Just got the UP license… take a look

Just some helpfull info on the UP part they share some info, But have strengent requirements on how the engine should look.
here is just a part of that multi page agreement. Computer simulations bearing Licensed Trademarks should appear Generally clean and be free of grafitti and excessive "road dirt" and grime. They should replicate as nearly as possible the actual equepment the simulation is designed to represent
humm no wonder they didnt want an agreement with MS or KUJU.
They also go on about how each emblem and everything else should appear.

A plus is they give a Color Palette stating the true shades of each color that Union Pacific uses. UP blue, UP red, Armour Yellow, UP Grey and Harbormist Grey. each includes the color code that computer programs use for each shade.My aggrement with them include the following All Union Pacific, Southern Pacific, Missouri Pacific, MKT, Cotton Belt, and the Denver and Rio Grande.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, ssw, Jan-16-04, 09:13 PM, (1) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, Boilerbuster, Jan-16-04, 10:26 PM, (2) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, OkrasaGhia, Jan-17-04, 05:53 AM, (3) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, chucksc, Jan-17-04, 11:09 AM, (7) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, westerngy, Jan-17-04, 12:29 PM, (10) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, OkrasaGhia, Jan-17-04, 04:11 PM, (12) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, Boilerbuster, Jan-17-04, 09:29 AM, (4) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, century242, Jan-17-04, 09:53 AM, (5) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, Coonskin, Jan-17-04, 10:52 AM, (6) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, chucksc, Jan-17-04, 11:11 AM, (8) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, Coonskin, Jan-17-04, 05:13 PM, (14) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, mjs2101, Jan-17-04, 12:24 PM, (9) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, BNSF4999, Jan-17-04, 12:58 PM, (11) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, pwillard, Jan-17-04, 04:30 PM, (13) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, CMO, Jan-18-04, 01:46 AM, (16) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, chucksc, Jan-18-04, 08:40 PM, (17) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, Boilerbuster, Jan-17-04, 06:17 PM, (15) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, stryder47, Jan-21-04, 04:49 AM, (18) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, chucksc, Jan-21-04, 10:51 AM, (19) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, stryder47, Jan-21-04, 10:07 PM, (20) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, chucksc, Jan-22-04, 11:32 AM, (21) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, stryder47, Jan-22-04, 11:01 PM, (24) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, chucksc, Jan-23-04, 10:32 AM, (28) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, muskokaandtahoe, Jan-23-04, 12:13 PM, (29) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, chucksc, Jan-23-04, 12:39 PM, (30) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, muskokaandtahoe, Jan-23-04, 01:17 PM, (31) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, stationmaster, Jan-23-04, 02:20 PM, (34) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, krswen, Jan-22-04, 08:01 PM, (22) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, chucksc, Jan-22-04, 10:29 PM, (23) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, stryder47, Jan-22-04, 11:20 PM, (25) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, stationmaster, Jan-23-04, 03:58 AM, (26) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, Boilerbuster, Jan-23-04, 08:01 AM, (27) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, mvolt3, Jan-23-04, 01:31 PM, (32) RE: Just got the UP license... take a look, stationmaster, Jan-23-04, 01:59 PM, (33)

Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

> Computer simulations bearing Licensed Trademarks should
>appear Generally clean and be free of grafitti and excessive
>"road dirt" and grime. They should replicate as nearly as
>possible the actual equepment the simulation is designed to
>represent I'd like UP to explain how we can nearly replicate the actual equipment if we can't be UP-Prototypical and weather the crap out of it?
UP and their licensing program.... oh boy.

Bradley Linda
Waco, Texas

Paint Shop Department
Sounder Commuter Rail
Everett-Tacoma
Coming Fall/Winter 2004

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Ya I was going to send an email to them asking them to Wash there engines before I take Pictures of them for use as Reskins in train sim

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Big empty barrels make the largest noice if you get what I mean.
A repaint looking just as the actual engine even if dirty and with grafitti can't be banned whatever they claim.PS it's no longer true they did not reach an agreement.
For Trainz 2004 UP has agreed on a license with Auran.
Would guess they finally realized all the positive publicity BNSF was getting from MSTS.


