Posted on 01/31/2005 7:41:53 AM PST by pabianice
January 31, 2005: For over half a century, kits have been sold that enable military history buffs to assemble scale models of military ships, aircraft and vehicles. But that era is coming to an end, as the manufacturers of the original equipment, especially aircraft, are demanding high royalties (up to $40 per kit) from the kit makers. Since most of these kits sell in small quantities (10-20,000) and are priced at $15-30 (for plastic kits, wooden ones are about twice as much), tacking on the royalty just prices the kit out of the market. Popular land vehicles, which would sell a lot of kits, are missing as well. The new U.S. Army Stryker armored vehicles are not available because of royalty requirements. Even World War II aircraft kits are being hit with royalty demands.
This move grew out of the idea that corporations should maximize "intellectual property" income. Models of a companys products are considered the intellectual property of the owner of a vehicle design. In the past, the model kits were considered free advertising, and good public relations, by the defense firms. The kit manufacturers comprise a small industry, and the aircraft manufacturers will probably not even notice if they put many of the model vendors out of business.
Some model companies will survive by only selling models of older (like World War I), or otherwise "no royalty" items (Nazi German aircraft) and ships. But the aircraft were always the bulk of sales, and their loss will cripple many of the kit makers.
For decades, the aerospace and defense companies have done nothing to stop kitmakers/gamemakers/others from using their trademarks, copyrights, and patents. Having made no attempts to protect their property, they are at serious risk of losing it.
This thing should settle out of court before summary judgement.
One more time: if it was built for Uncle Sam, it's not their IP. They've used that statement as their prime defense in product liability suits stemming from aircraft crashes. If they're claiming ownership of the intellectual property now, they are also claiming responsibility for any damage brought about by defects in design (such as the infamous mast-bumping issue in the Bell H-1 series).
BTTT
I've seen that at a few companies. The marketing people have sumptuous lunches with piles of sandwiches, desserts and drinks catered. The rest of the staff labors away producing the core products of the company. Sometimes, a scavenger call goes out at the end of the marketing meeting. The productive staff get a shot a scavenging what is left. Minutes later, you find out that marketing has made a public commitment to an unrealistic deadline. More all nighters and weekends to cover their incompetence and lack of communication.
> For decades, the aerospace and defense companies have done nothing to stop kitmakers/gamemakers/others from using their trademarks, copyrights, and patents.
Why should they? Back in the 1960's, when Monogram (or Revell??) was working on what would become the ground-breaking 1/48 scale B-17, Boeing bent over backwards to be helpful, providing drawings and expertise for free. Because back then they realized that a good model was Good Advertising and Good PR.
A model hurts a defense contractor precisely None At All, while at the same time a *good* model can help them rather a lot.
True but that's but one example. No male American born executive of those companies will be able to truthfully testify that as a kid he didn't go into the toy store and see all the models. Some of which may have had his current employers name and logo on the toy and the box.
I forgot his name, but Art Bell interviewed him a few years back.
Did I ever tell you I have a '61 VW two door Transporter? I've owned it for about 25 years or so......
Best FRegards,
> Sweet Mother Magoo!!!!
That's a buttload of legalese!
Hello, I represent Mother Magoo, a division of Omni Consumer Products. I hereby serve you with a Cease And Desist Notice until such time as you fully comply with the licensing requirements listed on pages 4 through 26 of our Licensing Agreement.
I am sure that we can come to an amicable agreement here. With proper royalties (including back-dated royalities to 1947), you can be using the trademarked Mother Magoo name again in short order. In future, though, you may wish to check with our legal department before each use, in order to prevent inapproriate use of the Mother Magoo trademark. We are quite proud of out Licensing Relationship Department; we can usually respond to a Request For Usage with four to six weeks from receipt of request.
Thank you for your compliance.
Yes, a 45 degree common-crankping v-twin. A design neither originated by H-D nor used solely by them, historically. Well, that combined with poor carburetion and ignition at low rpms leading to a variety of misfires and generally uneven running, especially at idle.
Actually, while I thought the idea of patenting or trademarking or copyrighting an engine sound was ridiculous (as I would expect others who think this whole IP thing has gone too far would agree), I really could care less. The world really didn't need a bunch of crappy Japanese copies of a crappy old design, anyway.
Too bad nobody has come up with a software system where you can design and fly your own plane...like Rollercoaster Kingdom.
I stand corrected -- and that's really, really cool!
I have met a lot of these types who believe that all a company really needs is a marketing deparment, those pesky engineers are just overhead to keep the SEC off their backs.
A model hurts a defense contractor precisely None At All, while at the same time a *good* model can help them rather a lot.
I completely agree as long as the model is more or less true to the original. I stated in a prior post that I expect this to settle out of court with the big companys granting some sort of limited use, non-transferable, royalty free license.
never-the-less, the law is the law and the big companies do have an obligation to protect their IP.
LOL! Tell ya what, my net worth is $.05, how about I give ya my last nickel and we call it even. :-)
I have my step brothers lot. When my mother cleaned house she ran them all over to me. Do you think they'll be worth something???
> how about I give ya my last nickel and we call it even. :-)
Legal has concluded that as a down payment that will have to suffice. We can have the courts garnish your wages and put a lien against your house for the balance. Indentured servitude is also an attractive option you might like to consider. As always, Mother Magoo (a division of Omni Consumer Products... "We Know What You Want, We Know What You Need, We Know Where You Live") is here to help you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.