Yes, and KFC does a good job of defnding their TMs. With a trademark,
not like copyrights, you must show you *use* and *defend* your
trademarks. A copyright is yours no matter what. You don't have to
defend it to be a copyright and be valid.
With a trademark, you must show that you use the mark and have been
using it and that you have defended that mark since you started using it.
The UP has failed at the defend part. It could easily be shown that UP
never defended their marks from toy manuf. until 2004. They let anyone
make things, since model trains were invented.
I think many of hte people on this board keep confusing the specifics of
trademarks with copyrights. While you end up with a piece of property
you created, there are differences in getting to that point and keeping
With corporate Trademarks, it is 100 years before it becomes public domain.
I know this because I put out a line of Public Domain movies on DVD. Public
Domain used to occur 28 years after a work was produced, unless the creator
applied for an extension, which put it to 50 yeras. The Sonny Bono act of
the mid-90s extened that to 75 years. Disney is trying to extend it again.
Right now some films are PD even though they were done in the 1960s, while
some have been protected for years.
Corporate Trademarks are valid for 100 years, this is why Disney has
trademarked Mickey Mouse his first toons were made in 1928, and hence are PD
right now. WB did the same thing with Bugs Bunny, Daffy, Porky and all their
"stars", they are now trademarks of WB and protected for another 100 years.
So the only Trademarks that would fit into the PD would be those of
companies that went out of business before 1904 and were not picked up by a
wrote in message >
You have GOT TO BE KIDDING ME!
Why because it will cost you $1.00 or $2.00 more per part with a corporate
trademark on it?
The Model Railroad Industry will only be in dire straits if it's current
user base shrinks.
I still think what manufactures should do is put out units with "data info"
only and then sell decal sets of dry transfer sets of the particular roads
and allow the model railroader to customize his own cars. That would be a
whole lot easier for the manufacturers and distributors and LHS. They would
stock ONE kind of each unit, and have a drawer of decals/transfers. I go in
and pick up an unbranded piece of rolling stock and a set of decals for
whatever road I am modeling.
OR, in my case (and many other serious modelers I know) pick up the rolling
stock and bring it home and custom letter it.
Here is my two cents....I have two small companies...The Great Scale Model
Train show and the Piermont Division. If Lionel, Athearn, or whoever wants
to put my company logos on their products, I'll go over to their
headquarters and make them all breakfast every day for five years and to
their homes at night and tuck them in bed. I'll even read them "The Little
Engine That Could" before turning out the lights.
When asked if I fear the terrorists.....my reply was....."To some degree,
but my real fear is the thousands upon thousands of lawyers the law schools
are turning out each year"!!!!!
Spam time.....don't forget our summer Timonium show in Maryland, June 19/20.
I can tell from this that you have created nothing in your life Charles.
If you have created anything, it is your property. You have the right to use
it. you have the right to give others permission to use it.
Others do not have an implied permission to use it, they need specific
Just because UP has not legally defended their right of intellectual claim
on the trademarks that their company pocesses does not negate their right to
defend the trademark.
Please, at least open a book on corporate law (maybe even read it) before
you start commenting and making yourself look foolish.
"Not only have Lionel and Athearn failed to license use of Union
Pacific's historic trademarks"
That appears to include the fallen flags, though it's a little vague.
Please, spare me the conspiracy theories!! Comparing an extortion scheme
(Buy my meat or I'll blow up your restaurant) to this lawsuit is
Maybe UP is concerned about their trademark, because most of Athearn
and Lionels merchandise is made in China, and China leads the world in
producing knock off and bogus stuff. If we take the paranoid perspective
of the Harmon article to heart, maybe UP is afraid that China will start a
UP railroad of there own!! Think it wont happen? Maybe it will! There, I
said it, so it might be true, no wait, it is true!!!!
