"Activision sued by Humvee Manufacturer (AM General)" Topic
6 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please don't make fun of others' membernames.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Hobby Industry Message Board
Areas of InterestGeneral
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Recent Link
Featured Ruleset
Featured Showcase ArticleIs there finally a gluestick worth buying for paper modelers?
Current Poll
|
Cold Warrior | 11 Nov 2017 10:28 p.m. PST |
This has been steadily increasing over the years (manufacturers of military equipment suing companies for using likenesses without permission). I know it has hit plastic model manufacturers, just wonder when we will begin hearing about larger miniature companies (such as GHQ) getting hit. link Annoys me to no end, as any vehicle or weapon can potentially be targeted going back generations. IMHO if a weapons system has been purchased with our tax dollars, it's likeness should be "public domain" when it comes to recreating it's likeness in models and video games. If we have to start "licensing history", well it will likely shut down smaller manufacturers quickly who cannot afford the margins. As our hobby is primarily made up of smaller manufacturers the effect could be devastating. |
Vigilant | 12 Nov 2017 5:41 a.m. PST |
This was discussed in a scale model magazine some years ago. Part of the problem is down to ambulance chasing lawyers suing the manufacturer of the real thing if little Johnny hurts himself with the model. Part is how the vehicle is portrayed i.e. if it gets associated with terrorist or criminal activities. Part of it is if it gives the impression that the original manufacturer endorses the views of the game/TV/film being portrayed. Intellectual property is just that, just because you bought a Ford doesn't give you the right to sell a model of it as your own. We shall just have to wait and see what happens. |
Jeigheff | 12 Nov 2017 7:42 a.m. PST |
I agree, Cold Warrior. Our US tax dollars paid for all this stuff. |
Wyatt the Odd | 12 Nov 2017 8:49 a.m. PST |
In the US, it is considered "open". None of the makers of the Sherman tank can claim IP, not can Lockheed go after modelmakers for images of the F-16. In Europe, it's a bit different. Wyatt |
Dynaman8789 | 12 Nov 2017 1:24 p.m. PST |
Weapon system manufacturers having been trying this for at least a decade now. Eventually they will succeed. If through no other method then altering the deal with the US for new weapon systems – so that the manufacturer owns licensing rights in some manner outside of US government use. I work in the software field, the standard contract for the US government to buy software at least WAS that the source belonged to the US government if they paid to have it written but that has not been done for decades now. Either the standard has changed or every major software company gets the deal written with a stipulation that they onw the code. Something similar could happen with hardware. |
Old Contemptibles | 13 Nov 2017 9:37 p.m. PST |
Wyatt is right. The image or likeness of a military vehicle, aircraft or whatever is open source. Because they are government property. Any image or likeness that is used by the military that is not classified is open source. |
|