I don't like to eat spagetti very much but I don't dislike Italy. Still, I do not often buy spagetti. It is sort of like that with UP. I don't add to my UP fleet anymore, but I will not be upset if UP is successful in business.
I dont see this as a problem at all .. UP has a right to license their image .. much the same way many of us slap a copyright on every picture we take .. I dont model UP .. but the few models I have, will stay that was ..
How many of you bought the Pepsi MT stuff???? Did any of you not by it because of the trademark thing??? No difference!!!! Though I hate the fact my favorite railroad (SP)was swallowed by the borg and I vehemetly disagree with UPs claim to predecessor road logos, I still have UP rolling stock and locos and will continue to add them to my collection. As you can tell with my websites alone, I've gotten over it. Maybe some others out there should look at the Pepsi, John Deere, McDonalds trademark issues and then re-examine your positions on UPs issue.
John- I don't waste my money of the oddball, frivolous stuff MT does. In fact, have only bought one MT car in the last 3-4 years. Those who purchase such items, are mostly, (I did not say all), those diehard MT collectors. Of which I was once one. There is a big difference in the UP issue, versus John Deere, Pepsi, etc. That being unlike John Deere, Pepsi, etc., UP never bothered to police their trademark. In fact, it was in public use prior to WWII, with UP sitting quietly by. And UP even participating in this! Now they suddenly decide to try undoing decades of neglect on their own part. And in the process, claiming companies such as the CGW, M&St.L, etc. Which many in Omahahaha couldn't find on a map, if their lives depended upon it. These are reasons why so many of us are rightfully disgusted. Had the UP, all along, diligently protected their markings, I would not be saying a word. The facts are that they did not do so. Boxcab E50 [ 12. December 2004, 22:25: Message edited by: BoxcabE50 ]
My point may have been missed. Every day we all purchase items that have had to be liscensed. We don't even think about it. Now suddenly another company wants to protect its logo and image even if it hasn't done so in the past. They might have even done so without so much tact as they are kinda new to this whole thing. Everyone gets mad and wants to boycott and all. Why?? Whats the point?! As stated, I totally and completely disagree about the predecessor roads being involved. However, UP does have the right to do what so many other companies do with their own logo and image. Does everyone out there boycott all these other products and companies that do the same thing?!! NO!! It's argued that UP has never done this in the past. SO! They want to now. So what?! I can argue the same thing. No one has *****ed much about other companies doing this until UP did so why now?! Why after all this time do people want to cause such a fuss over it? No one has before. Cause they bought out your favorite railroad?? Cause you think yellow is an ugly color?? Cause you perceive this as a money grab, even if you really don't have any facts to support it??!!! I can see being mad at them for the roads that no longer exist. Hell, I am pissed!! But as for the rest of it, whatever..... Let me finish by saying this, If anyone comes up with a constructive way to protest the issue on roads they have swallowed and no longer exist, sign me up! But as for a completly viable and current company, you cannot make money off using they're logo or image without their permission or paying for it. Period. Just my $1.50. No hard feelings [ 12. December 2004, 20:57: Message edited by: John Barnhill ]
John, My answer to "Why, What's the Point" is Why, What's the Point? I totally agree that UP has a right to license any and all aspects of their corporate identity, including predecessor roads IF THEY ARE CURRENTLY BEING USED FOR ACTIVE BUSINESS PURPOSES, which they were not. So that would be my question to UP.....Why, What's the Point? UP could have easily said, "hey, we need to start protecting our trademarks and corporate identity. We are going to actively monitor the fidelity and accuracy of UP logos that you use, and will require you to submit the paperwork for every instance you choose to utilize a UP branded logo or road name. We will charge you $1 a year to belong to our officially licensed partner group but otherwise we recognize the value of the positive public exposure offered by your products, and we will not be charging licensing fees at this time." That would seem to be a more corporate friendly plan than putting companies out of business because your lawyers are bored and it makes you look like your doing something for the stockholders. Taking a piece of the pie for every sale in an industry this small is just a very greedy thing to do. Yes, there's probably not much we can do about it so why even bother. Well, when the railroad industry goes into a rut someday and UP is asking the U.S. Government and taxpayers for help, I will certainly be first in line to vote NO.
