"Intellectual Property" and ownership therein

I think that fat cats have gone too far this time.
I can understand royalties lets say to a GP, WRC, Indy racing team because it is the specific car you want not just a Ferrari or Subaru or Chevy but the car of Schumacher, Makkinen etc you want.
You can argue though that this is sports not history.....

Lets agree that the children or granchildren of an ace can rightfully have the exclusive rights (intellectual property) of its autobiography. but surely they do not have the exclusivness of him. i.e Anderson, Bong, Marseille, Bader, Mitralexis are the nation´s heroes or at least a person you admire so building their mount is a tribute to them so no-one has the right to demand anything from us.

QUOTE: Originally posted by Model Museum Not sure how much a campaign in the US alone will influence model makers,kit companies and licence holders overseas.

I'm of the same opinion, but it's better than doin' nuthin'...


Fade to Black...

ETO Club Public Forums

Not sure how much a campaign in the US alone will influence model makers,kit companies and licence holders overseas.

I know that Ferrari stepped down on Tamiya recently about one of their releases, hence why it is now sold with the wheels seperate as their licence was for a kit and not a finished model.

Yes, Mike, I'm still steaming over that. Among others, they had planned to put a P-61 into the game and it ain't gonna happen now.

Grrrrrr...


Fade to Black...


ETO Club Public Forums

This isn't just happening in models....recently, the company that released the IL-2 series of flight sims had another add-on called Pacific Fighters released. Seems they got a lot of corporate flak as they did have the names of the manufacturers on the box....it ended up that the company, based in Russia, will no longer provide further developments to non-Russian versions of the sim...or at least that was the last I heard...

Another way for the bean counters to justify their existance and make another penny or two for those big corperations to feed their greed.
John
da da da dah

QUOTE: Originally posted by tho9900 I'll certainly follow the guide of that qouted link... I envision a feeding frenzy eventually, if nothing is done.. Chevy wants fees for the Indy car, Coke wants fees for the Coke sponsorship emblem on said car, the people who gave it the snazzy paint job want royalties etc...

I say it should be the other way around, with coke paying for advertising, since they would make money anyways, why not get it in common everyday things?

agreed... there are a lot of us here... not a huge amount, but a cross section of the country and there are more silent ones out there than forumer here...

Steve,

No, I'm not a member (yet). But, I am definately interested in some kind of organized campaign. We need a unified front on this one.

Well for once I agree with 'The Cleaver'... never thought I'd see the day...

Justen, I'm going to talk this over with Butz when I get a chance and I'm also going to get some input from some members of our club. Maybe we can organize a mass-mailing or a mass-signed letter or something. I know you're not in the club (I don't think you are, are you?) but you're more than welcome to collaborate with us if you so wish...


Fade to Black...


ETO Club Public Forums

Money,money,money it so funny.This is a shame what the world has come to.I will take more intrest in this subject.Its all for the love of money that they do this and it tells you something that we as people need to take more intrest in what happens in our Goverment and what others try to pawn off on us.Digger

This thread made me stop and take a look at my "to-do" shelves and I noticed something. Not one of my boxes has the manufacturer's corporate name on them (ie Boeing/Vertol, McDonnel-Douglas, Grumman, etc..) Just the military designation for whatever kit it is (AH-1T, AH-6J, M1A1, AAV7). I'm guessing none of the kit makers wants to fork over the money to these corporations if they don't have to.

It wasn't always that way, was it? I seem to remember seeing boxes for North American P-51s and others.

They want us to pay them to advertise!

It's a very real threat to the hobby, especially model kits of anything from the current time. One thing for sure, the cost of many new kits will increase accordingly.

Regards, Rick

I'll certainly follow the guide of that qouted link... I envision a feeding frenzy eventually, if nothing is done.. Chevy wants fees for the Indy car, Coke wants fees for the Coke sponsorship emblem on said car, the people who gave it the snazzy paint job want royalties etc...

Thanks for the info, Mike. Not to put you on the spot, (Or your company for that matter), but does Kalmbach have a position on this? I understand if you can't respond. I work for a customs broker, so I fully respect legal discretion.


Thanks again

QUOTE: Originally posted by thehannaman This article by Tom Cleaver was posted recently on modelingmadness.com, and it scares the heck out of me. This is a hugely important topic that effects all modelers everywhere. Please take the time to get "filled in" on this legal threat to our fine hobby: http://modelingmadness.com/tomseditorial.htm

This is a topic that has come up here in the past and is certainly not to be taken lightly. Here's a post I made to a "Why are we paying so much?" thread from these forums in October or so:

Posted by Michael Ellis Posted: 12 Oct 2004, 11:04:01

I’m not going to defend or condemn either position, but just wanted to offer some insight on a growing issue across the modeling industry. Licensing is a becoming an increasingly large part of the business world – everyone from Coke to McDonald’s to Ford to Boeing place a great deal of emphasis on their corporate image. Companies certainly do seem to be taking advantage of their intellectual property to build new revenue streams, but they are also quite concerned about how, where, and when their logo, designs, and images are portrayed.

Our sister publication, Model Railroader, is hearing quite a bit on both sides of the licensing argument. Here’s a link to an article on Trains.com that you may find interesting: http://www.trains.com/content/dynamic/articles/000/000/003/752uuuqt.asp

So while increasing the bottom line is certainly part of the motivation behind the licensing, protecting and preserving a corporate identity is equally important.

The complete thread can be found at: http://www.finescale.com/fsm/community/forum/topic.asp?page=-1&TOPIC_ID=28641&REPLY_ID=286693#286693