Thought I'd heard, or read somewhere, he'd been able to turn the tables on them. And came out in good shape? mg: Boxcab E50
It says in the Trains article that BN9900 linked, that Nils fought them and won. Nils Huxtable of Steamscenes, the guy who did the calendars. In the latest Railfan and Railroad mag, there is an ad from UP asking for photos to be used on their 2008 calendar. I am about to contact Nils and ask him if he would submit some. Wouldn't that be some irony? :teeth:
It still amazes me that UP thought that it would benifit their corporation if they punished those who provided free advertising of their services across the world. Guess some stockholder complained - perhaps a model railroader.
Way back when, didn't Santa Fe actually pay companies like Lionel to use their logo and paint schemes?
A little IP law... It's great that UP backed off, but I agree with the commentators who stress that the MTH suit played a key role. To provide a little background, UP's position was based on the 1995 U.S. Trademark Dilution Act, which radically transformed US copyright law. Originally, trademarks were developed to prevent confusion in the marketplace, and they benefitted vendors and consumers alike. Thanks to trademark law, you aren't likely to be taken in by a bottle of "Poopsie" that looks almost exactly like a bottle of "Pepsi" -- except that it contains dimorticious methylcyanide. From the standpoint of traditional U.S. IP law, UP would have had no beef with model railroad manufacturers. After all, who in their right mind would confuse a Kato N-scale UP SD-45 with the real thing? See? The Trademark Dilution Act tremendously expanded the scope of trademark protection by establishing the following: A trademark holder has the right to prevent reproduction of the trademark in ANY medium, even if there is no possibility of consumer confusion. In essence, this act transformed trademark into perpetual copyright. Since the passage of the Trademark Dilution Act, there has been quite a bit of overreaching. For example, the University of Alabama is suing to prevent its top fan, a celebrated artist whose paintings capture memorable moments in the history of the university's football team. It's not just UP. I would love to know what the arguments were in the UP v. MTH lawsuit. There are some holes in the Trademark Dilution Act. For example, only "famous trademarks" are covered (what does "famous" mean?). Also, the act is intended to prevent someone from tarnishing or diluting or otherwise doing horrible things to the trademark's image. That's hardly what modelers have been doing! Cheers, Bryan (Not an attorney, but I teach a course on intellectual property for engineers at the Univ. of Virginia. Nothing in the above should be construed as legal advice by anyone in their right mind.)
I doubt that UP ever made enough money from the royalties to pay for one lawyer. Also, they probably realized that they were damaging sales of UP models. It was just so obvious in the hobby shop that the UP models were $5 more; an explanation was required, and it didn't make UP look good. They've gone back to where they should have been, realizing that the model industry is basically free advertising for them, and all they have to do is make sure their "brand identity" isn't misrepresented.
Roll out those UP models! Man, I'm so glad this happened. I was so angry at the UP that I vowed never to run a UP model on my layout! Silly, perhaps, but I felt strongly about it. Since I model the D&RGW Helper-Soldier Summit run during the mid- to late-1960s, I was depriving myself of modeling one of the nation's first unit coal trains, which was jointly operated by the Grande and the UP with shared power -- SD-45s. Ebay, here I come! --Bryan
I'm glad these issues have resolved themselves, something I'm curios about is that I remember reading a blurb in RMC a few months ago that UP announced that they would take any money collected from these licencing fees and donate it to the Heritage Steam program for use in the restoration of the Heritage fleet. Does this new announcement void that? Are we losing seeing some new equipment restored, because of a lack of budget? I really don't believe that the amount collected would have made a drop in the bucket, in the Heritage fleet's budget. It would be nice however to see UP make good on some of their claims. When I originally read the statement it came off as just so much lip service. 2slim
