There are many more difference. Where you file to get one (copyright through the Library of Congress and Patents and Trademarks through the Patent and Trademark Office), what you have to submit as proof and how long you can keep the marks, copyright or patent. For example Open Source is at risk of losing the Unix trademark in part because "...it HAS to show some level of defending its trademark lest it loose the trademark." Open Source hasn't done a good job of defending their mark so companies like Apple who have been using the Unix mark, may be able to do so without paying.
Also trademarks can lapse if you fail to use the mark for 5 years. A copyright has no such problem.
There are so many differences, that is why laywers specialize in different areas.
Different pe (2) A person infringes a registered trade mark if he uses in the course of trade a sign where because - (a) the sign is identical with the trade mark and is used in relation to goods or services similar to those for which the trade mark is registered, or (b) the sign is similar to the trade mark and is used in relation to goods or services identical with or similar to those for which the trade mark is registered, there exists a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public, which includes the likelihood of association with the trade mark.
"(3) A person infringes a registered trade mark if he uses in the course of trade a sign which- (a) is identical with or similar to the trade mark, and (b) is used in relation to goods or services which are not similar to those for which the trade mark is registered, where the trade mark has a reputation in the United Kingdom and the use of the sign, being without due cause, takes unfair advantage of, or is detrimental to, the distinctive character or the repute of the trade mark."
At least in the UK, it would appear that using a Trademark on a Model Train would not be construed as infringement, as it is not used "in relation to goods or services similar to those for which the trade mark is registered". A MRR would not appear to directly compete with the prototype, and the public would not likely be confused by its usage.
However, you could argue such usage is "detrimental to the distinctive character or repute of teh trade mark", but I think such an argument would be frivolous.
In fact, I think you can argue that use of trademarks on MRR equipment PROMOTES the tademark, and perhaps the railroads should be paying the MRR maufacturers for advertising. At least, I would argue the benefits to the railroad and to the MRR manufacturer are about equal - a "win-win" situation: manufacturer sells more product, the railroad gets exposure.
I know this Charles, like I said, WB and Disney wanted MORE control over their creations than copyright allowed, so the established their main characters as corporate trademarks. It is easier to protect them that way.
Actually, it just occured to me......the Borg like UP wants to eliminate all artificts and references to the fallen flags.
Once they have the big names (Athearn, Lionel) under thier control, they will simply disallow any Southern Pacific, Western Pacific, Missouri Pacific, Chicago North Western, etc. rolling stock, decals, t-shirts, neck ties, stained glass windows, what have you.
Only allowed production will be puke yellow with the shield, and bye the way, the fees will be going UP.
Good think the warbonnet scheme was on the Santa Fe!
In spite of this our new private train companies in the UK have successfully pressured the manufacturers into licencing deals with little apparent resistance. I suspect that the model companies were seduced by the idea of exclusive deals keeping the opposition out.
It has now reached the point where they are claiming to have to get licenses from both the operating railway for the logos and livery and from the manufacturer, eg GM for the class 66, Bombardier for the voyager for the right to make the model itself.
There does not seem to be any real legal basis for this other than the crippling costs of a defence. Keith Make friends in the hobby. Visit Garratt photos for the big steam lovers.
Don't be too thrilled yet. Unless you model an imaginary railroad, if UP prevails completely, I suspect that most if not all real railroads will impose licensing schemes.
Athearn et al seemed to have no problem at all licensing Coca-Cola and John Deere products. I don't know their terms, but I suspect they paid something (or were paid for the advertising?). I suspect the whole thing comes down to some of the terms in the UP licensing agreement; maybe not even over fallen flags. One poster mentioned something about turning over the dies and moldings if UP didn't like the actual product. I can't imagine anyone agreeing to such a term; I invest thousands producing the molds, and UP says, "You missed a rivet. Sorry, not approved. Give us the molds."
I'm starting to agree with the poster who suggested that Athearn et al eschew modeling UP at all. Then go to them and see if they would like to advertise on Athearn models and charge UP for the ads. Hahahahaha.
