Topics

Pacemaker boxcar usage off-line of NYC - NYCSHS


James Yaworsky
 

--- In STMFC@..., Benjamin Hom <b.hom@...> wrote:

James Yaworsky wrote:
"Disclaimer: as a NYC-focused modeler, I like to see manufacturers release > NYC-specific models.

Hate to say it, James, but this state of affairs ain't going to happen until > NYC-focused modelers come out and actively support NYC-specific freight cars, > mot only through sales, but through demonstrating through publishing research > showing why NYC freight car prototypes are important, and actively pushing > prototypes through product development and cooperation with the manufacutrers. 
[snip]
None of this appears to be of any interest to the NYCSHS -[snip] 
You raise some interesting questions, Ben. I've been a member of the NYCSHS now for four years and am aware that it has a history of not being noted as "modeler-friendly". I'm not sure this is true today. It may have started off as mainly an ex-employee organization but obviously as time goes by, it has become less so. I think there are a lot of misconceptions floating around about it now. I believe the current leadership is making sincere and productive efforts to change those misconceptions.

I've certainly noticed the superior quality of many of the other railroad historical society web sites as regards the information available to modelers. The NYCSHS's main efforts have been focused on the quarterly newsletter, "Headlight", and there is a lot of good information along the lines you speak of in it. However, it's mainly members of the Society who benefit from it.

It appears to me that the NYCSHS's focus is much broader than the sorts of issues that would appeal to someone who is strictly a prototype model railroader. I started off with an interest in the NYC because it was the largest railroad in my home town, Windsor, Ontario; and because I was attracted by lightening stripes, Dreyfus Hudsons, and, yes, Pacemaker boxcars etc. At that stage, I knew little of the actual history of the railroad. For example, my only thoughts about Al Perlman were probably what a jerk he was for scrapping virtually all of the Central's steam locomotive fleet.

As I learned more about the "big picture" - how the Central system evolved, how it actually operated, what it accomplished, and how it ended up in Penn Central, my views about many things evolved and changed.

My views about Mr. Perlman certainly have changed considerably. The current issue of "Headlight" has a story by a man who started his career with the Central in its sales department under Perlman. I've never seen a more concise demonstration, based on this man's actual experiences, of why Perlman was a great railroad executive and how he turned the NYC from a stodgy "status quo" road in to a dynamic organization that had in many ways "turned the corner" and might very well have survived in some form if not for the Penn Central disaster. However, I must concede this article contains virtually nothing someone entirely focused on freight car details would find interesting... Despite this "defect", I confess I *still* found it a fascinating insight in to the NYC in the 1960's.

So, the NYCSHS is not just about models and model railroading. I imagine every railroad historical society will have a mix of goals, which will include a model railroader component. The mix of historic and modeler focus is perhaps more on "historical" rather than "modeler" in the NYCSHS than it is in the PRR or many other historical societies, but it is a mix that the current NYCSHS executive has identified as being desirable to shift towards more modeling info.

I know for a fact that NYCSHS members like Terry Link have been consulted by and actively assisted manufacturers on some of the NYCS-specific models that have come out the last few years.

Although I can certainly see that a large historical society pushing for a specific model might help attract a manufacturer's attention, it would seem to me that this is more important for supporters of smaller railroads than a giant like the NYC, Pennsylvania, Union Pacific, etc. Surely the manufacturers would realize that models from the giant railways are probably going to sell. Surely the manufacturers do more than just react to pressure from "special interest" groups. If NYCS items sell, surely manufacturers notice?

I'll
bet that there was little or no support provided by NYCSHS to the BLI NYC
USRA-design steel boxcar - the single most lacking model boxcar on any HO-scale
steam era layout.
I'm not so sure about that, but don't know for sure one way or the other. Unfortunately, the NYCSHS has not been adept at blowing its own horn. I do believe it is more active in these matters than is generally supposed. This belief is based on what people like Terry Link and Rich Stoving have told me.



