_GOTOBOTTOM
General Aircraft
This forum is for general aircraft modelling discussions.
Military Toy Act
JackFlash
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Colorado, United States
Joined: January 25, 2004
KitMaker: 11,669 posts
AeroScale: 11,011 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 13, 2006 - 07:59 PM UTC
This may fit better in General modeling but I thought we ought to get a crack at it first. Can you believe it they are making laws to keep contractors from suing model and decal manufacturers.

SUMMARY AS OF:
2/28/2006--Introduced.

Military Toy Replica Act - Directs the Secretary of Defense to require that any contract entered into or renewed by the Department of Defense include a provision prohibiting the contractor from requiring toy and hobby manufacturers, distributors, or merchants to obtain licenses from, or pay fees to, the contractor for the use of military likenesses or designations on items provided under the contract.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HR04806:@@@L&summ2=m&
JackFlash
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Colorado, United States
Joined: January 25, 2004
KitMaker: 11,669 posts
AeroScale: 11,011 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 13, 2006 - 08:12 PM UTC
Here is what Revell had to say...This Bill is to keep us modelers from paying out the ying-yang for all the licensing, royalties.
http://www.revell.com/News_Viewer.ne...a9983d9.0.html
JackFlash
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Colorado, United States
Joined: January 25, 2004
KitMaker: 11,669 posts
AeroScale: 11,011 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 13, 2006 - 08:16 PM UTC
This appeared in the April 2006 copy of Scale Aircraft Modelling (SIG is a Special Interest Group):

"...With new products promised from several companies, modellers interested in UK military aircraft have plenty to celebrate. Elsewhere, bureaucratic machination has forced a change to the name and content of Scale Aircraft Modelling's regular column covering the UK's air force

The change to this column's title has been forced upon us by a Ministry of Defence licensing issue. The abbreviation 'RAF' and the words 'Royal Air Force' can no longer be used in a title describing a group - such as a SIG - without a license from the MoD. The procedures for satisfy­ing this requirement have proved to be swathed in red tape, expensive and unworkable. The trademark arrangements also cover the 'corporate roundel' and all logos used throughout the UK armed forces, each of which has to covered by a separate licence. The IPMS 'RAF' SIG has therefore now been dissolved. Hopefully this issue will eventually sort itself out and common sense will prevail, so that we can again concentrate on our hobby. In the meantime, let's enjoy some UK air arm modelling."


Makes me glad I use terms like BEF and RFC!!!
bf443
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Idaho, United States
Joined: May 16, 2003
KitMaker: 895 posts
AeroScale: 457 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 13, 2006 - 08:17 PM UTC
Yeah, this is been an ongoing debate for some time. The actual intent of the bill is to prohibit U.S. defense contractors from charging copyright or royalty fees to model companies which pass the costs on to us the buyers.
Congress doing something positive for modelers?
I will believe it if and when it becomes law.

Brian

Merlin
Staff MemberSenior Editor
AEROSCALE
#017
_VISITCOMMUNITY
United Kingdom
Joined: June 11, 2003
KitMaker: 17,582 posts
AeroScale: 12,795 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 13, 2006 - 09:05 PM UTC

Quoted Text

The abbreviation 'RAF' and the words 'Royal Air Force' can no longer be used in a title describing a group - such as a SIG - without a license from the MoD...



Hi Stephen

Makes me proud to be British! I don't suppose there was any significance in it being the April edition of the magazine?...

All the best

Rowan
05Sultan
#037
_VISITCOMMUNITY
California, United States
Joined: December 19, 2004
KitMaker: 2,870 posts
AeroScale: 258 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 13, 2006 - 09:20 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

The abbreviation 'RAF' and the words 'Royal Air Force' can no longer be used in a title describing a group - such as a SIG - without a license from the MoD...



Hi Stephen

Makes me proud to be British! I don't suppose there was any significance in it being the April edition of the magazine?...

All the best

Rowan



WOOHOOO!! Good one,Rowan! :-) :-) :-)
JackFlash
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Colorado, United States
Joined: January 25, 2004
KitMaker: 11,669 posts
AeroScale: 11,011 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 13, 2006 - 09:40 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Hi Stephen Makes me proud to be British! I don't suppose there was any significance in it being the April edition of the magazine?...
All the best
Rowan



I am quite sure I don't know what you mean...he says coyly...where is that tongue in cheek smilie.
Grumpyoldman
Staff Member_ADVISOR
KITMAKER NETWORK
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Florida, United States
Joined: October 17, 2003
KitMaker: 15,338 posts
AeroScale: 836 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 14, 2006 - 05:04 AM UTC
Over here it's been an on going battle.
The bill is basically to protect the tax payers who already got screwed with the forever never ending cost overruns from getting screwed a second time.

We all remember the amazing $275.00 dollar stanley hammer, and $600.00 toliet seat. Not to mention that $725.00 1/4in drive socket set!

I think we need to go back to the old days of "if you build it we may buy it." But we're tired of paying through the nose and out the errr other end.... for crap that does not work.

Hey tax payers...... our $350million project is finished and just rolled out.... sure looks pretty, to bad it can't fly, or drive, but for a mere $600 million more, I'm sure we could get the lights to work.

OK sorry... rant over......
JPTRR
Staff MemberManaging Editor
RAILROAD MODELING
#051
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Tennessee, United States
Joined: December 21, 2002
KitMaker: 7,772 posts
AeroScale: 3,175 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 14, 2006 - 07:21 AM UTC
An ongoing contention in the model railroad world is Union Pacific Railroad, who has sued manufacturers to prohibit them, without a licening agreement, from using UP's logos, livery, etc. on models, calendars, etc.--even as far back as 1800's railroad. UP has even come out with their "Heritage" locomotives, painted in colors and logos of the companies UP has merged. A cynical attempt at copyright protection, or a friendly PR campaign to remember the fallen flags?

And to think yeas ago the railroads would give model railroad manufacturers their paint chips and livery stats to encourage them to produce models of their railroads.
 _GOTOTOP