Can someone explain to me the motive behind Union Pacific’s recent decision to require anyone using its trademark to apply for a license?
When I first heard about it, it sounded like it would be a positive thing, done just to improve its immage (given UP’s steam excursions and the like, I could believe that).
However, TRAINS’ most recent article would suggest to the contrary. I am particularly concerned about the rejection of calenders.
Is UP declaring war on rail fans? I can understand the desire to accurately portray its immage, but excluding a calendar? I am very concerned and would like to know any information/opinions you might have on the subject.
The article said the UP would license calenders for RR’s the UP has aquired (MP, DRGW, etc). The UP does put out it’s own calender. Maybe they don’t want any competition for a UP only calender.
Jeff
I’m no lawyer, but this is what I remember from business school:
For a company such as Union Pacific or Coca-cola the company name is a trademark asset of immense dollar value.
The legal principle is that the onus is on the trademark owner to demonstrate that he has taken due diligence to protect his trademark. If he doesn’t and the trademark becomes commonly used, such as in slang, they lose ownership of the trademark. And it’s not enough to sit back and claim ignorance, you have to demonstrate that you’ve been reasonably observant and proactive in challenging infringements. That’s why Hormel, for example squawks about the use of the word “spam”.
Any deviation from a scorched-earth, take-no-prisoners policy will be cited by a defence lawyer as lapse in this diligence. I remember studying cases where this defence has successfully worked.
This puts a company such as the UP between a rock and hard place. They have to follow a consistent policy in protecting their trademarks or they risk losing exclusive rights to it. On the other hand, by applying this policy too strictly it appears that they’re beating up on the little guy and risk bad publicity.
Thanks for your respone eastside (and thanks for not beating up on the new guy by saying this issue has been talked to death; how was I supposed to know?)
I am a lawyer, and understand what you are referring to. I still think it is the equivelant of cutting off your leg to spite your foot. It is important for railroads to be viewed with some fondness by the public, not just something that causes unnecessary noise and blocks crossings. Model railroading, train fans, and the like further the railroads cause in unquantifiable ways.
When the average voter says to me that they hate trains for the above reason, I say do you hate the fact that cruise control is now obsolete because of highway overcrowding, etc? Train fans educate the public about the importance of trains; given the increased amount of railroad/public interaction, I don’t think UP would want to lose this asset.
I’m just trying to take a balanced look ot the issue. To me it’s a sign of the times.
Until about 20 years ago, a railroad such as UP got mostly free publicity from toy makers, calendar printers, etc., and they could stick to their knitting and not spend money for lawyers. Both sides were happy. Railroads were different from other firms in that a lot of small companies were dependent on free use of their trademarks. With the changing legal climate, UP had to build infrastructure to manage their trademarks, a real distraction from running a railroad.
My guess is that the decision to be hard-nosed about trademark use is an indication that UP’s managers are only following the advice of their attorneys, not because they see them as potential revenue, which is probably infinitesimal compared to the rest of the railroad. Once a bureaucracy is in place, however, it often tries to justify its existence by recovering its costs through a revenue stream. Another way in which a bureaucracy justifies it existence is by managing its portfolio and pointing to its decisions as activity.
Union Pacific’s motive to have any manufacturer aquire a license is due to quite a few things that have happened to their image.One was someone was using their logo on an internet web site,WITHOUT the permission of the UP.Secondly,there was a person who had written a slogan on a freight car the said," You can’t spell UP without the word stupid in it". Then UP decided that since they have the slogan “Building America”,along with the American Flag in it,they wanted to protect that trademark,and any manufacturer that wanted to produce any kind of item WITH UNION PACIFIC on it,needed to have this license to make the product or face great consequences.Example;Lionel and Athearn,which are being sued for not having a license for producing a Union Pacific product,and apparently being accused of a licensing infridgment,which is making UP uncomfortable.Further to add to this,ALL the railroads and subsideraries that had belonged to the railroads that UP aquired(SP,CNW,MP,MKT,WP),now the Union Pacific wants trademarks for these railroads,and now UP is upset,due to that they can not get any type of trademark protection for these fallen flags,because the Union Pacific HAS NOT used the former railroad logos,icons,symbols,etc,etc,etc, within the past ONE year,and according to the trademark office,a company HAS to have used that logo in that length of time in order for it to be “protected”. So…since all this garbage has been going on now , Union Pacific is upping the ante,and now wants ALL products that are manufactured,that have Union Pacific on it,and/or the fallen flags of the raillines that they aquired,the UP wants a share of the profit of that item,from the manufacturer,and alot of model train companies are dropping the Union Pacific altogether,and will not be producing any type of item ever again.This same thing happened years ago with a different railroad,and it went on for 10 years before the railroad gave up,and kept its mouth shut. That railroad was the Chesapeke and Ohio.So,thats basically the run down of t
It’s interesting that Lionel is taking a 2 faced approached.
They refuse to be licensed by UP for the use of their trademarks but how long would it take them to go after someone who used Lionel trademarks on a commercial product without being licensed??
just like any other corporate America response. people who know nothing about the people or hobby of railroading, just doing their job. same is true of athearn, and others, no small time, friendly people, fulfilling their job descriptions, a few more dollars for licensing fees for up, why not, atheran will pass the costs to their customers…trademark infringement, its really called making another buck…up, bnsf, the corporate giants know nothing of hobbyist, its another day at work for them…
The licensing “will not” stop me from buying Railroad models,Im so die hard crazy about the BNSF that the licensing won’t bother me one bit.
[bow]BNSF[bow]