With all due respect to Jeff English, Roger Hinman, and Terry Link, I just don't
see a whole lot of action from the NYC crowd.  Ask yourself, James - why is
there so much available for the PRR models, and so little available for the NYC?


Ben Hom
It's certainly a valid question, Ben. I just don't know the exact situation to be able to comment with authority on it - but I'm not sure anybody else does, either. All I can say for sure is that Terry Link is a personal friend and I do know for an absolute fact he's been consulted on several of the projects that have come out in the last few years.

As for the pros and cons of the NYCSHS, that's a big topic and one that is "off-topic" for this group. All I would like to say to anyone who is interested in these issues is - check it out for yourself. There's too many rumours and innuendos floating around.

If you have an interest in the NYC and want to see changes in the NYCSHS, then the only way that's going to happen is if you *join* and start getting involved. In other words, don't just grouse about it - *do* something about it!

Jim Yaworsky


seaboard_1966
 

Let me pipe in here if I can. I work with WrightTRAK and we were looking at doing a project, a NYC car. I contacted the NYCHS and was told, yes, they have the drawings we are looking for. We would have to purchase the CD set, I don't remember what that cost was, but it was NOT cheap. This set included all sorts of information that we did not need. Then they said that because we were using information gathered from them that we would be limited to the amount of product we could produce from those drawings. If we wanted to produce more we were obligated to pay them what amounted to a royalty to do so. You gotta be friggin kidding me. Needless to say that project did NOT get done. This is by far the most restrictive policy that we have ever come across. In this instance it cost NYC modelers a car that we are certain would have been well received and it badly needed.

Denis Blake
WrightTRAK Railroad Models.



2011 Central Ohio Prototype Modelers Meet, May 19-21

http://www.facebook.com/pages/manage/#!/pages/Central-Ohio-Prototype-Modelers-Meet/326645470797

-----Original Message-----
From: James Yaworsky
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2011 10:34 AM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Pacemaker boxcar usage off-line of NYC - NYCSHS

--- In STMFC@..., Benjamin Hom <b.hom@...> wrote:

James Yaworsky wrote:
"Disclaimer: as a NYC-focused modeler, I like to see manufacturers release
> NYC-specific models.

Hate to say it, James, but this state of affairs ain't going to happen until > NYC-focused modelers come out and actively support NYC-specific freight cars, > mot only through sales, but through demonstrating through publishing research > showing why NYC freight car prototypes are important, and actively pushing > prototypes through product development and cooperation with the manufacutrers.
[snip]
None of this appears to be of any interest to the NYCSHS -[snip]
You raise some interesting questions, Ben. I've been a member of the NYCSHS now for four years and am aware that it has a history of not being noted as "modeler-friendly". I'm not sure this is true today. It may have started off as mainly an ex-employee organization but obviously as time goes by, it has become less so. I think there are a lot of misconceptions floating around about it now. I believe the current leadership is making sincere and productive efforts to change those misconceptions.

I've certainly noticed the superior quality of many of the other railroad historical society web sites as regards the information available to modelers. The NYCSHS's main efforts have been focused on the quarterly newsletter, "Headlight", and there is a lot of good information along the lines you speak of in it. However, it's mainly members of the Society who benefit from it.

It appears to me that the NYCSHS's focus is much broader than the sorts of issues that would appeal to someone who is strictly a prototype model railroader. I started off with an interest in the NYC because it was the largest railroad in my home town, Windsor, Ontario; and because I was attracted by lightening stripes, Dreyfus Hudsons, and, yes, Pacemaker boxcars etc. At that stage, I knew little of the actual history of the railroad. For example, my only thoughts about Al Perlman were probably what a jerk he was for scrapping virtually all of the Central's steam locomotive fleet.

As I learned more about the "big picture" - how the Central system evolved, how it actually operated, what it accomplished, and how it ended up in Penn Central, my views about many things evolved and changed.

