Model production blocked by company lawyers???

Kurt Laughlin wrote:


That's why I used considered. In photos and films at NARA copyright is clearly marked on most if not all items it pertains to.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

That was for the most part true in the past but now is no longer true. Because defense items like airplanes cost so much and need such a huge capital investment to get going, the aerospace firms now negotiate contracts with DOD that guarantee them certain rights - they want every last penny of their investments to make a profit. The government often gets nothing but the actual hardware - the company may retain the design rights, the copyright for the maintenance documentation, and it may even trademark the item's "official" name. The above is especially true if the item a company has sold to DOD has a cross-over potential in the civilian market. Some companies won't do high-dollar government contracting unless they retain all rights.

Probably for security considerations, not trademark or copyright issues.

Legally it may if that right was retained in the contract that the manufacturer had with the government. Just because it's painted olive-drab and was designed and manufactured at government behest doesn't mean that the manufacturer doesn't have legal rights to the item.

They could care less. Their job isn't to protect the modeling "industry". It's to get hardware for DOD.
John Hairell ( snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Val Kraut wrote:

Sometime in the 90's the contractors caught onto the idea of making money off "toys and replicas" and the Government started allowing the original designer or it's later incarnations in the form corporate buyouts to retain the rights to the design for the purposes of making toys and/or replicas. Add in the stupidity of McDonald's "coffee crotch" lawsuits and possible product liabilities and the lawyers went apeshit. However designs that predate those arrangements are still public domain, case in point the P-38, Lockheed can enforce copyright/trademark on the company name but not P-38 or the airframe...problematic whether they can enforce same for the "Lockheed" that appears on the military dataplate for decals purposes. The designers of the Stryker AFV did in fact have a contract clause spelling out in detail ownership of the design for "toys and replicas" and you probably won't see one of those anytime soon in kit form.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That explains why in 1975 the Mitchell Aircraft Corp. made a homebuilt kit-plane that they called the "P-38". Later they came out with another that they dubbed the "U-2". Never heard that Lockheed ever gave them grief.....
-- John The history of things that didn't happen has never been written. . - - - Henry Kissinger
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
What someone should do is contact a DOD or govt. lawyer to see what the governments' stance on intellectual property is. If the govt claims the rights to a design because it is the property of the U.S. Government then may be the model companies can band together and get a class action lawsuit going to get these corporations to back down due to govt pressure.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Scott A. Bregi AKA The Model Hobbit wrote:

    On Saturday, I did just that. You can go to the 'contact' page of the DoD website and pose questions. I basically asked what you requested and gave a small example of what we're talking about. We'll see if anyone responds...
Frank Kranick
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Francis X. Kranick, Jr." wrote:

Great idea Frank!
Bill Banaszak, MFE
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mad-Modeller wrote:

    Now Bill, I wouldn't get all worked-up over this - I'd be surprised if I even get a prepackaged response back. But, I thought it was better to ask the source (such as it may be) than to vent more (though I'll do more of that at a moment's notice!) ;-)
Frank Kranick
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Francis X. Kranick, Jr." wrote:

I'm not holding my breath. IF you get an answer, I might be surprised. After all, we are talking about a government branch here.
Bill Banaszak, MFE
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mad-Modeller wrote: (snip)

    Well, whatever (if ever) I receive, I'll be sure to pass along to ya'll and then maybe we can all get a good night's sleep.     Or, maybe not!
Frank Kranick
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Models aren't the Government's highest priority just right now ant I suspect any such letter would not be answered any time soon. Further, I remember the old saying "Don't ask the question if you can't stand the answer. :-)
--
Cheers: Bill Woodier
"We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Models per se may not be the govt.'s highest priority at the moment. But, Public Relations seems to be.
Apparently, in the last 5 years, Federal spending on PR projects has more than doubled (to around $89mil). Not much in the scope fo the whole budget, but a massive increase in its own right.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
well shit. I have around 250 unbuilts in storage. My kid and his kids will have more than enough models to play with.
Wow, actually a good reason for me to hoard and buy models.....
Craig
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On a slightly happier note, when we we doing our Shorts SC.1 kit the the Shorts archive (now part of Bombardier Aerospace) in Belfast was very helpful. They answered questions, and provided images, some even with permission to reproduce in our instruction sheet.. It's nice to know some people can be nice and civilised in this mad world.
Dave Evans Whirlybird Models
<shameless plug>1/72 Short SC.1 is available direct from us at 22.50 +p&p</shameless plug>
Val Kraut wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

good news about the helpful folks. bad news about the price....for me.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.