What happened to the lettering on tires?

[charlie8575]

The whole fee discussion came up Thursday at MassCar. One of our members, Steve DeVaux, who owns Vintage Racing Miniatures, has had quite a bit of dealing with several companies and sanctioning bodies.

He did confirm that Goodyear's fees are "exorbitant," but with that being the case, he also noted that Firestone doesn't charge any royalties, except a small review fee, and only requests some samples for approval prior to production. This would, in part, explain why Firestone tires continue to be seen in AMT kits.

The Revell issue seems to be stemming, based on what I'm reading here, and from having learned this information, to be a case of somebody at Revell irritating a lot of the marketing/PR/legal departments and getting the permission nixed.

Charlie Larkin

[Harry P.]

Wouldn't work for Goodyear because the "winged foot" design is also a licensed trademark. I'd think the design of the Firestone logo is also copyright-protected.

What we have here is... failure to communicate.

What we need here is... an "I'm kidding" emoticon.

Seriously.

All kidding aside.

I mean it.

[Evil Appetite]

pretty sure it was the MPC Trans Am kit that had that decal sheet laid out that way, i have one somewhere i think still.

i did hear about the truck decal maker and that issue as well.

The Blackbird kit I believe

[Jordan White]

Heck, why couldn't they just come up with their own tire names?

[spad007]

As an advertising agency professional, I've spent a good part of my career having to deal with "intellectual property" and licensing issues. I think this involves more than mere greed. Large corporations are very concerned with "brand dilution" (and certainly, not being able to collect licensing fees) for brands they've spent a lot of money to develop.

In a sense, this involves the issue of counterfeiting of logos and other brand-specific material. So, I would assume they have legal representatives and retain law firms who scour the marketplace looking for counterfeit products. This leads them to places like a true counterfeit hotbed, eBay, where even scale model usage could be found. Think of phony Rolex watches, Louis Vuitton bags, Mont Blanc pens, etc.

This could be as simple as finding unautrhorized T-shirts with logos. But also understand that these companies have legitimate licensing agreements with firms, and they are within their rights to protect those agreements and prevent illegal competition for their licensees.

So the lawyers snag someone, issue a cease-and-desist, and submit a report to their employers showing that they're doing their job.

IMHO it is still product placement and any brand or logo or font can be protected by a 1 dollar fee. if i remember American Airlines was one of the first to crack down on kit makers i would never fly on their greedy airline.

so it's a mater of greedy lawyers and company's one forgets that attracting young folk to this hobby might include the logo on a tyre in the box art

firestone is bridgestone etc and one might need a firestone for one model and a bridgestone for another."Their brands not cap-ed on purpose."

NITO on all kits for a buck might make sense. Greed is at the center of this one might not buy or use products from the greedy offenders .

[brett]

Actually, I think that kind of supports my earlier theory ... that this whole thing is more about Revell trying to keep its costs down than it is about "the greedy tire companies."

Not that I blame Revell in the least for that. Think about all the different licenses the company has to pay for to bring a kit to market. Let's take one specific example ... the recent Tom "Mongoose" McEwen Duster funny car reissue. In addition to paying licensing to Chryler for the use of "Plymouth," "Duster" and "Hemi," Revell had to pay royalties to:

* The driver (McEwen).

* The NHRA (Revell is selling all its drag kits as officially licensed NHRA replicas. Without the sanctioning body's stamp of approval, the kits could not be sold by souvenir vendors at NHRA events.)

* The sponsors. (The main sponsor in this case is the U.S. Army. I doubt Revell had to pay them anything. But you can bet the secondary sponsors all wanted their rake.)

By the time you get done paying for all those licenses, that doesn't leave a lot for the bottom line. And, like I said earlier, model kits aren't exactly high-profit-margin items to begin with.

This whole licensing issue is way more complicated than most of us can even begin to comprehend.

I tend to agree with this and personally dont mind the "REVELL" "QTR MILE SPECIALS) decals that were in the street burner reissuses of the top sportsman cars (at least somethings on the tires0.

But my suggestion would be at least in the case of race cars. no decals other than generic dash board type. How many of the drag kits actually get built out of the box ? I bet a fair few are brought to be donor chassis for resin bodies where there is an abundance of aftermarket decals anyway, Would you fell ripped off if you brought a generic non decaled race car to use for a doner kit? or would you prefer to get a sheet of decals you might never use? Should you pay less for a generic car or be happy to pay the same amount?

In my own case, Ive brought about 12 of the revell street burner 55/57 chevys as doners I've used the tach ,gauges and seatbelt decals from them and only built 2 of the cars the only other decals used were the headlight and grilles, same with the earlier lapd drag camaros Kendall and Mad Mag funny cars. My point being apart from the most basic of decals I wouldnt care if they weren't included. I know there are others that will (first time builders or someone on a tight budget etc but for the most part ? How about you?