My views about Mr. Perlman certainly have changed considerably. The current issue of "Headlight" has a story by a man who started his career with the Central in its sales department under Perlman. I've never seen a more concise demonstration, based on this man's actual experiences, of why Perlman was a great railroad executive and how he turned the NYC from a stodgy "status quo" road in to a dynamic organization that had in many ways "turned the corner" and might very well have survived in some form if not for the Penn Central disaster. However, I must concede this article contains virtually nothing someone entirely focused on freight car details would find interesting... Despite this "defect", I confess I *still* found it a fascinating insight in to the NYC in the 1960's.

So, the NYCSHS is not just about models and model railroading. I imagine every railroad historical society will have a mix of goals, which will include a model railroader component. The mix of historic and modeler focus is perhaps more on "historical" rather than "modeler" in the NYCSHS than it is in the PRR or many other historical societies, but it is a mix that the current NYCSHS executive has identified as being desirable to shift towards more modeling info.

I know for a fact that NYCSHS members like Terry Link have been consulted by and actively assisted manufacturers on some of the NYCS-specific models that have come out the last few years.

Although I can certainly see that a large historical society pushing for a specific model might help attract a manufacturer's attention, it would seem to me that this is more important for supporters of smaller railroads than a giant like the NYC, Pennsylvania, Union Pacific, etc. Surely the manufacturers would realize that models from the giant railways are probably going to sell. Surely the manufacturers do more than just react to pressure from "special interest" groups. If NYCS items sell, surely manufacturers notice?

I'll
bet that there was little or no support provided by NYCSHS to the BLI NYC
USRA-design steel boxcar - the single most lacking model boxcar on any HO-scale
steam era layout.
I'm not so sure about that, but don't know for sure one way or the other. Unfortunately, the NYCSHS has not been adept at blowing its own horn. I do believe it is more active in these matters than is generally supposed. This belief is based on what people like Terry Link and Rich Stoving have told me.



With all due respect to Jeff English, Roger Hinman, and Terry Link, I just don't
see a whole lot of action from the NYC crowd. Ask yourself, James - why is
there so much available for the PRR models, and so little available for the NYC?


Ben Hom
It's certainly a valid question, Ben. I just don't know the exact situation to be able to comment with authority on it - but I'm not sure anybody else does, either. All I can say for sure is that Terry Link is a personal friend and I do know for an absolute fact he's been consulted on several of the projects that have come out in the last few years.

As for the pros and cons of the NYCSHS, that's a big topic and one that is "off-topic" for this group. All I would like to say to anyone who is interested in these issues is - check it out for yourself. There's too many rumours and innuendos floating around.

If you have an interest in the NYC and want to see changes in the NYCSHS, then the only way that's going to happen is if you *join* and start getting involved. In other words, don't just grouse about it - *do* something about it!

Jim Yaworsky






------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links









No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.894 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3516 - Release Date: 03/19/11 03:34:00


James Yaworsky
 

--- In STMFC@..., "Denis Blake" <dblake7@...> wrote:

Let me pipe in here if I can. I work with WrightTRAK and we were looking at
doing a project, a NYC car. I contacted the NYCHS [snip] Needless to say that
project did NOT get done. This is by far the most restrictive policy that
we have ever come across. In this instance it cost NYC modelers a car that
we are certain would have been well received and it badly needed.

Denis Blake
WrightTRAK Railroad Models.

This is distressing to hear and as a member of the NYCSHS all I can say is I don't believe the general membership of the Society knew or would approve of the way this was handled.

I am reporting it to some of the "modeler-friendly" executive members and intend to do everything I can to see nothing like this ever happens again.

Jim Yaworsky


pullmanboss <tcmadden@...>
 

Denis Blake:

Let me pipe in here if I can. I work with WrightTRAK and we
were looking at doing a project, a NYC car. I contacted the
NYCHS and was told, yes, they have the drawings we are looking
for. We would have to purchase the CD set, I don't remember
what that cost was, but it was NOT cheap. This set included
all sorts of information that we did not need. Then they said
that because we were using information gathered from them that
we would be limited to the amount of product we could produce
from those drawings.
That makes no sense. I have no problem with institutions charging whatever they want for access to or copies of their information, and I certainly understand royalty fees based on publication quantity - when you publish original drawings or photos. But when you use original drawings or photos only as reference materials to produce models, I don't see how the holding institution can restrict the "amount of product".