//Okrasa
Chief Engineer
okrasa @ xtracks.tk
http://www.geocities.com/okrasaghia
http://www.xtracks.tk

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

>Big empty barrels make the largest noice if you get what I
>mean.
>A repaint looking just as the actual engine even if dirty
>and with grafitti can't be banned whatever they claim.
>
>PS it's no longer true they did not reach an agreement.
>For Trainz 2004 UP has agreed on a license with Auran.
>Would guess they finally realized all the positive publicity
>BNSF was getting from MSTS. Ahhh... Okrasa I think you may be slightly off the mark here...
As I understand it, You are correct in that you can post all the Pictures of Dirty UP locomotives you want and maybe even paintings of them too (but I'm not too sure of that one)...However, I also understand that it is their trademark and they can legitimately control the use and dissemination of it, especially in the "for profit" mode....Unless you want to start a jobs program for copyright attorneys I would not distribute a model that is dirty and graffiti covered with out their permission...
Chuck Schneider

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Well then someone or all of us should write the HIGH ALMIGHTY THINK THEY ARE up AND TELL THEM TO WASH THEIR LOCOMOTIVES UP can go suck a tree. Never seen so many afraid of the giant before.Just Rollin Down The Tracks

Dale

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

If it's faitfull model of a dirty and grafitti covered prototype those attorneys does not have a case.
Yes it is their trademark (at least some of those trademarks they claim) but it appearing on models of real UP, SP aso material does go under the same category as photos and paintings of those prototypes.If you were doing non-prototypical work you would be in the grey zone and for profit work I agree it is best to get a license.
But free work of actual prototypes done on a hobby level UP is trying to scare with an empty gun. I would not hesitate a second releasing a UP repaint had it not been I dislike armor yellow and thats not only for their bully manners.


//Okrasa
Chief Engineer
okrasa @ xtracks.tk
http://www.geocities.com/okrasaghia
http://www.xtracks.tk

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

I couldnt realy blame UP for wanting new looking engines to represent them in Train sim. I would want the same if I were running a Rail Road. But I would keep the engines Clean as possable. But Can one realy blame them for it. I think it is the same with all Rail Roads. As the saying goes, put your best foot foward.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Well there is a reason why the SP had there engines painted grey and scarlet. There are so many tunnels and snow sheds on the west side of the counry is impossible to keep things looking good. The UP can have a clean SD70 on a west bound leave Sparks Nevada and by the time it arrives in Roseville California the flags and the "Building America" tag line are just barely visible.
There was some discussion a while back where some one was stating that they had heard that UP cleaned the flags on the engines, some times that is true. It is not uncommon to see locomotives that were once Armour Yellow now a shade of Lark Grey with a clean spot where the flag is. Regards,
Erik Pierson
Sacramento, Cawww.sacramentolocomotiveworks.com

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Jan-17-04 AT 10:53 AM (EST)

Ah yes, the SP.Was on a road trip Thursday... stopped in a hobby shop for a look-see. Saw a book about SP power from about 1958-1970 (MY preferred diesel eras, btw!)... so picked it up and gave it a browse. GREAT stuff therein. Lots of F's, some GP7/9's... even some early SD stuff looked good... in color no less! Thought about buying it. Looked for the price tag... somewhere around $70+. Carefully put it back down. Also looked at a color GN book that was neat-o. It was more affordable at $24. Should'a bought that one. Regretted it about an hour down the road. Sometimes being too frugal is not good.Back to UP license: On the commercial version, do they require a percent of only the UP stuff being marketed, or a percent of gross on all product? Just curious.Andre MingVisit V Scale Creations Forum at: http://www.3DTrains.com

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

>Back to UP license: On the commercial version, do they
>require a percent of only the UP stuff being marketed, or a
>percent of gross on all product? Just curious.
>According to the documents we went through, it is for the UP "stuff" only....
Chuck Schneider

