dealing with trademarks

[phoneguy]

PACCAR was the one company I thought would care less about this. Especially with the fact that the most widely available toys/models/etc of trucks are PACCAR products. Well the stripes that you offer for cabs/hoods/sleepers are what I am mainly after.

The good thing is these stripes are still going to be offered since the will work on most trucks.

insaneMB---I have no problem complying with the laws. I was and still am willing to do what is necessary to use their logos. Apparently I don't make enough $$ for them to grant permission. Decals are a sideline for me and I could not survive off what I make. I took over Brad's business because he and I were somewhat in the same boat--He had no time to build and I was burned out from building.

[highway]

Think about it man...your making money off of someone elses name..if the tables were turned you would feel the same way

I don't think I would! Yes, they ARE copyrighted names and images, but, as a few others have said, you would think any company would be happy that modelers wanted to build ACCURATE replicas of their products. I could see the issue if Jerry was making millions mass marketing his decals the way AMT would off of the truck kits, but he has said himself his business "are a sideline for me and I could not survive off what I make". This is a perfect example of corporate greed in my opinion!

By the way, Jerry, I read the posts on Hank's forum you mentioned, they were probably EXACTLY the ones who messed everything up for you!

[Harry P.]

Seriously though, I'd like to know what the world is coming to.

The problem is that there are WAY too many lawyers.

I wonder how a resin caster like Modelhaus gets away with selling replicas of "Fords," "Chevies." "Plymouths," etc. I can't imagine that they are paying licensing fees to all the car manufacturers... are they???

[highway]

The problem is that there are WAY too many lawyers.

I wonder how a resin caster like Modelhaus gets away with selling replicas of "Fords," "Chevies." "Plymouths," etc. I can't imagine that they are paying licensing fees to all the car manufacturers... are they???

I doubt it. And what about all the ebay listings that have something like "Kenworth, Peterbilt, etc. thingamabobs" in the sales listings? Are the sellers paying for the use of the names? Again, I doubt it!

[cargostar]

The way the original letter is worded, you can't even use the name in a descriptive sentence: These stripes fit a P...... and a K...... kit from Italari.......as an example........ Talk about tring to limit free speach!

[phoneguy]

The way the original letter is worded, you can't even use the name in a descriptive sentence: These stripes fit a P...... and a K...... kit from Italari.......as an example........ Talk about tring to limit free speach!

If you visit my store, you will notice the changes I made, but I will still make reference to the specific kit(s) which the decals were made for. I don't think I'm violating anything that way.

[cossett]

Hi all,

There's a guy in the RC seen that was making aluminium grills for RC trucks and Paccar sent him a notice the same saying stop or else pity they were dam nice grills

Cheers Cossett

[cowboysevens]

hey jerry, maybe you could organize a " million model march " on the front lawn of paccar, lol that would definately make the news and put them in a awkward position, we can head strait over to cat after that!! lol

dennis

[David G.]

I think you could just get creative and put "Kenwothless" and "Piddlebilt" scripts together. They could be trimmed in the one case, and so close in the other that you'd need a magnifying glass...

I realize that you're probably kidding, but that's just the kind of thing started many of these companies' seek and destroy departments in the first place.

As I understand it, there were companies overseas that were producing shoddy parts with major brand name logos on the packages and parts. When customers used these substandard parts and began to complain to the companies of their parts' poor quality, the companies tracked down the sources of the parts and worked hard to eliminate these sources. What started as an honest effort to protect their customers and their own corporate image has grown into a monstrosity.

This is only partly due to greed created by a previously unrealized revenue source. There is also a legal aspect to the pursual of individual and "microcorp" misuse of trademarks; If they go after one, they have to go after them all. Once discovered, any infringement would have to be stopped or licensed. To do otherwise would open the door to countersuits from entities that may be using or wish to use the trademark. Any examples of current unlicensed trademark use cited as an example by such a company as a precedent would then have to be licensed or stopped. By protecting their trademarks in the manner we've been discussing, the companies are establishing a history of "due diligence" effectively closing that door.