I work with the Newberry Library and am very familiar with their fee structure and terms of use. I have redrawn a multitude of floor plan, underneath equipment and side elevation drawings from Pullman originals in the Newberry files and am not in violation of the Newberry's terms of use when those (re)drawings show up in kit instructions. What am I missing when it comes to the NYCHS?

Tom Madden


Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
 

It's more a matter of what "they" are missisng: an understanding of intelectual property laws, particularly with regard to copyrights. Not uncommon, unfortunately. In the military vehicle world there are several libraries claiming copyright to photographs that have the US Army Signal Corps emblem in the corner!

(Government photographs are "born" in the public domain. It's not that the Government claims copyright and lets us use it free, it's that they are not protectable at all.)

KL

----- Original Message -----
From: pullmanboss

I work with the Newberry Library and am very familiar with their fee structure and terms of use. I have redrawn a multitude of floor plan, underneath equipment and side elevation drawings from Pullman originals in the Newberry files and am not in violation of the Newberry's terms of use when those (re)drawings show up in kit instructions. What am I missing when it comes to the NYCHS?


hacketet <hacketet@...>
 

I noticed some comments about the NYC historical society. They apparently aren't very eager to engage the model RR community. That is unfortunate because modelers are a sorce of a lot of potential income. I have been a member of the C&O HS for many years and although I live a considerable distance away, I've visited the archives several times and have participated in a couple of volunteer work sessions.

The society actively promotes the model railroad hobby. It is good for modelers and provides substantial income to the society. You may have noticed the large number of C&O prototype models produced over the last few years. There have also been many special run models made specifically for the society and sold through their on line store

http://www.chessieshop.com/

and at their store front in Clifton Forge.

http://www.cohs.org/

A few years ago they had ammased sufficient funds to build the C&O Heritage Center which will soon be home to C&O 614.

http://www.candoheritage.org/

This whole thing was started in 1979 with a type written (most of us remember type writers) news letter. Why any historical society would pass on this source of income is beyond my understanding.


Bruce Smith
 

Kurt,

I would remind you that if you do not control the copyright on
something, then the way to "control" it is by restricting access. Thus,
if the NYCHS decides that they wish to control access to a drawing that
they own, but for which they do not hold the copyright, they are well
within their rights to require that anyone aquiring copies from them
sign an agreement that requires the purchaser to do whatever NYCHS
dictates in order to gain access, including paying royalties on
subsequent models. The requirements detailed by Denis indicate that
someone or a group at the NYCSHS think that somehow the NYCSHS'
resources are a "cash cow" that should be milked.

OTOH, the PRRT&HS and the PRRT&HS Modeling Committee strive to assist
manufacturers to identify exactly those drawings that might be needed
for a given project and the PRRT&HS even offers a manufacturers
membership which provides discounted rates on access to drawings in the
society's collection. No royalty agreements are asked for and no
royalties are paid. Although the PRRT&HS does not request them, model
are sometimes provided by manufacturers to the PRRT&HS which then
raffles them at the annual meeting.

This is not a "red team" versus "green team" thing, as the PRRT&HS was
in the same situation as the NYCSHS 15-20 years ago, when modelers felt
decidedly unwelcome by the "powers that be". However, some members,
mostly younger modelers, stuck it out and gradually changed the focus of
the PRRT&HS to included modelers (in addition to employees and
historians) and the society is definitely the better for it. Hopefully
the NYCSHS can continue to make progress in a similar direction.

Regards
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL

"Kurt Laughlin" <fleeta@...> 03/19/11 9:17 PM >>>
It's more a matter of what "they" are missisng: an understanding of
intelectual property laws, particularly with regard to copyrights. Not
uncommon, unfortunately. In the military vehicle world there are
several
libraries claiming copyright to photographs that have the US Army Signal

Corps emblem in the corner!

