I have just finished reading a “readers letter” in a modelling magazine whose name I dare not mention --read on , you will see why .
The letter writer runs a small businesws making and selling models , mainly of true scale aircraft engines in 1/72 , 1/48 and 1/32 .
He was horrified to receive a visit from a legal representative of an aircraft engine company , let’s call them Wit and Pratney .
This gentleman proceeded to give a formal warning to the model entrepreneur that if he did not cease and desist forthwith his practise of selling HalfWit and Pratney lookalikes in plastic scale form , he would be transported to somewhere nasty . No , not Australia , even the wicked can be human .
So , suddenly , yer man in a shop ain’t got no stock . Not saleable anyway .
I believe another company ruined all their free advertising chances by banning the use of railway engines bearing the logo Onion Specific .
And put people off using their 1/1 scale products as well .
A well known Japanese model kit company had to desist from selling models --superb models , I have a few --of a motor cycle graced with the name Hardly Believable , for pecuniary reasons .
The same company fell foul of Kenbilt Trucks with their big rig model in 1/16 ,yet produced a superb model of a FORD AEROMAX in the same scale . How did FORD miss that oppurtunity to join the growing band of spoilers , huh? And MERCEDES ,they missed out too , let their name be used on a model .Perhaps setting a trap for the unwary ?
D’ya think they saw something positive ? D’ya think their truck sales suffered because of it ? Has anyone sued them because darling little spoiled brat couldn’t manage to put the kit together ? Or sued them because spoiled brat’s brother swallowed a piece of kit his parents should never have given him in the first place ?
We need to watch this , it is becoming more common .
Sheesh .
Mike M
Sometime in the late 60’s or early 70’s, a company was manufacturing kits for VW bugs that would replace the bonnet (we call it a hood, for some odd reason) with a Rolls Royce Phantom lookalike, complete with a “Flying Lady” radiator cap.
An enterprising “infobabe” interviewing the CEO of Rolls asked why the auto manufacturer had allowed this to go on for so many years. His response was very telling of a lost corporate ethos. “My dear young lady,” he said, “we don’t think that anyone will ever confuse a Volkswagon Beetle with a Rolls Royce. Besides,” he went on, “we think it is kind of cute.”
Whatever happened to that attitude?
I’d be hard pressed to believe that the 1:1 folks who are being are remotely feeling any negativity to their bottom line because of their recent actions. The reason? Modelers aren’t customers. If I’m running a factory that needs to receive tons of raw materials, and XYZ railroad runs by my door, guess what? I’m not going to care how much they charge model manufacturers who want to make models, I only care about what they charge me to deliver what I need. Same thing with the above-mentioned aircraft company. PW isn’t going to lose any defense contracts because they strong-arm some little guy in his garage over a model. These companies no longer benefit from the “free advertising” generated by such models. The glory days of competitive passenger travel–which are what fostered the practice of such free advertising–are long gone. Each of the big class 1 railroads now operates more or less as a regional monopoly. If you want to be able to choose which railroad can serve you best, you need to do that before you build your factory. Otherwise, you take what they offer.
Steve asks, “what happened to that attitude?” Simple. It’s not profitable, either in terms of public perception or the bottom line. Since we’re not customers, the fact that we’re disgruntled means nothing to these businesses. Our perception has no negative impact on their profits. Therefore, if they can make a few extra dollars by enforcing licensing requirements without offsetting that gain to the bottom line in a loss of customers, then naturally, they’re going to do it. It’s a bean-counter’s world we live in, no matter how much it p****s us off.
Of course, my way of dealing with these things is a bit contrary to the popular “boycott” responses. I say, buy their stock. If the corporate SOBs want to get rich off of your pocket, put your hand into theirs at the same time. UP stock’s gone up from $60 to $90 in the past year. The gain from just one share would pay for more than a few “surcharges” on our models.
Later,
K
Sorry , Kevin , that attitude is what gives them the idea in the first place .
Mike M
The only requirement for tyranny to exist is for good men to do nothing.
