Jump to content
Model Cars Magazine Forum

Resin casting parts - legal?


Recommended Posts

To answer your questions, the answer is YES. There are trademark and copyright violations in every one of your examples. The question is if the owners of those originals choose to legally challenge and shut down those making repro Lionel parts and model car kit parts. In most cases it's just not worth the effort since most of the model car aftermarket are small producers.

But as you said, I wouldn't want to have my full time livelihood invested in this kind of business. While it's working fine for most of them now, every so often there's a situation with a copyright owner. And yea, that would just be my luck!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And while I don't know the legalese of this, you could get into some hot water if you started a computer company named "Apples" and used a apple logo with or without a bite in it.

Much more fun to start a computer company called "Orange". As so much energy is already expended comparing apples and oranges anyway, it seems only natural to try to wring a buck or two out of it. B)

Edited by Ace-Garageguy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much more fun to start a computer company called "Orange". As so much energy is already expended comparing apples and oranges anyway, it seems only natural to try to wring a buck or two out of it. B)

umm... I believe there already is a company or product called "Orange" (a cell phone or cell phone service, possibly in Europe) so you'll have to get permission from them to use that name. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You probably wouldn't have much trouble with a model company in regard to copy right infringement. We as modelers have to change so much, from thier mistakes. That it Kind of Makes it our own creation. look at Revell's Mustang LX, Nova, Charger, and others. Let the model companies get thier act together before they come after Me or You.

What would the Legal Be if you cast some kit parts for a friend <_< and did not charge him a price, but he made a donation to your Charitable resin supply fund ;) would that be Ok in the Eyes of the Law :blink::D:angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never could understand how car manufacturers can stop resin guys and model companies from making miniatures (something they would never do themselves) but can't stop people from copying body parts (aftermarket "crash parts") that does hurt them financially.

I think auto manufacturing is as much a zero inventory business as possible. They make enough fenders to build the cars they sell with a percent figured in for defects and production line damage. Stocking fenders for the repair market would be costly. Those aftermarket fenders made in Taiwan are produced and sold under license.

Dale

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummm Dale...the car manufacturers DO make crash (replacement) parts, but these days they RARELY get used on vehicles over 1 or 2 years old. The aftermarket, usually inferior-fitting parts, are MANDATORY...REQUIRED by MOST insurance companies on repairs to less-than-new vehicles as a cost-saving measure (or junkyard "LKQ" parts on even older vehicles). It's NOT that the car builders don't want to be in the repair parts market, but that the insurance companies have driven them out of it.

And ummm... I've been in the 1:1 body-repair business and I'm not just giving an uninformed opinion. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 years later...

Stumbled upon this case online, of Monogram Model, Inc. v. Industro Motive Corporation, so read at you leisure: 

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/492/1281/321807/

 

This line, however, stood out to me: 

"Thus it is neither the assembled plane, as a structure, nor the individual pieces of the unassembled plane, that are the proper subject for copyright protection. It is the scale model airplane kit, as a kit, that is copyrightable."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Casey said:

Stumbled upon this case online, of Monogram Model, Inc. v. Industro Motive Corporation, so read at you leisure: 

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/492/1281/321807/

 

This line, however, stood out to me: 

"Thus it is neither the assembled plane, as a structure, nor the individual pieces of the unassembled plane, that are the proper subject for copyright protection. It is the scale model airplane kit, as a kit, that is copyrightable."

That is very interesting, it's similar to saying one word of a book isn't copyrightable. It's the work as a whole distinct construction that makes the whole protectable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Casey said:

Stumbled upon this case online, of Monogram Model, Inc. v. Industro Motive Corporation, so read at you leisure: 

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/492/1281/321807/

 

This line, however, stood out to me: 

"Thus it is neither the assembled plane, as a structure, nor the individual pieces of the unassembled plane, that are the proper subject for copyright protection. It is the scale model airplane kit, as a kit, that is copyrightable."

I got to the 2nd paragraph only to realize i have zero idea of what it said.  I always follow the rules. If you are unsure something is ok, its probably not and probably you shouldnt do it.  I would never do something that could ruin my livelyhood or my reputation.  Its just my opinion though and who am i to judge

Edited by youpey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...