Corporate Blue Modern Traction?

yourdomingo · Post by **yourdomingo** » Thu Sep 12, 2002 7:43 am

in the quare brackets you write quote="name"

where name is the bit you want before the word "wrote"

the speech marks are important too

name wrote:hello

tony25 · Post by **tony25** » Thu Sep 12, 2002 3:23 pm

yourdomingo wrote:in the quare brackets you write quote="name"

where name is the bit you want before the word "wrote"

the speech marks are important too

Cheers! I learn something new every day in these forums!

yourdomingo · Post by **yourdomingo** » Thu Sep 12, 2002 6:59 pm

some time soon you'll learn something that's actually useful!

Kevo00 · Post by **Kevo00** » Thu Sep 12, 2002 10:44 pm

tony25 wrote:Hear! Hear! Does 'British Rail' count too?
(and why do i get just 'quote:' above the box instead of 'Kevo00 wrote:'? S'not fair!)

British Rail is a good name too! It sounds both modern and professional (and indeed iconic) - it wouldn't be the same if it was "British Trains" now would it? Trains sounds so ameturish. Can't see why the privatised companies couldn't use the word "rail" rather than "trains" - South West Rail, Central Rail both sound a bit better. And ScotTrains would never be as good as ScotRail!

saddletank · Post by **saddletank** » Fri Sep 13, 2002 9:01 am

buffy500 wrote:The lorries were done from photos taken by me of the truck I was driving that day, so in theory, the copyright of the images should be mine.

True for the image itself. But the logo/trade mark/company name on the lorry in the image is still the property of that company.

Anyhow as this is a not-for-profit use of the trade mark there isn't that much point in a company legal eagle fighting it. They'd just make themselves look twerps if they did. The file would no doubt come off this site but it would still be distributed around the world on various MSTS installations just by private email. Impossible to stop that.

buffy500 · Post by **buffy500** » Fri Sep 13, 2002 10:41 am

saddletank wrote:
True for the image itself. But the logo/trade mark/company name on the lorry in the image is still the property of that company.

This whole thing could end in trouble really, in theory we should not be using any livery or design not of our own imagination.
Maybe not for steamers, but most things I've done are modern enough that you could argue that the design of the rolling stock is still a copyrighted design too, therefore Bombardier, Adtrans and Alstom will be after me !

But as we have said, as none of this is for profit, there *should* not really be a problem. There is a probably a way of heading off any trouble, by adding the disclaimer that American Airlines now require to be used on any AA repaint. I can't find it at the moment.

buffy500 · Post by **buffy500** » Fri Sep 13, 2002 11:16 am

Following intervention by AA's legal team, the agreement was that the following text be added to any model using any AA trade mark or copyrighted image.

Disclaimer: "I acknowledge that American Airlines, Inc. (including its subsidiaries and affiliates) is the sole and exclusive owner of the trademarks, logos, designs, and trade dress constituting the Livery of American Airlines, American Eagle, TWA, TWE, BEX, Air Cal, and Reno Air. I affirm that I have not made, nor will I make in the future, any direct or indirect commercial use of these Liveries (or any other American Airlines intellectual property) in creating or distributing these Liveries for flight simulator programs or otherwise. If I give (as opposed to sell) the product of my hobby to others, I will include the following language in a conspicuous place: "Not for commercial sale. Not affiliated with or endorsed by American Airlines."

Now that we've bought this up again and I've found it, I will be adding something simiar to any new uploads I make.

I would suggest that anyone uploading a model that uses the livery of a company still trading should consider something similar too.

saddletank · Post by **saddletank** » Fri Sep 13, 2002 11:21 am

Out of interest did American Airlines get twitchy post Sept 11 last year, fearing that simulated models of planes bearing their markings might get used in rather sick simulations? Or was this furor pre-Sept last year?

madmardy · Post by **madmardy** » Fri Sep 13, 2002 11:27 am

thats a good idea i assume this will apply to liveried models of loco's as well.
i notice that no other airline company has moaned only AA
it make you think why things in this world happen to specific people /organisations

buffy500 · Post by **buffy500** » Fri Sep 13, 2002 11:31 am

I 1st read about this when I was first into FS2000, and as that was before MSTS, I'm 99.9% sure it was before anything like the hiddeous events of 9/11.
Its much more about analy retentive corporations than bad publicity, but its probably safe to say that if this had not already happened, 9/11 would have resulted in some form of crack down anyway.