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Thanks for the reply Chuckster.It will be interesting to see how they fare on their appeal of the trademark department's rejection of their claim to rights on the SP and D&RGW names. Andre MingVisit V Scale Creations Forum at: http://www.3DTrains.com

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Maybe a little off subject, but it has to do with licenses and trademarks.
For those of you who get permissions from railroads to use their particular logos or paint schemes, do you also get permissions from the engine and car manufacturers for building their shapes? I mean, to me the SD-40-2 or E-6 of EMD are easier to recognize than some of the paint schemes they wore. I am wondering with all that has transpired, if it is necessary, or even thought about, getting permissions from EMD, or GE to model their distinctive shapes?
Not trying to start anything, just honestly curious about this.
Thanks and enjoy the day!Mykel

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Doesnt UP realize what a hassle theyre making this for everyone? I know its been said a thousand times, but obtaining this stupid freeware agreement certainly has deterred a ton of people, myself included, form reskinning anything into UP. Its too much of a hassle. None of the other railroads do it. Ive done UP before this license BS...does this mean i have to report it to them? Cus Im not going to...if they have a problem they can come find me! (and Im sure they have nothing more important than to track me down and come get me!Licensing free products...rediculous

Kevin V.
-President/CEO of Illinois Northern Ry Inc, subsidiary of The Midwest Regional Railways Corp.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Cmon, they need clean trains in trainsim... to make up for the actions of the plastic scale model maufacturers trying to tarnish their corporate image.Pete Willard


http://www.trainsimstuff.com

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

You have raised an exceedinly interesting point, especially under the new dilution statutes.
I also have real problems w/ any RR asserting rights in models - a line of business they are not into.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

I believe the issue is use of their trademark not the model itself!Years ago in the late 60s, RCA (remember them) had a line of IBM compatible Mainframes called the Spectra 70 series....
A plumbing supply house introduced a line of toilets called Spectra 70 and their adds caused no end of embarrassment for the RCA folks (after maybe some circulation to prospective customers by nefarious folks rumored to be but never proven to be connected to IBM)....
IIRC, When it went to court the Toilet mfg said completely different product so RCA can't sue us (Similar to your dilution theory)... The Court held that RCA had the exclusive use to the Trademark and the Toilet company was enjoined to "cease and desist".... Chuck Schneider

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Yes it does seem like a Hassle to do but I am going thru it anyway.
Besides I have goten thru the hard part. I have the License just need to print it and sign it. Printing it will take me a little as I dont have a printer. But I am going to put it on a disk and print it at a friends.
One last step as far as UP goes and I dont have to worry about it anymore. Chuck hows it going on my premission to use your guys model. I know that you guys are busy so dont hurry to much, But I was just wondering if you got the Email with the Screen shots I sent?

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

What a bunch of BS just for a game. I think the entire thing is nonsense and wouldn't hold up in court. If I want to do a weathered UP reskin(which I probably wouldn't do anyway as I am no fan of theirs) but if I did, they can kiss my you know what and come after me because they would be wasting their time. Maybe, and I say maybe if it was a commercial endeavor they might come after me but I still say they would lose in court. A weathered UP would represent the actual engine and they wouldn't get very far if I showed a judge the pictures to prove it. What utter nonsense. Who in hell do they think they are? And who the heck is going to see it on my personal computer anyway? Makes no sense!RangerWestern Maryland Railroad
Gone, but not forgotten!

