Oh NO... MicroMark at it again!


Richard Brennan <brennan8@...>
 

Well I've had it with MicroMark...
They are now showing their true colors as a wholly unethical copycat/poacher of other's innovations.

As you may recall... last year it was NWSL tool clones...

Now they have announced:
"Another MicroMark Exclusive..."
"A fantastic new product ..."
"MicroMark directed its engineering talents into producing yet another revolutionary model building technique..."

Yea RIGHT. Yada... Yada... Yada...

Rather than give you the offending MicroSnark link...
You can find and order from the actual ORIGINATORS of the product...
Archer Fine Transfers:
http://www.archertransfers.com/SurfaceDetailsMain.html

Archer -are- the folks who took the time to work with modelers to develop ACR rivet details for "thin-skinned" box cars,
and the double-row rivet details for STMFC tank cars. Even their weld-line details can be in-era...

Let Woody Vondracek, Archer's owner...
know that we DO appreciate his efforts in originating the surface details concept, and in bringing to market multiple versions optimized for (STMFC) railroad models.


--------------------
Richard Brennan - San Leandro CA
--------------------


Brian Ehni <behni@...>
 

Wow. Doen't copyright cover Archer?

Thanks!
--

Brian P. Ehni

From: Richard Brennan <brennan8@...>
Reply-To: STMFC List <STMFC@...>
Date: Wed, 04 May 2011 13:09:13 -0700
To: STMFC List <STMFC@...>
Subject: [STMFC] Oh NO... MicroMark at it again!






Well I've had it with MicroMark...
They are now showing their true colors as a wholly unethical
copycat/poacher of other's innovations.

As you may recall... last year it was NWSL tool clones...

Now they have announced:
"Another MicroMark Exclusive..."
"A fantastic new product ..."
"MicroMark directed its engineering talents into producing yet
another revolutionary model building technique..."

Yea RIGHT. Yada... Yada... Yada...

Rather than give you the offending MicroSnark link...
You can find and order from the actual ORIGINATORS of the product...
Archer Fine Transfers:
http://www.archertransfers.com/SurfaceDetailsMain.html

Archer -are- the folks who took the time to work with modelers to
develop ACR rivet details for "thin-skinned" box cars,
and the double-row rivet details for STMFC tank cars. Even their
weld-line details can be in-era...

Let Woody Vondracek, Archer's owner...
know that we DO appreciate his efforts in originating the surface
details concept, and in bringing to market multiple versions
optimized for (STMFC) railroad models.

--------------------
Richard Brennan - San Leandro CA
--------------------









[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Brian Ehni wrote:
Wow. Doen't copyright cover Archer?
What would they copyright? The rivet spacing? You can't copyright an idea.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroad history


Brian Ehni <behni@...>
 

So, then, anyone can also just copy all of the Microscale catalog and get
away with it? After all, they are just miniature copies of the real thing,
too. That's wrong. Just my opinion.

Thanks!
--

Brian P. Ehni

From: Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
Reply-To: STMFC List <STMFC@...>
Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 13:58:53 -0700
To: STMFC List <STMFC@...>
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Oh NO... MicroMark at it again!






Brian Ehni wrote:
Wow. Doen't copyright cover Archer?
What would they copyright? The rivet spacing? You can't
copyright an idea.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
<mailto:thompson%40signaturepress.com>
Publishers of books on railroad history









[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Stokes John
 

I'm not sure what relevance this has to the subject, Brian. The catalog may be copyrighted, it is a publication and is put together with unique features and content. The decal of rivets is not in the same category. It is a product that makes a common image available for use on a model in a certain way. The process of making decals is not unique to Archer, maybe the process for making raised decals is, but I doubt it. Archer may have a patent on a specific process for making their rivet decals, but in the absence of that, and an actual violation of that use, there is no apparent legal problem here.

