Frank,
I'd bet the CEO of the company doesn't even know this is happening. I see this as the legal department making up something else to justify their existence. One thing we miss here is, in general the government pays a company to design a defense system - the government owns the design. As an example Rockwell won the GPS contract and put the system in orbit. The government recompeted for the next series and Rockwell lost. The system changed hands again after that. The Government owned and paid for the design. I would find it hard to justify that an airframe manufacturer ownes the design to a fighter aircraft to the point that a model couldn't be made without their getting paid off.
It would also be interesting to get the Pentagon's view on this as they (and the companies) seem to be doing everything to advertize their systems and their use to the voters. The average company spends big bucks hyping their product in magazines like Aviation Week. Then they turn down free advertizing via kits - doesn't make sense. I tend to think if you went to talk to the marketing department they'd be pushing for the model and giving assistance - It's their job to make the company's product visible. The Legal Department on the other hand would be "protecting intellectual property" - This justifys their existemce. I wonder if any of the kit companies have tried to deal with other entities other than legal. Might be intresting if someone sued the company for denying their use of public information - remember the freedom of information act.
Val Kraut