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Jan-21-04 AT 10:53 AM (EST)

Well instead of talking about it why don't you go ahead and do it????
LOL, This ought to be interesting... My personal opinion is that you won't get too much grief for a weathered freeware UP loco....But if you'd like to do that Tie Dyed UP Sux reskin?????? and as payware?!!!! Heheh!
Let me break out my camp stool and popcorn bucket and beer cooler so I can be comfortable while I watch...Hope you can afford a second mortgage to pay for the lawyers...Chuck Schneider

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Jan-21-04 AT 10:17 PM (EST)

What is it Chuck that you seem to have against me? Just because I am unafraid to stand up and say what I believe in or what? You seem to be one of the very few who does this to me. I am really curious. I already stated that I wouldn't do one because I am no fan of UP. And secondly anything I would ever do would not be payware because, first I am not that good at it, and secondly, I am too old to be getting into that kind of thing.
All I am saying is that if I did do one, I don't think they could make a case against me if I showed the judge a picture of a weathered UP that was current and running a route. How could they, as it would represent an actual engine that I was trying to capture in my model? I just don't think it would hold up in court. And I still believe that, so bring your stool but bring plenty of popcorn and beer because you are going to be sitting there a long time.And I have lawyers in the family. I wouldn't have to pay one. In fact I just talked to one and although he admitted he hadn't seen their paperwork, he would tend to agree with my assessment of the situation.Let's just agree at this time not to reply to each other's posts until, at least, I can figure out what it is you seem to have against me. I know I have a big mouth but so do a lot of other people here, and I am opinionated, this is true, but others know that of me and don't seem to jump on me like you do and used to when I was here before my illness. And most know that I am a very easy to get along with kind of guy in spite of the above and have helped a lot of people here and go out of my way to make friends with everyone.
So I marvel at your statements aimed at me sometimes. If you disagree with my opinion then by all means disagree but please don't use euphymisms or colorful expressions that belong more in a bar than here. Use english and express your opinion in an intelligent manner and I won't have a problem at all with it. Others here do it and I don't get mad about it. Why can't you?Hmmm. I guess I used a colorful expression in my post as well, so I will give you that. The only difference was it was not aimed at a particular member here.And that is all I have to say on this subject.RangerWestern Maryland Railroad
Gone, but not forgotten!

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Tim,
Buddy you need to chill out!
I'm not attacking you at all...
I just happen to believe that UP has the right to control distribution/use of their copyrighted trademark(s) that they have spent literally millions of dollars developing....
I'm using irony and a little bit of sarcasm to make my point to the others on here, not necessarily you and I apologize if you think I was attacking you as I wasn't, who believe that the cost of their HO locomotive was doubled due to UP's licensing program. (Actually the license fee is based on manufacturers wholesale and adds about $1.50 to the cost of a $100 retail locomotive or about $0.36 to a 3dTrains or Dekosoft megapack)You are correct, IMO, that you would not get into trouble depicting a weathered UP model of an actual piece of rolling stock if you described it using those terms...
I think if you phrase the question in that way to your lawyer relative you might get a different answer...
Kinda like UP can't sue you for posting pictures of dirty UP locomotives....The payware was a blanket statement about using UP's logo for gain by other than UP licensees. Not that you are doing payware...
LaterChuck Schneider

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Ok Chuck, I have chilled out. I remember when I first came to this forum years ago, I had a few incidents with Kevin, until I got to know him and his way of saying things, and now we are the best of friends because we decided to talk about the matter through PM's and Emails plus in the chat room. Perhaps this is the same type of situation. I have to admit that I have a trigger temper sometimes and respond before thinking. It is a problem I had hoped I had corrected after being gone so long but apparently not. I need to do more work on it. So, I apologize for flying off the handle. I just get upset when a company, like UP or any other (I believe NS had some kind of similar policy, and may still have about taking certain pictures of their locos), go so far as to worry about what is seen in a game. I mean c'mon Chuck, you gotta admit it is kind of silly. Ok, so they have a thing with their logo, but these locos are only seen by the user on his own computer. They aren't out in the open where everyone can see them. If some other railroad or vehicle were to use a similar design to theirs, I could understand them sueing but really Chuck, what are they afraid of in a game? Are they charging a fee for this agreement? That might explain it but I just fail to understand it being used in a game, at least freeware. Now, I can see it as far as payware is concerned, as far as using their logo is concerned, but not that it has to be clean, or this way or that. If it depicts the loco in its real state of usage I just fail to understand the hoopla. Doesn't the company have better things to do with their time? I wonder if they have hired a game loco watcher just to nab the offenders? Totally ludicrous in my humble opinion.Ok, Chuck, again, my bad, I overreacted and I apologize, but you do have a way of saying things sometimes that, at least on page, sound like a put down. I never go after people here in the forum, when I do have something to say, unless I feel I am being attacked first. And in this case I felt I was. You say you weren't and I will take you at your word. I know how much you have given to the community here and to the game and so I will retract my statement in the interest of civility. And I will trust that you have stated the truth in your reply to me. So, let's remain civil to one another. I will try to remember this the next time you make one of your comments. I am getting long winded again and probably distracting from the main theme of this post. To the rest of you, I also apologize. I don't mean to be long winded but just am. Just ignore my posts. Probably most do anyway. Usually if I have something helpful to say or useful to the community, it is short. (hmmm, wonder why that is?)Just read those. I need to stop taking this so seriously I guess.Again, my apologies to the original poster, to Chuck S, and to the rest of you. I will do my da..est to try to lighten up. I promise.RangerWestern Maryland Railroad
Gone, but not forgotten!