Its all a bit OTT, but companies have some strange ideas, and I think we'd do well to at least consider the possibility that someones going to have a sense of humour failure about this at some point and start sending "cease and desist" letters to site or authors.

And to prove a point, have a read of this URL, (updated March 2001)

http://scobleizer.manilasites.com/2001/05/10

davep · Post by **davep** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 8:43 pm

[quote="Kevo00 I seem to recall that orignally GNER wanted to use the name GNR but someone must have pointed out to them that the GNR didn't go north of York (that was solid NER land) so they must have put the two company names together for a compromise! [/quote]

The reason GNER (Great North Eastern Railway) is GNER and not GNR (Great Northern Railway) is that the words GN were already in use by another railway company, namely WAGN (West Anglia Great Northern).

basildd · Post by **basildd** » Tue Sep 24, 2002 12:41 pm

I have had to remove Basil's picture temporarily from my avatar as he claims that the image is his intellectual property and therefore I should not be using it without his written permission. I have responded by withdrawing his gravy bone supply until the matter has been satisfactorily resolved.

Goingnorth · Post by **Goingnorth** » Tue Sep 24, 2002 1:16 pm

Remember US law is quite different from UK law. In fact the American situation is such that you can't take pictures (film or video) or other people and publish them. This situation does not exist in the UK, hence the massive long lens pictures; often seen in newspapers. These can fetch large amounts of money.

To quote the Euroloco pack

'The locomotives provided in this program is intended to show a representation of real locomotives. The logos and other trade marks displayed are the property of the companies they represent and are acknowledged as such.

The inclusion of these logos and trademarks does not imply any endorsement of the scenery by the companies they belong to or that the publisher or author of this scenery endorse them. We also recognise that some words, model names and designators, for example, mentioned herein are the property of the trademark holder. We use them for identification purpose only; this is not an official publication.'

Bottom line is a TOC is unlikely to issue a writ provided you acknowledge there intellectual property. In fact, unless I would say if it was against an individual or small company it would be a bad move. Not only would it cost then Â£Â£Â£ it was also probably claim negative press against them 'bully boy tactics' and deny them free publicity.

Other people's intellectual property is use all the time and companies enforce it only when they lose significant amounts of revenue.

Foe example BT hold the IP to internet hyperlink technology. Technically anyone using them (IE anyone with a website) is breaking the law and a fee is payable to BT. They have considered going to law to enforce this BTW.

The other IP copyright up for legal challenge at the moment is the JPEG compression format...again used by the web, digital cameras and much more. Again a fee is payable the Japanese company that holds the copyright.

Bottom line is we've probably all broken the law. Companies will only enforce IP when they will lose money and will sent you a polite letter/email first and ask you to agree to their terms. Your unlikely to end up in court, simply because the sum of your estate is unlikely to cover their legal costs.

madmardy · Post by **madmardy** » Tue Sep 24, 2002 8:59 pm

as rob said in the UK
you can take pics of anyone or anything except military
and there is nothing anyone can do about it, but you can't use someones voice without permission hmmm

basildd · Post by **basildd** » Wed Sep 25, 2002 6:12 am

tony25 wrote:It's a long shot, but here goes................
Is anybody thinking of (or currently undertaking) skinning some modern UK engines in Corporate Blue? Whenever i see the likes of 58's, 60's and 66's etc in real life, i can't help but constantly wonder what these locos would look like all blue with yellow ends. Its becoming an obsession! (or have i just never grown up?) I know its never going to happen with EWS in reality, so i'd love to see some fantasy repaints for MSTS!
I HEREBY LAY DOWN THE CHALLENGE!

Well to appease you and the large logo fans, my boy Casper knocked this up last night for a bit of fun:

Atomic Systems

Corporate Blue Modern Traction?

Why GNER is GNER and not GNR

Re: Corporate Blue Modern Traction?