Mike
Why don’t you come down here - you might like the best country in the world
Quote:Depends on how you look at it, Mike. True, their actions are motivated by profit, as are my own. "Having more" has been the primary motivator since the dawn of time, long before man decided to walk upright. It's inherent in many living things--even plants. Why would we have any expectation of anything different? Society teaches us that from day one.
Sorry , Kevin , that attitude is what gives them the idea in the first place .
Let’s use the oil companies as an example. We’re all paying through the nose for gas, meanwhile the oil companies are posting record profits. Translation–money is going straight from our pockets into theirs because of what they vaguely call “market forces.” As consumers, we have no choice but to pay. We need to buy gas to make a living and keep a roof over our heads. We can’t not buy gas, so we pay. We all feel the pinch because of this. We cut back in other areas because we don’t have quite as much money left over at the end of the day. BUT, or goal is to have as much left over at the end of the day as possible, so we look to ways to not only save money, but earn it–that is, let our money work for us instead of against us.
We do that through investments. Where are the smart investments? Companies who are posting record profits and are either paying large dividends and/or have rising stock prices. Guess who that is right now… the oil companies. We have to buy gasoline. They have us (pardon the pun) over a barrel. Their hand is in our pocket and we have NO control over how much they take out. We’re being forced to support their corporate “greed.” All the while, we lament and petition our congressmen to do something about the price of gas and force the oil companies to give us back some of our money. Well, they already do–to shareholders. So, becoming a shareholder is not “giving in,” but “getting back.” It’s our only way to get back the money they’re pulling from our wallets. It’s a capitalist society. Someone’s going to buy their stock and get their money. Who better than those of us who are putting it there in the first place?
Let’s now work this back to the UP and licensing fees. We have no control over the deals that these companies make with the model companies. Like the oil companies’ “market forces,” the UP (and others) has its reasons for justifying its course of action. The model companies have the choice to pay or not, but most realize the popularity of the UP, and want to be able to continue to use it to help their own sales. Naturally, since their costs have increased, they pass the costs onto us. Unlike the oil companies, though, we have the option of not buying models. BUT, that only hurts the model manufacturer, not the UP. We have no recourse to keep the UP’s hand out of our pockets that doesn’t hurt the hobby itself. Not wanting to hurt the hobby, we let the UP into our pockets. So, our only way to get that money back is to put ourselves in a position to benefit from the UP’s now-padded bottom line. Like the oil companies, they’re going to post gains and pay dividends. Investors will take notice and make money. Why shouldn’t it be us? The model companies are the ones “giving in” to the UP’s greed. We don’t have the option. I’ll take whatever opportunity I can to “get back” what they’ve taken.
Some may view it as “greed,” but I see it as getting back that which was taken involuntarily. If more like-minded people buy into the company as shareholders, they have a better chance at effecting change. It’s the slow, quiet revolutions that are the most effective.
Later,
K
Bob,
Especially as the OZ Soccer team has marched right into the second round of the FA World Cup.
Not bad really considering Soccer is at best only the third or fourth most watched football code in OZ.
Imagine how unbearable the populace of Australia would be if soccer was the main winter sport.
I shudder to think.
And, boy, we’re in for a scorcher this weekend in Seattle…
Steven Featherkile said:
Sometime in the late 60's or early 70's, a company was manufacturing kits for VW bugs that would replace the bonnet (we call it a hood, for some odd reason) with a Rolls Royce Phantom lookalike, complete with a "Flying Lady" radiator cap.An enterprising “infobabe” interviewing the CEO of Rolls asked why the auto manufacturer had allowed this to go on for so many years. His response was very telling of a lost corporate ethos. “My dear young lady,” he said, “we don’t think that anyone will ever confuse a Volkswagon Beetle with a Rolls Royce. Besides,” he went on, “we think it is kind of cute.”
Whatever happened to that attitude?
Steve,
Only those who are reasonably sure that their product is not to be confused with someone else’s product can afford that attitude. And they need a sense of humour to see the “cuteness” of things.