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Don't sweat it Tim!
Ain't nothing but a thing! As they say around here...
We can agree to disagree about UP's motivation for their Licensing Policy.... Chuck Schneider

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Jan-23-04 AT 12:14 PM (EST)

>I just happen to believe that UP has the right to control
>distribution/use of their copyrighted trademark(s) that they
>have spent literally millions of dollars developing.... Chuck, a couple of questions: 1) Do you believe they have the same right to control marks they did not develop?2) Do you believe they have the right to control marks composed entirely of artwork whose copyright protection lapsed long ago moving it into the public domain (e.g., any art created before 1921 and/or artwork created before 1950 for which renewal was not sought)?3) Do you believe they have the right to control marks composed entirely of geographic phrases or geographic phrases plus public domain art?4) Do you believe they have the right to control marks that have been freely used (i.e., uncontested use) in other markets by other companies for the last 70 years?Don't wanna pick a fight, just would like to know your thoughts on each of these 4 questions.Dave NelsonWP mainline, Oakland-Stockton: 100% complete;
SP mainline, Oakland-Stockton: 20% complete;
Aug 1950

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Dave the short answer is, That if they purchased those RRs and all of their rights and possessions then yes they do....
They would have the same rights to those logos as say the WP would if it still existed...
And I don't know if that "stuff" is really in the Public Domain as several sets of Lawyers are fighting over that as we speak.....
I'm curious as to how that will turn out....Chuck Schneider

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Jan-23-04 AT 01:19 PM (EST)

Fair enough answer for question #1 but it stands to reason that your answer has to be predicated on whether those railroads actually were in possession of these trademarks, now doesn't it? And IMO that's what the fuss is all about.I can assure you anything created in or before 1921 is in the public domain (e.g., Western Pacific artwork) and that the Trademark office will not allow a mark composed of common geographic locations (e.g, "Missouri, Kansas, Texas"), nor a mark that uses geographic reference but is misleading to consumers relative to the products of the company (e.g., the Southern Pacific is south of the equator and the Western Pacific is near Japan and railroads don't operate in the ocean).What I don't know is whether the trademark office will accept a mark composed of artwork taken from the public domain. Common sense says no but this is about the law. Go figure.If UP were to create new artwork and trademark that, fine by me. Ditto for artwork and logos for which they can show were under copyright protection in 1978 (when the Micky Mouse changes to copyright law were done). But so long as the public domain issue is unexplained to me I have a real hard time buying into their program for anything else.Dave Nelson