Unfortunately, it's usually the little guy that gets trampled in the process. It's hard for me to imagine that this is the "American Way" that Superman was fighting for

[phoneguy]

In this case, I am the "little guy". 1 man, 1 computer. I have no problem with complying with them. As stated before, I want to do everything on the up and up and have no desire to do a "misplaced letters" or "scrambled name". I see this as indirectly provoking them and possibly hurting any chance in the future of obtaining permission from them to print their logo. Certainly it adds to the attractiveness of the decals but it is not major reason for buying the decals. I do hope one day that Paccar and I can come to some sort of agreement. Until then, we shall get by as truck modelers have already done for all these years.

[highway]

I do hope one day that Paccar and I can come to some sort of agreement.

I hope to see you get things worked out soon, too, Jerry. You do some great work.

[SpreadAxle]

By the way, Jerry, I read the posts on Hank's forum you mentioned, they were probably EXACTLY the ones who messed everything up for you!

I think you're right. I read that thread as well.

[sjordan2]

The key here is appropriating the trademarks for commercial use. If you sell something with the trademarks and don't have licensing rights, that's a violation of copyright law. And don't even start with the idea that "it just gives free advertising to the company and helps the brand." Not a single copyright holder will agree to that train of thought.

There are other considerations about using copyrighted material in general discussions on forums and blogs, and in most cases these will pass the test of "fair comment" that allows you to discuss and show certain kinds of material. Here's a quote and a link on that subject (I am reproducing a bit more material than is advisable; the key is that you cannot quote or reproduce copyrighted material in its entirety or in a major way):

"Fair use is a concept that allows limited use of copyrighted material, generally for the purposes of criticism, education, satire, etc. And no the "education" umbrella doesn't allow you to use works in their entirety. There are no hard-and-fast guidelines as to where the line is drawn, but using a work in its entirety is never allowed, whether it's a four-line poem or a four-page article. Similarly, an entire chapter from a book would also be a copyright violation. You can use excerpts, but not "complete" anythings: chapters, articles, posts, poems, etc. You can see a quick summary of "fair use" at the U.S. Government Copyright Office or get more in-depth information at the Stanford Copyright & Fair Use Center. The Electronic Frontier Foundation provides some great legal resources for bloggers, including Bloggers' FAQ - Intellectual Property."

That complete article can be viewed at http://ezinearticles.com/?Using-Copyrighted-Material-in-Blogs-and-Forums&id=103411

A lttle more analysis based on US Patent and Trademark Office guidelines:

"Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered fair, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair:

The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes

The nature of the copyrighted work

The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole

The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work

The distinction between fair use and infringement may be unclear and not easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission."

[Wagoneer81]

Jerry, your decals are top-notch. Regardless of whether or not name badges or nameplates will be included on the sheet, I'll still be buying from you! Keep up the great work!

[phoneguy]

Thanks Chris.

[Brizio]

I'm very sorry to heard that...

[charlie8575]

Harry said it all. Too many lawyers, and the point of sheer greed contributes, too.

While it's reasonable for a trademark holder to want to protect their interests, too many of them have gone entirely too far. A small enterprise like this shouldn't even be charged, or any charge minimal (e.g.: an hour of time to review and approve the product at say $50.)

It's idiotic to watch things like this happen. And upsetting. Too many of the manufacturers are setting themselves up for so much bad publicity if word starts getting out about these heavy-handed tactics, that it could hurt them badly.

Perhaps a "million model march" is in order. Perhaps we as consumers need to start sending very clear, loud, but polite messages to the worst offenders of the common-sense scale to inform them we'll buy nothing bearing their brands, or even their vehicles, tires, oil, etc. until they demonstrate some consideration to the modeling public and especially the small manufacturers who make small batches of items, often at low margins, predominately to fill small needs.

Perhaps we should write our Congressmen, MPs, or whatever. Inform them of our concerns and ask them to investigate and possibly enact some kind of legislation setting maximum royalties, when they can be charged, minimum sales figures, etc., etc. I know...more bureaucratic nightmare, but this is one time I could get behind it. It's greed like this that helped to destroy the economy in 2008, and it needs to be brought to the fore.

It was either Franklin or Jefferson that said sunshine is the best disinfectant. Royalties and heavy-handed knee-breaking are festering (and in some cases, weeping) puss pockets for our hobby.

Time to open the blinds.

Charlie Larkin