The thing is, Garth, I think a lot of the commercial aviation stuff is subsidized by the government as well. I know Congress has passed some bail-out legislation in the past few years for the airlines -- especially after the attacks in Sep. 2001.
But beyond that, I think that Boeing and others have received tax breaks, and/or tax incentives etc. for many, many years. The question is whether that's enough to make the argument that the design is in the public domain.
And, of course, those designs aren't in the public domain. Airbus can't get blueprints for a Boeing airliner without paying for them and asking permission to use them, regarless of how much government or private corporation money went into the design and building of a plane.
I understand the point about military planes being in the public domain because they're funded by tax dollars, but the rights to the design still belong to the company making the plane. When Lockheed sells export versions of the F-16, Lockheed gets the money. The transaction is really little different from a legal point of view than Boeing selling a 727 to United.
I think the real crux of this argument revolves around the purpose of licensing fees. As I understand the concept (and I'm no lawyer), when a company licenses a design, it is trying to control the use of that design to avoid generating competition with its own products.
So General Electric may license some of its technology to Raytheon to be used in an air to air missile (a made-up example, but it illustrates my point), so that the two companies form a partnership instead of competing with one another.
The thing is, scale models don't compete with the full-sized item. This seems like such a basic idea, that it has gone without saying for all these years. So, it would be interesting to know a few things:
1) How do model companies get the information to make their models? Is it from the manufacturers?
2) Just how much is the licensing fee? Just how much does it drive up the cost of a model?
3) What rationale is used to justify the licensing fee?
4) Just what is being licensed? The overall design?
5) What about the assertion that the real problem is liability insurance? Is the fear really that somebody will buy a Monogram F-16, choke on a missile, and sue Lockheed?
This is a complex issue, and I think we're just scratching the surface. I, for one, would like more information before writing to my elected representatives.
Frankly, I think a petition drive or letter-writing campaingn directed at Lockheed, Boeing, etc. may be pretty effective too.
Just some (jumbled) thoughts.
Regards,