If you have not read the Mainline Commentary in the August issue of Mainline Modeler Bob Hundman explains the Union Pacific licensing issue.
Recently there was a posting on this newsgroup about the UP licensing issue and I don't mean to be redundant here I just wanted to comment on Bob's commentary.
At the end of commentary Bob started to go where I hoped he would not which was by making a case that shippers who influence shipping decisions would start shipping on the BNSF. Economics, not sympathies, will determine how shippers move their freight. He also said this could be a public relations issue for the Union Pacific. The reality is that the public is not going to be sympathetic to this issue at all. In fact the public will never know about it. Just the MRR community will. I understand he needs to approach it this way because he could not endorse telling manufacturers to simply ignore the Union Pacific.
Something is driving the Union Pacific to do this. I have not heard a reason that sounds logical yet. Could it just be a revenue issue? Do they want a part of model railroad revenues? Is that the business they are in?
Could be that the Union Pacific is worried about their trademark being used on things other than model railroad products such as a Union Pacific Sucks website and use of the trademark on model railroad products without royalties might make it difficult for them to trample such a site. By the way I have not checked if there is a UnionPacificSucks.com. Any webmasters out there interested in building a website?
Bottom line is it is unfortunate the UP does not sell something you and I could buy because if they did they would be paying the model railroad manufacturers to make more UP stuff.
The manufacturers are in a tough situation. Which one should step out and challenge the Union Pacific to see what happens? My recommendation to manufacturers would be for them to ignore the Union Pacific. MRIA (the Model Railroad Industry Association) should get the advice of legal counsel paid for by the manufacturers who have the most to lose with a licensing program and see if the Union Pacific has a case for this. But MRIA is not that strong of an industry organization compared to other industries.
It's true, it is the Union Pacific's trademark but this is also true - they seem like real assh***s for pursuing this issue.
How can the UP enforce the percentage of sales anyway? By what authority do they have to audit the books of the manufacturers? "Hey UP I sold about $2000 in UP stuff this year" Athearn could say. "Here's your $20 licensing fee now beat it". Athearn is not the best example because the UP could investigate their numbers based on the tips of an Athearn employee. But you see when you start thinking that it gets silly doesn't it? Are they going to conduct these types of James Bond investigations for all the model railroad manufacturers? Nope - they have a railroad to run. Attention Manufacturers - lie to the UP, that's what you need to do. Screw them for bringing this up in the first place. I know it's their trademark but screw em'.
By the way if anyone wants to reply be sure not to use my name in the reply unless you intend to pay me 20 cents royalty for the use of my name in a newsgroup posting.
Jim Stanton