A little extreme considering what little actual impact the action will take but if ones eliminating UP from their current collection makes one feel better........
I agree with Doug A. They could have handled this in a very different manner. As for other products with logos from multi-billion dollar corporations, I know that they are licensed. They are big name products that don't require a "fee" for licensing, only permisssion!!! By the way, I don't have any of the specialty items offered in N scale or much of anything else around the house for that matter. The UP has gone so far as to ban anyone from making calendars featuring UP equipment. The other railroads don't!! Why? If this wasn't a money grab, then why charge? Once you have the license, that is all you need to stop someone from using your logo. The fee is not the deterent!!!! Why should I help finance a multi-billion dollar corporation by having a home layout?? I think it should be the other way around!
Well hopefully the tone of this conversation is going to the lighter side so I ask, does anyone out there think this discussion would have taken place or been such a heated topic no matter what board you visit had it been BNSF that had taken the same action? Just wonderin what you all think.
Interesting thought, although I'd say that the reaction to CSX's announcement has been similar. You're probably right that the tone and emotion involved has been influenced by feelings towards UP, but I think the same general reaction would have occured no matter what road was involved.
I have a Kato SD-45 in SP colors, which will be repainted to match the other Reading SD-45. I am primarily interested in the CNJ and Reading, with a touch of other eastern fallen flags. Even if CSX and NS play the UP game, I blame UP for starting it. I also wonder if the modeling industry could have played their cards a little smarter? Do they have a trade association worthy of the name?? Len
Boxcab E50,One of my favorite trains during the 50s to the mid 60s was a solid block of PFE and Santa Fe reefers..Some was ice bunkers while other was mechanical.This was on the PRR in Columbus Ohio..The produce was heading for the East coast markets..
Larry: I don't remember mechanical reefers mixed with ice reefers. I probably predated that as it was 1950-1955 when I was watching those reefers on the Atlantic Coast Line in Selma, NC. What kind of reefers would that have been? I have thought that the two types did run together...they had to. I have asked this before and never had anyone answer. Maybe there is a picture in the Great Yellow Fleet?
I have two UP diesels, one UP caboose (A CA-3 from Centralia Car Shops), and several pieces of rolling stock lettered from the UP. Since I model the 70s, this is not an issue. I also model a part of the Frisco where UP engines would be seen in run-through freights, as would Santa Fe, SCL, and so on. Heck, I've even seen Southern Ry. SDs on Frisco freight trains roaring thru Afton, OK in the mid-1970s! For me to ban all UP-lettered power & rolling stock on my layout would smack of historical revision of sorts, which would be a false picture of how Frisco did business in the last decade of existence. Why deny the truth? And, boycotting UP-lettered products won't hurt the bottom line of the boys in Omaha one whit. You'd only be hurting the LHSs, as well as the hobby manufacturers. Now if you want an imaginative protest, get a freight train with UP power, and park it on a siding somewhere on your layout- with the way these clowns are running, it's more the truth. You don't have to run it, except maybe from one siding to the next, and leave it there for a long period of time. Again, fairly close to what's really happening. Add some cobwebs, and you have a real satirical piece of art! I know this is an N scale forum, and I'm in HO, but this issue is one that affects all modelers of all scales. I personally think UP did this in the same heavy-handed fashion they did the CNW and SP mergers (we know what happened then).
We didn't seem to have the length of ice blocks up here, as compared to down toward California to back east. They were shorter. GN probably had the longest of them all with WFE stuff. Although NP had some good blocks of fruit in their own NP cars. Milw had some as well. And in the 1970's, we saw ART in their trains now and then. Boxcab E50
We seem to have to arguements here, onse side saying other companies do it so why not UP, and the other side saying that UP shouldn't do it. In what I have seen there are 2 reasons why people are so upset about what UP has done Firstly the attempt to register fallen flags, which is the saddest thing I've seen in corporate history and secondly UP's attitude to the whole deal. A well known calendar manufacturer approached UP for a license and was rejected, and after 2005 will no longer publish a UP calendar. We all know the other RR's will follow and as the story goes, he approached BNSF and was told "no probs with us as long as you pay the fee"