Ed
in article Xns94FDE39AB33E0tsunamixs4allnl@194.109.133.29, JB/NL at snipped-for-privacy@xs4all.nl wrote on 6/3/04 1:23 PM:
Exactly right, just don't make any more UP stuff. That's the ticket. If they win the battle about the fallen flags then don't make anymore of that stuff. Hell, we all have enough toys to last us anyhow, and the newbies can model other road names. Besides, remember back in the early days, Lionel lettered most of their trains Lionel Lines. What's wrong with that, you could have Athearn Lines, Life Lines, Bachman Lines, etc. The fun of running the stuff is still there, who the hell cares what lettering it has on it. This is about model railroading, the operation of trains or if you like Lionel the operation of toy trains. It's all one in the same thing anyhow
"Edward A. Oates" wrote in news:BCE4DDA7.1E74% snipped-for-privacy@unearthlylink.net:
Actually, my prototype's products are usually already licensed from the railroad that runs them ... so there's not much chance of things changing, other than for the better - most of the JR companies (as well as the private railroads) seem to rather enjoy the fact their trains being turned into high quality models .. even if they're produced overseas :-D
Wouldn't work either, I think UP would simply come back and slam them. I foresee a world of freelance railroads and undecorated cars ...
United Potato Railroad, Dark grey on Lemon with a purple stripe anyone ?
Actually, who cares. If UP wins the price of your toys is going up a few pennies (as if that were going to break you) and if the companies win they will raise prices to pay for the legal defense. Either way, you are going to pay more for your trains. Actually it is about time. I think you should accept this as part of the hobby. I didn't hear any moaning when DCC came in and the price of locos shot up $25-30 each. So why bitch now
in article Xns94FDED62B2B96tsunamixs4allnl@194.109.133.29, JB/NL at snipped-for-privacy@xs4all.nl wrote on 6/3/04 2:20 PM:
When Athearn decided to do the CalTrain commuter cars, I got the photos for them with permission from Caltrain (access to the yards, actual paint blueprints, etc.); they were very cooperative and were thrilled that Athearn was going to produce their Baby Bullet cars and granted permission to use the design enthusiastically. It would be nice it UP were so accommodating, but I guess that's in the past.
UP must have more corporate lawyers than is good for them. I don't see the point. There isn't enough money in licensing fees from small potato companies like Athearn and Lionel to pay the court costs of this suit. Up until now, the real railroads considered model railroads to be good free advertising. The rules about defending your trademark haven't changed to my knowledge. Lionel has been making rolling stock painted for UP for better than 50 years, and Athearn nearly as long. If it's been OK for 50 years, what makes it a lawsuit matter now? Could it be that bean counters and lawyers are gaining control of the real railroads?
The problem with the trademark dispute is Union Pacific going back as far as possible and claiming trademarks on every railroad or former railroad logo as enforceable trademarks. Now the current trademarks they'll likely have a legitimate argument. However the fallen flags and older UP markings that have not been used in many years but have been used on models (& T-Shirts, etc) may well not be trademark protected having gone to public domain. Lionel and Athearn have disagreed that the UP has valid trademarks for these older ones nor any desire to license these thereby agreeing these are legitimate trademarks. You can't do UP's license for just the modern trademarks. It's an all or nothing situation. The current situation is not just affecting Athearn and Lionel. The industry as a whole is trying to do something about the proliferation of trademarks and all the paperwork and expense involved. This will likely be the test case to detemine the future of the fallen flags trademarks. If the UP wins then you can bet other corporations will likewise follow suit. Some folks think that just paying and passing along the cost would be the end of it all. However, suppose UP did like UPS and say no use of any of our trademarks. Then what will we all mode?l Perhaps a generic "anyname" railroads? Most model manufacturers are very small operations and can ill afford spending time filling out paperwork and submitting proposals for every product they want to manufacture.
Me, I think I'll wait and see how this developes and not debate the right and wrong here. It's not the cut and dry issue some folks make it out to be.
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.