Why oh why, would UP care if a manufacturer created a locomotive that
hasn't been used in 50 odd years? Because it's not modern? What the heck
If UP wants to start dictating which models that a manufacture can
couldn't the manufacture say "forget it, we're not going to produce any more
On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 16:11:25 -0700, cat mumbled
No, Edward is correct. Any added costs of business filters
down the food chain and of course is paid for by the hobbiest. That's
the bottom line.
Personally, I wish that Athearn and Lionel would just drop the
UP logo. There are plenty of decals out there or we could produce our
own logos using modern printers.
Department Of Redundancy Department®
"It should be the policy of the United States to
support efforts to remove the regime headed by
Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote
the emergence of a democratic government to replace
--1998 Iraq Liberation Act (Public Law 105-338)
signed by Bill Clinton
When ye encounter the infidels, strike off their heads
till ye have made a great slaughter among them, and of
the rest, make fast the fetters.
Q: What the hardest thing about rollerblading?
A: Telling your parents you?re gay.
spammers can send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org
I'm only proposing that some users of UP marks could be accepted without
much review: Lionel, Athearn, LifeLike, Kato, et al for use on models,
decals, and advertising of those products. Those companies could even be
required to sign a license agreement stipulating allowed and disallowed uses
and giving UP the sole right to demand cessation of uses UP deems to be not
showing UP in a good light. The cost to the users should be the actual cost
of administering the program or free: it costs Up the same to approve a well
known boutique manufacturer as it does to approve Athearn; in any case 5% or
so of sales has nothing to do with UP costs.
Other users of more dubious reputation might be subject to stricter (and
more costly) reviews, and they should pay for it.
To me the issue for UP is to legitimately protect their trademarks, etc..
They are a transportation company, not a media company (yet :-), and trying
to turn logo licensing into a profit center may not be worth the cost to
them. But as I've said in the past, their current logos are their property
and they have every right to control them or charge for them as they see
I suspect the reason that Athearn and Lionel have not signed the licensing
agreement is that it specifies a payment schedule not only for the current
logos, but for older UP logos and fallen flag logos which have been used
freely for years. For all I know, A & L tried to negotiate inclusion of only
current logos and failed. They may have decided to force the issue to court
and agree to pay for current logos and exclude old ones. Maybe Athearn's or
Lionel's lawyers will tell us what their defense is for using current logos
in article KYAvc.78733$ email@example.com, Mark Mathu at
firstname.lastname@example.org wrote on 6/3/04 1:04 AM:
in article email@example.com, Ken [NY) at
snipped-for-privacy@IsBelow.Text wrote on 6/3/04 7:42 AM:
The decals from Microscale at al are also subject to the UP licensing
program. I've not found a decent homebrew decal system The inkjet stuff runs
like crazy (haven't tried Epson Durabright, though) and don' t have access
to an old Alps printer.
It would sure be interesting, though, for Athearn, et al, to sell models
completely painted except for the protected logos and to provide blank decal
sheets and printing instructions and/or kits to finish the job use the
modeler's own artwork. Hmmmmmmm.
You folks are aware that part of the UP wording says that the companies
will have to give UP all tooling etc. if UP disproves of the product. This
is one of the big reasons the larger companies didn't sign up. If UP didn't
like their boxcars for example and they had signed the contract then UP
could ask for the molds etc.
It's really much bigger than most people think.
And the bottom line is not really protecting the marks (that's easy to
do), UP really thinks (or corporate figures have argued) that they an really
make money on this.
Nothing to do with Trademarks. That is copyright you are talking about.
Trademarks and copyrights have TOTALLY different laws and rules.
That is why som many people are screwed up about this. They keep saying
things that are technically about copyrights and not about trademarks.
They are different, have different rules, and are done in different
offices of the government.
I've created much and have had things officially copyrighted (Library of
Congress) and have worked with lawyers at my last place of employment on
As evidense from your Disney post, you are confusing trademarks and
copyrights. They are different.
Just as corporate law is different than trademark law.