler whos taxes funded them for licensing fees?

PURE GREED!

Not to mention that Uncle Sugar will probably get into the act and make LMT and Boeing and the others cough up the proceeds under the original contracts. You can bet this will happen, because there are probably more than a few interested parties in the DCMA that would take a good look at this issue.

Those folks can make some interesting mischief for the contractors, trust me.

[Tulyar15]

In Britain apparrently Virgin Trains have threaten to sue model manufacturers who used the Virgin logo without permission. Furthermore, Virgin will only grant a licencse to one manufacturer in each scale. So for this reason the Danish manufacturer Heljan who've just brought out a model of a class 47 loco which has been widely acclaimed cannot offer it in Virgin livery.

In the old days it was different. The Great Western Railway normally named locos in alphabetically order but the first of its Manor Class 4-6-0's was named "Torquay Manor" because the guy who lived in Torquay Manor was a keen model maker who'd made models of GWR locos. So in recognition of the benefits they'd gained from this free publicity the GWR decided to name the first Manor class loco after his home! Not surprisingly at the 1938 Model Railway Exhibition at Central Hall in London a model of "Torquay Manor" (the loco!) appeared to critical acclaim made by this guy. (Given the GWR had difficulty in finding stately homes to name all its 300+ "Hall" class locos after it's surprising they never named one "Central Hall". That would have been well received by Methodists as well as model railroaders!)

[Anonymous]

I wonder if US Steel is going to demand royalties because the model track has the same cross section as the rail they roll?

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

As far as the resemblance between the Buran and the Space Shuttle, the Tu-144 and the Concorde, etc., the laws of physics and aerodynamics do not vary from country to country. Consequently, aircraft that are designed to fly in the same flight envelope are quite likely to look similar. Going back to the Korean War era, compare the F-86 and the MiG-15.