As has been noted previously, we live in a world in modeling of individuals and companies copying, the more exactly the better, objects that exist from drawings or the actual thing, and selling them to us. There are multiple copies of many types of diesel engines out there, the same with certain types of steam locos, and multiple-multiple copies of common box cars by dozens of manufacturers. There is no copy right on these. The plans maybe, or a photo, but not on the actual object itself. Dinging MM for aggressively marketing products that others also offer is not very productive or encouraging to new manufacturers or products, or cheaper prices and different goods and services. Again, the "American way."

Many people think we have a capitalistic system that encourages dog-eat-dog competition and copycatism runs high. That's the "good old American way." There are laws protecting legitimate property interests of course, but the overall all theme is open competition. And perhaps Archer is the contracted manufacturer of the MM product, who knows?

I do note that the MM product seems to be one sheet with multiple sizes and types of rivets and other features, while Archer offers multiple sheets in a wide array of sizes and types of products. I doubt that MM will cut into the Archer sales very much, but so what, that's what capitalism is all about, isn't it?

John Stokes
Bellevue, WA


To: STMFC@...
From: behni@...
Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 16:08:04 -0500
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Oh NO... MicroMark at it again!




























So, then, anyone can also just copy all of the Microscale catalog and get

away with it? After all, they are just miniature copies of the real thing,

too. That's wrong. Just my opinion.



Thanks!

--



Brian P. Ehni



From: Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>

Reply-To: STMFC List <STMFC@...>

Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 13:58:53 -0700

To: STMFC List <STMFC@...>

Subject: [STMFC] Re: Oh NO... MicroMark at it again!



Brian Ehni wrote:

Wow. Doen't copyright cover Archer?


What would they copyright? The rivet spacing? You can't

copyright an idea.



Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA

2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com

(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...

<mailto:thompson%40signaturepress.com>

Publishers of books on railroad history



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Brian Ehni <behni@...>
 

By "catalog" I mean their entire product line of decals, exactly as
Micro-Mark has.

Thanks!
--

Brian P. Ehni

On 5/4/11 4:47 PM, "John Stokes" <ggstokes@...> wrote:


I'm not sure what relevance this has to the subject, Brian. The catalog
may be copyrighted, it is a publication and is put together with unique
features and content. The decal of rivets is not in the same category. It
is a product that makes a common image available for use on a model in a
certain way. The process of making decals is not unique to Archer, maybe
the process for making raised decals is, but I doubt it. Archer may have
a patent on a specific process for making their rivet decals, but in the
absence of that, and an actual violation of that use, there is no
apparent legal problem here.

As has been noted previously, we live in a world in modeling of
individuals and companies copying, the more exactly the better, objects
that exist from drawings or the actual thing, and selling them to us.
There are multiple copies of many types of diesel engines out there, the
same with certain types of steam locos, and multiple-multiple copies of
common box cars by dozens of manufacturers. There is no copy right on
these. The plans maybe, or a photo, but not on the actual object itself.
Dinging MM for aggressively marketing products that others also offer is
not very productive or encouraging to new manufacturers or products, or
cheaper prices and different goods and services. Again, the "American
way."

Many people think we have a capitalistic system that encourages
dog-eat-dog competition and copycatism runs high. That's the "good old
American way." There are laws protecting legitimate property interests of
course, but the overall all theme is open competition. And perhaps
Archer is the contracted manufacturer of the MM product, who knows?

I do note that the MM product seems to be one sheet with multiple sizes
and types of rivets and other features, while Archer offers multiple
sheets in a wide array of sizes and types of products. I doubt that MM
will cut into the Archer sales very much, but so what, that's what
capitalism is all about, isn't it?

John Stokes
Bellevue, WA


To: STMFC@...
From: behni@...
Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 16:08:04 -0500
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Oh NO... MicroMark at it again!




























So, then, anyone can also just copy all of the Microscale catalog
and get

away with it? After all, they are just miniature copies of the real thing,

too. That's wrong. Just my opinion.



Thanks!