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Copyright and trademark are quite differnt, but a few of thoughts about trademarks:1. Trademarks are applied to a specific usage. In the case railroads, trademarks have been issued for something like "Transporation Services". It is only in the last year or two that UP has applied to have these trademarks for model trains, toys, etc.2. If a trademark is not used in commerce for some period (2-3 years I think) it is considered abandoned. UP has been painting a handful of freight cars with "Heritage" logos, but it is questionable as to whether this would be considered sufficient. While UP is making a big deal about "Branding", I have not noticed any effort in trade publications or anywhere else to promote "Western Pacific" brand railroad services. 3. The courts do make a distinction between use of a trademark in creative art vs. "merchandise". Creating a model or painting of a locomotive IS different from slapping a decal on a coffee cup.4. Dilution. If your company and the predecessor companies took no action against model railroad manufacturers in the last 70 years, hasn't dilution for that usage already occured?Ron
http://www.railwaystation.com

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

On the subject of trademarks, I worked for Harley-Davidson for seven years and we became educated about trademarks!First of all, the lawyers are not a bunch of meanies out to squash the little guy. H-D, and anyone else with a trademark that they value (and yes, they can literaly have dollar value in a company financial statement) MUST by law, actively defend it or they can lose claim to it forever.We didn't like coming down on the Mom & Pop bike shops, but we had to.Does H-D make $ on trademark licensing? Sure, and they are very particular to ensure that poor products don't "cheapen" the image. But trademark licensing was not a core business sector and they would have defended the trademark anyway, as I said because they have to.UP probably faces the same issues.krswen

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Thank You Ken!I've been trying to make exactly this point and I feel like I am talking to a post somedays!Chuck Schneider

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

I understand defending a trademark, but to go as far as telling someone exactly what they can put out, down to fine details, in a game model, is a bit ludicrous IMHO. No one is going to put out a retail product (game add on, I am talking about) that doesn't depict UP in its normal state. If they did then the add-on simply wouldn't sell. As for freeware, unless someone is depicting UP in an obnoxious way, like putting a picture on the side of their loco of some movie (I hate that), then I just can't understand the hoopla. Perhaps that is what they are afraid will happen, I don't know, but I just have trouble with things like that when it comes to a game. It is just a game, UP! Just a game! Lighten up. Besides, look at all the free publicity you are getting. Ranger Western Maryland Railroad
Gone, but not forgotten!

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

The fact that they do not want models which realistically depict real locomotives and equipment underscores what I've been saying for years. Models, whether platic or computer rendered are artful expressions and are protected by the 1st Amendment.Ron
http://www.railwaystation.com

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

In the license agreement they do state that they want it to look and appear as close to the real engine as possable. so yes they did put that in there as well. but I dont think that they will pick about the little things.
Shortly after I wrote the first post on this I sent UP an email and asked them about the clean engine part of it. I got a reply from them about my repaint and they told me that the engine dosnt have to be as clean as the one that I have done, that they are aware that in the way that I reskin the engines with photos, that it will be impossable for me to find realy clean engines to get photos of.... So that some road dirt is alright, but I think what they are meaning is excessive road dirt where the engine is almost blackened from running.
I think that what they are consirned about its if we do an engine that the logos are so defiled that it is nearly unreadable.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

So I guess this is acceptable - Before UP gets their hands on it!

Dwight / MSTS NG Goose#6
RGS Work Goose

Attachments

http://www.train-sim.com/dcforum/User_files/401168576fd355ac.jpg

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

I'm guessing that it is graffiti (a serious problem for railroads these days) that really bothers them. A good example of something they would likely censor is PWRS's HO & N scale model of UP covered hopper #78994 (see Model Railroader Sept 2003 p 29). The model was based on an actual photograph of a UP hopper. Under the UP slogan "We Will Deliver", a disgruntled employee added "Pay Cuts".Understand that I REALLY hate graffiti - it is a dangerous and destructive crime. However, I cannot condone censorship of a realistic depiction.Trademark law was not created to give corporations and individuals the power to censor free expression. It was designed to protect consumers from counterfeit goods and services. Would a reasonable person be confused by the products offered by Walthers and the services offered by UP?Ron
http://www.railwaystation.com

Alert | IP

[ Home | MSTS Forum | MSTS FAQ | File Library ] Copyright © 2004 by Nels Anderson. All Rights Reserved.