1 model = 1 model company?

Monogram's 1st gen RX-7 is their own tooling. It has complete detail, where Tamiya's was a curbside kit.
Lee

As japanese model cars goes, let's see,
The current mitsubishi lancer Evo series had been produced as model kits by both Hasegawa and Tamiya, though Tamiya begun production later on with the Evo V series.
Both Tamiya and Fujimi made models of the nissan skyline (all trims) at the same time. And I think so did Aoshima.

As for the 1st gen RX-7, Tamiya also did a model of it, very long time ago.

Actually, after looking at some older kit boxes, I'm wondering if Monogram actually do it's own molding, mainly because some of their models are actually reboxed Fujimi's or Tamiya's.

As Japanese cars go, both Tamiya and Revellogram released models of the MX-5 Miata. The Tamiya offering is curbside, while the U.S. kit has an engine. These two companies also did their own renditions of the NS-X.

Monogram did the first-generation RX-7, and I cannot recall seeing a good 1:24 one from anyone else. It had a Wankel and all.

Would that be why there are so few Land Rover models out there?

Yes,
I'd heard a few years ago that Mattel was at one stage going to have exclusive rights to all Ferrari makes and models - and subsequently all Tamiya F1 Ferrari kits doubled in price and then disappeared from the shelves, practically overnight.
Licensing can be a real pain for a model manufacturer - imagine suing Boeing because some idiot lets little 2 year old Johnny near his workbench and the kid swallows and chokes on an engine or a nosecone from a 747 - there's far too many lawyers in this world and far too many people who refuse to accept responsibility for their own actions or errors.
P.S. Sorry to any lawyers out there for the crack about there being too many of you, but I'd like everyone to check out
http://www.stellaawards.com/
and you might agree with me.

Cheers, Leetree

aitala,

I stand corrected! When I had reard the initial press release from Mattel when they did the deal it made it sound as if Mattel had total exclusive rights for all scale Ferraris.

Regardless, the point is that the manufacturers are requiring licenses for replicas.

I do remember reading in the mid 60's that someone from Ferrari had written on "Sefac Ferrari" letterhead some of the slot car manufacturers in the US requesting "several samples for review"....the general thought was that it was someone at the factory trying to score some free slot cars, not a legal or licensing ploy!

Rick

Incorrect - Mattel's license did not include Ferrari model kits - I contacted Ferrari and Mattel Directly about this issue.

QUOTE: Originally posted by Mark IV Mattel doe hold an "exclusive" with Ferrari, however they "sub-license" to companies that have products that do not directly compete with them,i.e. the $4000.00 die casts, etc. Plus as Mattel does not do plastic kits they license the Japanese kits and others to fill the gap, they still get paid! Rick

Mattel doe hold an "exclusive" with Ferrari, however they "sub-license" to companies that have products that do not directly compete with them,i.e. the $4000.00 die casts, etc.
Plus as Mattel does not do plastic kits they license the Japanese kits and others to fill the gap, they still get paid!

Rick

There's no reason why there couldn't be an 'exclusive' agreement. Perhaps the kit maker is willing to pay extra to the auto manufacturer to be the 'exclusive' builder/distributor? I heard a while back that Mattel had signed an agreement with Ferrari to become the 'exclusive' provider of all Ferrari branded toy items (including model kits). Obviously I heard wrong, or the kit manufacturers are getting a license from Mattel to produce the various Ferrari kits that have been coming out lately.

M.

hasegawa and tamiya both do the ford focus WRC and Toyota World Ralley Cars so it might just be if theres a market for two companys to make them

Thanks for that, Rick. It all makes sense.

There are two reasons that companies require model manufacturers to "license" the right to produce the kits.

One is for royalty income, they feel they are entitled to a return on the use of their trademarks and trade dress (design)...this is their right.

Two is legal protection. Several years ago Boeing was sued over an injury to a child from a die cast Boeing replica that Boeing had no part of, no knowledge of and had not recieved any payment for. Requiring a license provides the trademark holder with some protection. I held a Ford Motor Company licnese for restoration parts and some other items that were covered by Ford trademarks. I was required to have insurance that named Ford as an additional insured and pay Ford a royalty, 7.5 % in that case. Ford inspected my operation, tested the product, required samples and proof of a quality control system plus a lot of documentation. A plus side was that I had access to original Ford blueprints and speciifcations.

The license issues are both good and bad for the modelling community, several small cottage industry types are chancing it as they do not have licenses and need to "fly under the radar" to escape the wrath of the corporate lawyers! The upside is that many manufacturer must approve a sample of the product, keeps some shoddy stuff of the shelves.

Rick

Some do... Boeing for instance require model manufacturers (and toy manufacturers) to pay royalties (that's why some kits sport the mention 'TM' after the Boeing title. Airbus Industries on the other hand have always indicated that they take Airbus scale models and toys as an indication of their popularity, free advertising, and they do not want to charge kids and modeler for it... As far as I know, Porsche is doing the same as Boeing.

Obviously, Boeing and Porsche do not want their names and logos to be applied to unrealistic representations of their products. They are protecting their image.

There's good and bad in the two options...

QUOTE: Originally posted by midnightprowler As long as they have purchased the rights from the auto manufacturors, they can do them.

Interesting. I never thought about it, but do the kit manufacturers have to really purchase rights from the auto manufacturers? I guess there would be the trademark/copyright thing with the make/model of the car. Still, something that never crossed my mind one bit.

What about military vehicles?

I guess I don't know what the laws in Japan are. Maybe try wtiting to the respective model companies? Good luck.
Lee

But how about japanese cars? cos i have yet to see a japanese car made by 2 different companies
it's normally either Tamiya or Fujimi?

or it's just the companies don't want to make the same car because of some commercial reasons?

It's not true at all. AMT and Revell/Monogram have 57 Chevies, both have Mustamgs, both have Camaros, etc. As long as they have purchased the rights from the auto manufacturors, they can do them.
Lee