--



Brian P. Ehni



From: Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>

Reply-To: STMFC List <STMFC@...>

Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 13:58:53 -0700

To: STMFC List <STMFC@...>

Subject: [STMFC] Re: Oh NO... MicroMark at it again!



Brian Ehni wrote:

Wow. Doen't copyright cover Archer?


What would they copyright? The rivet spacing? You can't

copyright an idea.



Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA

2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com

(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...

<mailto:thompson%40signaturepress.com>

Publishers of books on railroad history


























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

Yahoo! Groups Links



Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Brian Ehni wrote:
So, then, anyone can also just copy all of the Microscale catalog and get away with it? After all, they are just miniature copies of the real thing, too. That's wrong. Just my opinion.
Don't misunderstand me, Brian. I didn't say I liked it, only that I don't believe there is an issue in copyright law.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroad history


Stokes John
 

Not to drag this out too much, but a goodly number of the Microscale decals are or have been also offered by other decal manufacturers over the years. Presumably they are exact copies of the real thing, so there is no creative product involved. The UP name and logo can be and has been copied by many folks, lately under license by UP, and you too could make up the same decals fs you wanted to, as long as UP would license to you. or most of the railroad names and slogans there is no such permission, and if you have a good photo you could do what Art Griffen does and make your own decal and sell it (subject to any copyright issues on the photo). So yes, MM could reproduce its own version of all the decal products that Microscale lists. Copied straight from their catalog might be a problem since it is a publication, but the same thing could be accomplished other ways and it would be legal, and in the current system, ethical.

John S.

To: STMFC@...
From: behni@...
Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 16:59:34 -0500
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Oh NO... MicroMark at it again!




























By "catalog" I mean their entire product line of decals, exactly as

Micro-Mark has.



Thanks!

--



Brian P. Ehni



On 5/4/11 4:47 PM, "John Stokes" <ggstokes@...> wrote:






















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Jack Burgess <jack@...>
 

John wrote:

[snipe]
<Dinging MM for aggressively marketing products that others also offer is
<not very productive or encouraging to new manufacturers or products, or
<cheaper prices and different goods and services. Again, the "American
<way."
<
<Many people think we have a capitalistic system that encourages dog-eat-
<dog competition and copycatism runs high. That's the "good old American
<way." There are laws protecting legitimate property interests of course,
<but the overall all theme is open competition.

I think the "American way" is seeing a product and producing something that
is significantly better, not just a cheap copy...cheap copies simply leads
to more American dollars being spent on foreign products. The NWSL Chopper
is made in America...the one MM sells is made, best guess, in China. Given
the price for the rivets MM is selling, I suspect those too are made in
China. I've sent a e-mail to Archer asking if they are manufacturing the MM
rivets as John suggested might be the case and, if I get an answer, I'll let
everyone know.

I for one, don't might spending a little bit more for a product made in
America. I also prefer to support a manufacturer who comes up with a new
idea rather than one who copies someone else's product, regardless of the
price differential. I think that approach is more encouraging to new
manufacturers...

Jack Burgess
Newark, CA


Stokes John
 

I agree with Jack's comments and will buy my decals from Archer, and my riveter and chopper from NWSL. I just made an off hand comment about Archer doing the decals for MM, hoping as much as anything, but I understand that is not the case.

I wish the real American way was as Jack suggests, but unfortunately the fact is that the bottom line is king and if someone can get it done overseas and undersell something made in America they will do so and crow about the private enterprise system being the best in the world. I was using the term "American way" with tongue in cheek. We do live in a global economy, and benefit in many ways from foreign made products, our hobby today would not be as diverse and rich in product otherwise, but yes, if there is a good American made product that delivers better value in the product itself, even if it costs more, I'll buy that. Maybe times will change, but I wouldn't hold my breath, Them that has the gold, likes to keep getting more and that ultimately drives where goods and serves come from today.

John S.
To: STMFC@...
From: jack@...
Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 15:24:32 -0700
Subject: RE: [STMFC] Re: Oh NO... MicroMark at it again!




