Of course both prerequisites have been in short supply for some years now, replaced by enough clout and money to pay lawyers to make sure “things stay right”.
i still thinks some of the top men in these compians donot even know about this until a new go getter who tells the big guys how much money they can make just to get on their good side and do’nt be suprised if the go getter is a modler who else would think of this stuff
TonyWalsham said:
Bob, Especially as the OZ Soccer team has marched right into the second round of the FA World Cup.Not bad really considering Soccer is at best only the third or fourth most watched football code in OZ.
Imagine how unbearable the populace of Australia would be if soccer was the main winter sport.I shudder to think.
G’day Tony,
Yep, we’re down to 16 and the fun begins!
BTW the Swiss made it, too. 
There was a “Fussball” story on CBC yesterday, some poor American wanders into a police station in Hanover at 3AM, completely lost, can’t find his hotel etc. etc. (No mention regarding state of “Happiness”) So he can’t remember the name of his hotel, but remembers it cost him 10 Euro to get from the hotel to the stadium. (Cabfare sort of "sticks’.)
Hmmmmmmmm not much to go by. What else? Well, there’s a Mercedes dealership kitty-corner to the hotel. (Sure, that’s a rarety in Germany! hehehehe).
I guess he must have remembered his own name, anyway, after some checking, an hour later he’s back at his hotel.
Just reminded me of the comment the USA coach made after arrival in Germany.
Quote:
There was a “Fussball” story on CBC yesterday, some poor American wanders into a police station in Hanover at 3AM, completely lost, can’t find his hotel etc. etc. (No mention regarding state of “Happiness”) So he can’t remember the name of his hotel, but remembers it cost him 10 Euro to get from the hotel to the stadium. (Cabfare sort of "sticks’.) Hmmmmmmmm not much to go by. What else? Well, there’s a Mercedes dealership kitty-corner to the hotel. (Sure, that’s a rarety in Germany! hehehehe). I guess he must have remembered his own name, anyway, after some checking, an hour later he’s back at his hotel.
What? Don’t you do that?
Having enough, is enough for everyone.
Is it the “bean counters” or is it a lawyer with a statement that “it won’t cost you anything, but I want a percentage if I get something?” I fear the later is the source of most of are problems. To me it is not the lawyer trying to make his buck, it is the judicial system that doesn’t make the lawyer pay for the defense and the judicial time that is taken while he argues his case. If there is this constant “no harm/no foul” attitude, then every lawyer will always think 'You can sue anybody for anything". The scarey part is that most of our politicians are lawyers.
Quite so , quite so .
Mike M
A quick message to Bob Hayes . I had the pleasure of going to Oz in an RAAF aircraft in 1956. Maybe before you , even . I would have stayed , but the RAF insisted that I return to Singapore . And my Mom wanted me back home . And I had no passport --this was in the days when a RAF identity card had more meaning than a mere passport ,
even extending to Clark Field in the Phillipines .
I think Australia is the country with the highest promise of a good future .
I would love to have lived there .
I hope their sense of humour still holds good , we had some damn good fun together , the RAF and RAAF .
Mike
TonyWalsham said:All Aussie soccer fans are in mourning. What a cruel way to exit the cup.
Bob, Especially as the OZ Soccer team has marched right into the second round of the FA World Cup.
Les,
The Swiss suffered the same fate.
The defence industry is ready and waiting to charge license fees to any model company for using names associated with companys they have absorbed over the years. No big deal right, make a model of a B-17 and pay Boeing, a model of a P-51, pay Boeing (They absorbed the remanants of North American Aviation when they took over Rockwell International’s military aircraft business), Make a model of a WWII Jeep and pay Chrysler and so on.
What’s wrong with this picture ? American tax payers paid for the development and production of that equipment and now they want to collect more from tax payers by causing model makers to raise their prices to cover the fees.
This is way different from UP collecting royalities ! An amendment was added to the House military spending bill forbiding the defence industry from collecting royalities and it passed in the house version. Whether or not it makes it through the Senate or not is still up for grabs !