(Government photographs are "born" in the public domain. It's not that
the
Government claims copyright and lets us use it free, it's that they are
not
protectable at all.)

KL

----- Original Message -----
From: pullmanboss

I work with the Newberry Library and am very familiar with their fee
structure and terms of use. I have redrawn a multitude of floor plan,
underneath equipment and side elevation drawings from Pullman originals
in
the Newberry files and am not in violation of the Newberry's terms of
use
when those (re)drawings show up in kit instructions. What am I missing
when
it comes to the NYCHS?



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links


Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
 

That's true: There's no legal limitation on signing a ridiculous contract.

I wonder why these "cash cow" farmers don't realize that things aren't worth what you think they are, rather only what someone is willing to pay for them. They don't seem to be making much money sitting in a file cabinet.

KL

----- Original Message -----
From: Bruce Smith
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2011 2:16 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Pacemaker boxcar usage off-line of NYC - NYCSHS



Kurt,

I would remind you that if you do not control the copyright on
something, then the way to "control" it is by restricting access. Thus,
if the NYCHS decides that they wish to control access to a drawing that
they own, but for which they do not hold the copyright, they are well
within their rights to require that anyone aquiring copies from them
sign an agreement that requires the purchaser to do whatever NYCHS
dictates in order to gain access, including paying royalties on
subsequent models. The requirements detailed by Denis indicate that
someone or a group at the NYCSHS think that somehow the NYCSHS'
resources are a "cash cow" that should be milked.

OTOH, the PRRT&HS and the PRRT&HS Modeling Committee strive to assist
manufacturers to identify exactly those drawings that might be needed
for a given project and the PRRT&HS even offers a manufacturers
membership which provides discounted rates on access to drawings in the
society's collection. No royalty agreements are asked for and no
royalties are paid. Although the PRRT&HS does not request them, model
are sometimes provided by manufacturers to the PRRT&HS which then
raffles them at the annual meeting.

This is not a "red team" versus "green team" thing, as the PRRT&HS was
in the same situation as the NYCSHS 15-20 years ago, when modelers felt
decidedly unwelcome by the "powers that be". However, some members,
mostly younger modelers, stuck it out and gradually changed the focus of
the PRRT&HS to included modelers (in addition to employees and
historians) and the society is definitely the better for it. Hopefully
the NYCSHS can continue to make progress in a similar direction.

Regards
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL

>>> "Kurt Laughlin" <fleeta@...> 03/19/11 9:17 PM >>>
It's more a matter of what "they" are missisng: an understanding of
intelectual property laws, particularly with regard to copyrights. Not
uncommon, unfortunately. In the military vehicle world there are
several
libraries claiming copyright to photographs that have the US Army Signal

Corps emblem in the corner!

(Government photographs are "born" in the public domain. It's not that
the
Government claims copyright and lets us use it free, it's that they are
not
protectable at all.)

KL

----- Original Message -----
From: pullmanboss

I work with the Newberry Library and am very familiar with their fee
structure and terms of use. I have redrawn a multitude of floor plan,
underneath equipment and side elevation drawings from Pullman originals
in
the Newberry files and am not in violation of the Newberry's terms of
use
when those (re)drawings show up in kit instructions. What am I missing
when
it comes to the NYCHS?

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links


Schuyler Larrabee
 

I sort of hate to get into this since copyright issues crop up on STMFC from
time to time and tend to get into long threads which don't really solve
anything.



BUT,



The NYCSHS can control access to a drawing all they want by requiring that
you pay a fee for reproduction. Not reproduction rights, but simply for
reproduction, getting a print made and mailed to you. IMHO, they then have
ZERO rights to tell you what you can do with that print, whether it's a
photo print, a drawing, an order, a letter, or any other sort of document.
They can ask that you credit the Society, which is easy enough to do and a
common civility, but if you want to use a drawing to make a master model,
which is then cast in resin, or make an injection molding die, so you can
crank out a thousand of some box car or whatever, they have no rights to
require any sort of profit split or anything else. UNLESS they have a
legitimate copyright in the document to begin with, meaning it was created
after a specific date and they received, specifically, the copyright when
they acquired the item. And even then, it's not so clear cut as all that.



