SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

You let the prototype manufacturers get away with it....

1463 views
10 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    October 2005
Posted by CG Bob on Monday, July 18, 2016 9:57 PM

hypertex

It has to do with the official Seal used by Government agencies. The seals indicate a source of origin or approval, and their use is regulated by a different set of laws. This does not apply to "markings", only to the official seal. Just remove the decal of the seal and the problem will be solved. How many aircraft actually have an official seal on it anyway?

This won't kill the hobby. 

The USCG emblem, a variation of the offical USCG seal, is part of the Coast Guard mark (racing stripe) on all USCG aircraft and vessels.  It is considered a trade mark.  The USCG application has a check box for "Hobbyist".

  • Member since
    May 2016
Posted by Revenant on Monday, July 18, 2016 9:40 PM

Yawn...

  • Member since
    January 2013
Posted by BlackSheepTwoOneFour on Monday, July 18, 2016 8:03 PM

Heh, he got no proof. So much for that. It's all heresay. 

  • Member since
    January 2013
Posted by BlackSheepTwoOneFour on Monday, July 18, 2016 12:35 PM

We'd like to see some proof. I know I would like to see it.

  • Member since
    July 2011
  • From: Armpit of NY
Posted by MJames70 on Monday, July 18, 2016 11:29 AM

A manufacturer has told you it has already had an effect on his business and plans for how he will do things in the future - by limiting or avoiding options. What more would you like?

  • Member since
    January 2013
Posted by BlackSheepTwoOneFour on Monday, July 18, 2016 9:25 AM

MJames70

The door was left wide open, to companies demanding licensing and royalties for model kits produced of subjects that were created on the taxpayers dime already. Now, the next logical process is occuring as well - that's right, your governement itself getting into the licensing and royalties game. 

This letter from Lewis Nace, President of Minicraft Models, appeared in the July 2016 issue of "Beaver Tales," the e-newsletter of IPMS-Canada: 

“Some months ago we exchanged messages about the threat of licensing demands by the US Military. It is now official that the first of the US military licensing demands have been made, the first being the US Navy. 

“Last year this topic first came up because a container shipped to a Minicraft customer (MMD) was seized by US Customs because a model kit had a decal representing the seal of the US Coast Guard (it was a Trumpeter container not a Minicraft container). That situation did not affect Minicraft because we do not currently offer a kit with US Coast Guard markings, but the lesson was obvious – the US military branches are by way of US Customs starting to enforce “new” trademark laws. Minicraft will no longer consider marketing any subject that requires reference to the Coast Guard going forward. 

“However, given the nature of the Minicraft line, I have a minimum of 2 military licenses I must contend with, the US Navy and the US Air Force. In the past we often offered optional markings in kits but that will no longer happen. If we were to include markings for a Navy and an Air Force airplane in the same box we would be subject to licensing both branches of the service. The US Army, US Marine Corp, US Navy, US Air Force, US Coast Guard all have a SEPARATE license all with separate procedures and royalty requirements. We cannot triple our licensing cost. 

“If modelers wonder why their selection has narrowed this might help explain it. The cost of licensing? Licensing costs are all pretty similar for Ford, Boeing, Lockheed-Martin, Northrup-Grumman, Cessna etc. It looks like the US military licensing fee will be the same and this will effectively double Minicraft licensing costs. EACH licensing authority will need to approve the product and each have their own special requirements all of which adds to the time it takes to develop new product. Many licensing groups are starting to require the use of an “OLP” hologram and we are expecting to have to reserve space on the box to line up the OLP holograms! Manufacturers will have no alternative but to increase the price to the consumer. 

“If model enthusiasts are unhappy about the state of the industry invite them to contact their Congressional representatives. Model kit manufacturers now need to wade through licensing agreements, pay royalties and follow accounting requirements and not only pay manufacturers for designs and license holders for ships tanks and airplanes the US military used decades ago, but now also pay each individual branch of the service depending on the decals included in the kit. 

“Incidentally legal advisors have also recommended removing any reference to crews or pilots because doing so presents the risk of yet another licensing demand. Ever heard the story about the “estate” of Chuck Yeager? His heirs have successfully demanded licensing of any kit bearing his name on the airplane. 

“Say goodbye to the hobby we once knew.” 

 

 

Jumping the gun prematurely aren't you?

  • Member since
    October 2010
Posted by hypertex on Monday, July 18, 2016 6:50 AM

I think Mr. Nance is confused about a few things.