John wrote:



[snipe]

<Dinging MM for aggressively marketing products that others also offer is

<not very productive or encouraging to new manufacturers or products, or

<cheaper prices and different goods and services. Again, the "American

<way."

<

<Many people think we have a capitalistic system that encourages dog-eat-

<dog competition and copycatism runs high. That's the "good old American

<way." There are laws protecting legitimate property interests of course,

<but the overall all theme is open competition.



I think the "American way" is seeing a product and producing something that

is significantly better, not just a cheap copy...cheap copies simply leads

to more American dollars being spent on foreign products. The NWSL Chopper

is made in America...the one MM sells is made, best guess, in China. Given

the price for the rivets MM is selling, I suspect those too are made in

China. I've sent a e-mail to Archer asking if they are manufacturing the MM

rivets as John suggested might be the case and, if I get an answer, I'll let

everyone know.



I for one, don't might spending a little bit more for a product made in

America. I also prefer to support a manufacturer who comes up with a new

idea rather than one who copies someone else's product, regardless of the

price differential. I think that approach is more encouraging to new

manufacturers...



Jack Burgess

Newark, CA


















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Andy Harman
 

At 01:58 PM 5/4/2011 -0700, you wrote:

What would they copyright? The rivet spacing? You can't
copyright an idea.
Sure doesn't stop it from being tried all the time and millions spent on lawyers to fight it only to have it never go to court and get the slapping down it deserves.

Andy


Andy Harman
 

At 03:24 PM 5/4/2011 -0700, you wrote:
to more American dollars being spent on foreign products. The NWSL Chopper
is made in America...the one MM sells is made, best guess, in China.
Wherever it's made it can't be any worse than the Chopper. It's a piece of junk. Or at least the Chopper 1 and Chopper 3 are. The 2 is almost usable having an aluminum base. All are great ideas, but sloppily built and in the case of the 1 and the 3, very poor choice of materials. Way too much play in the cutting arm to get precise cuts, I can do better with a straightedge and a #11.

No great love for MM, but if their chopper is better built, I'd try it. Never have seen it though. A precision guillotine type cutter where the blade comes straight down would be a very handy tool, without the pull distortion you get with a swiveling chopper if you cut anything more than about .050" wide.

Andy


Tim O'Connor
 

But you CAN patent an idea, even a simple one. Depositing material
on decal film to represent rivets -- might be patentable. Far less
original ideas have been granted patents. (For example, Verizon
-patented- the idea of using a phone number to look up an internet
address. Nevermind that this was totally unoriginal -- they got the
patent and used it to sue Vonage and other competitors.)

Tim O'Connor

What would they copyright? The rivet spacing? You can't
copyright an idea.

Tony Thompson


nvrr49 <nvrr49@...>
 

What MicroMark is doing is also the Walmart way. Buy it cheaper off shore. So if you not going to buy from MicroMark you need to stop shopping at Walmart.

Kent in KC

--- In STMFC@..., Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote:


But you CAN patent an idea, even a simple one. Depositing material
on decal film to represent rivets -- might be patentable. Far less
original ideas have been granted patents. (For example, Verizon
-patented- the idea of using a phone number to look up an internet
address. Nevermind that this was totally unoriginal -- they got the
patent and used it to sue Vonage and other competitors.)

Tim O'Connor


What would they copyright? The rivet spacing? You can't
copyright an idea.

Tony Thompson


cj riley <cjriley42@...>
 

I once worked for a man that had a truly original way of manufacturing logs for homes. He patented the ides and then spent a major portion of his work day defending the patents and applying for them in other countries. It consumed him. There has to be a high value in the product to justify that time and expense.

CJ Riley

Bainbridge Island WA

--- On Wed, 5/4/11, Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote:






 











But you CAN patent an idea, even a simple one. Depositing material

on decal film to represent rivets -- might be patentable. Far less

original ideas have been granted patents.















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]