I created drawings of the ERIE's 0-6-0s. (OK, a peculiar obsession of mine,
I admit) by getting drawings from at least four different historical
societies/archives/collections. There is a lot of work involved in doing
this. One literally becomes a "rivet counter." People asked me when I
found the time. My answer was between 10 PM and 2 AM for about two years.
The drawings were published in two issues of The Diamond, the ELHS magazine,
and carried the legend "Copyright Schuyler Larrabee (date)." I was advised
by competent legal counsel that the copyright only meant that someone
couldn't take those drawings and claim them as their own. It did NOT mean
that I had any rights to any models that might be created from the drawings.



Oh, sure, I might expect that a manufacturer might offer me a model or two
as appreciation for the work that I'd done and the assistance I would have
gladly offered during the development of the model. But they would not be
under any obligation to do so. It would only be through the good graces of
their hearts.



The agreement that NYCSHS would like you to sign is probably worthless and
an illegal, unenforceable contract.

SGL (NOT a lawyer, but good friends with several)



From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of
Bruce Smith
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2011 2:16 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Pacemaker boxcar usage off-line of NYC - NYCSHS





Kurt,

I would remind you that if you do not control the copyright on
something, then the way to "control" it is by restricting access. Thus,
if the NYCHS decides that they wish to control access to a drawing that
they own, but for which they do not hold the copyright, they are well
within their rights to require that anyone aquiring copies from them
sign an agreement that requires the purchaser to do whatever NYCHS
dictates in order to gain access, including paying royalties on
subsequent models. The requirements detailed by Denis indicate that
someone or a group at the NYCSHS think that somehow the NYCSHS'
resources are a "cash cow" that should be milked.

OTOH, the PRRT&HS and the PRRT&HS Modeling Committee strive to assist
manufacturers to identify exactly those drawings that might be needed
for a given project and the PRRT&HS even offers a manufacturers
membership which provides discounted rates on access to drawings in the
society's collection. No royalty agreements are asked for and no
royalties are paid. Although the PRRT&HS does not request them, model
are sometimes provided by manufacturers to the PRRT&HS which then
raffles them at the annual meeting.

This is not a "red team" versus "green team" thing, as the PRRT&HS was
in the same situation as the NYCSHS 15-20 years ago, when modelers felt
decidedly unwelcome by the "powers that be". However, some members,
mostly younger modelers, stuck it out and gradually changed the focus of
the PRRT&HS to included modelers (in addition to employees and
historians) and the society is definitely the better for it. Hopefully
the NYCSHS can continue to make progress in a similar direction.

Regards
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL

"Kurt Laughlin" <fleeta@... <mailto:fleeta%40verizon.net> >
03/19/11 9:17 PM >>>
It's more a matter of what "they" are missisng: an understanding of
intelectual property laws, particularly with regard to copyrights. Not
uncommon, unfortunately. In the military vehicle world there are
several
libraries claiming copyright to photographs that have the US Army Signal

Corps emblem in the corner!

(Government photographs are "born" in the public domain. It's not that
the
Government claims copyright and lets us use it free, it's that they are
not
protectable at all.)

KL

----- Original Message -----
From: pullmanboss

I work with the Newberry Library and am very familiar with their fee
structure and terms of use. I have redrawn a multitude of floor plan,
underneath equipment and side elevation drawings from Pullman originals
in
the Newberry files and am not in violation of the Newberry's terms of
use
when those (re)drawings show up in kit instructions. What am I missing
when
it comes to the NYCHS?

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links







=======
Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
(Email Guard: 7.0.0.18, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.17150)
http://www.pctools.com/
=======