This has nothing to do with intellectual property law. It has to do with the official Seal used by Government agencies. The seals indicate a source of origin or approval, and their use is regulated by a different set of laws. This does not apply to "markings", only to the official seal. Just remove the decal of the seal and the problem will be solved. How many aircraft actually have an official seal on it anyway?

This won't kill the hobby.

 

  • Member since
    January 2012
  • From: Barrie, Ontario
Posted by Cdn Colin on Monday, July 18, 2016 5:54 AM

Wow.  Capitalism at it's best, really.  If you can make money from it, go for it.

Very short sighted of Yeager's family, I think.  Being mentioned in an instruction sheet is exposure.  I wouldn't have a clue who Saburo Sakai was if Tamiya hadn't used his aircraft as a decal option.  I guess his plane will never make it into my collection.  

 

I build 1/48 scale WW2 fighters.

Have fun.

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: hamburg michigan
Posted by fermis on Monday, July 18, 2016 5:38 AM

checkmateking02

I thought I'd heard everything, but this. . .

Smile Dots

Has any reason for this been released by the military?  Just a money-maker, or some legitimate concern for the possible misuse of emblems?

 

Sounds like a "money grab" and a "double dip" to me....as if they didn't have their hands deep enough in our pockets already. I'm sure they're already collecting taxes off the royalties/lisencing already paid to the manufacturers. They must have voted themselves another raise.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: AandF in the Badger State
Posted by checkmateking02 on Sunday, July 17, 2016 9:15 PM

I thought I'd heard everything, but this. . .

Smile Dots

Has any reason for this been released by the military?  Just a money-maker, or some legitimate concern for the possible misuse of emblems?

 

 

 

 

  • Member since
    July 2011
  • From: Armpit of NY
You let the prototype manufacturers get away with it....
Posted by MJames70 on Sunday, July 17, 2016 6:46 PM

The door was left wide open, to companies demanding licensing and royalties for model kits produced of subjects that were created on the taxpayers dime already. Now, the next logical process is occuring as well - that's right, your governement itself getting into the licensing and royalties game. 

This letter from Lewis Nace, President of Minicraft Models, appeared in the July 2016 issue of "Beaver Tales," the e-newsletter of IPMS-Canada: 

“Some months ago we exchanged messages about the threat of licensing demands by the US Military. It is now official that the first of the US military licensing demands have been made, the first being the US Navy. 

“Last year this topic first came up because a container shipped to a Minicraft customer (MMD) was seized by US Customs because a model kit had a decal representing the seal of the US Coast Guard (it was a Trumpeter container not a Minicraft container). That situation did not affect Minicraft because we do not currently offer a kit with US Coast Guard markings, but the lesson was obvious – the US military branches are by way of US Customs starting to enforce “new” trademark laws. Minicraft will no longer consider marketing any subject that requires reference to the Coast Guard going forward. 

“However, given the nature of the Minicraft line, I have a minimum of 2 military licenses I must contend with, the US Navy and the US Air Force. In the past we often offered optional markings in kits but that will no longer happen. If we were to include markings for a Navy and an Air Force airplane in the same box we would be subject to licensing both branches of the service. The US Army, US Marine Corp, US Navy, US Air Force, US Coast Guard all have a SEPARATE license all with separate procedures and royalty requirements. We cannot triple our licensing cost. 

“If modelers wonder why their selection has narrowed this might help explain it. The cost of licensing? Licensing costs are all pretty similar for Ford, Boeing, Lockheed-Martin, Northrup-Grumman, Cessna etc. It looks like the US military licensing fee will be the same and this will effectively double Minicraft licensing costs. EACH licensing authority will need to approve the product and each have their own special requirements all of which adds to the time it takes to develop new product. Many licensing groups are starting to require the use of an “OLP” hologram and we are expecting to have to reserve space on the box to line up the OLP holograms! Manufacturers will have no alternative but to increase the price to the consumer. 

“If model enthusiasts are unhappy about the state of the industry invite them to contact their Congressional representatives. Model kit manufacturers now need to wade through licensing agreements, pay royalties and follow accounting requirements and not only pay manufacturers for designs and license holders for ships tanks and airplanes the US military used decades ago, but now also pay each individual branch of the service depending on the decals included in the kit. 

“Incidentally legal advisors have also recommended removing any reference to crews or pilots because doing so presents the risk of yet another licensing demand. Ever heard the story about the “estate” of Chuck Yeager? His heirs have successfully demanded licensing of any kit bearing his name on the airplane. 

“Say goodbye to the hobby we once knew.” 

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

SEARCH FORUMS
FREE NEWSLETTER
By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy.