sorabain Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 Hopefully the concept of "prior art" will rain on this parade. 2 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jjb1970 Posted May 1, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted May 1, 2019 Does anybody think that the irony of his last update whinging about ne'er do wells, libel and slander followed by a bilious rant about various things in this announcement is genuinely lost on him? You really couldn't make it up!! 1 11 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anglian Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 If he tries to enforce an action he might end up even more out of pocket. 2 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Markwj Posted May 1, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 1, 2019 I wouldn't have thought the burden of proof would be on him to prove his interlectual property (which he has produced) has been copied. If another company demonstrates their own cads and process through to production then how can it be his interlectual property. I wonder if he actually consulted a lawyer 1 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post 37505bstp Posted May 1, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted May 1, 2019 This just confirms to me that DJM is not a serious business and the guy behind it has zero customer awareness or aptitude for business. How come Bachmann, Hornby and now Hattons all manufacture the class 66, ditto Graham Farish and Dapol in N Gauge - the intellectual property surely belongs to EMD that designed and manufactured the real thing, shrinking the full size model down to a particular scale does not require any intellectual ability just design expertise. Looking at the current brands making the 66 shows that each shrink ray has resulted in a slightly different model but with all giving the general look of a 66. In my opinion what he may be allowed to protect is his mechanism or a specific feature like an opening/closing door but even that only if the design were unique and then copied verbatim by others and would this not come under design copyright not IP. As he says he has taken a severe financial hit getting this far, does he realistically believe he can fund a long legal battle if it came down to it - I don't think so. In another thread I revealed that I was a crowd-funder for his 92 - and some months ago I decided that I was writing my 'investment' off due to bad faith from DJM in consitently not delivering on what he promised and with an excuse for every situation this announcement just confirms my decision was a wise one. This is yet another unnecessary detour in the conspiracy laden world of DJM rather than get on with the job of fulfilling his stated aims and progressing to delivering actual models. Adios Mr Jones this latest diatribe comes across as petulant, immature and quite frankly as someone who has a large chip on both shoulders. 5 21 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdvle Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 8 minutes ago, Phil Parker said: The registration doesn't mention scale or Class for that matter. In theory, Dave has scuppered the Heljan 7mm model and now only he can produce a Class 17. His listings on the UK registered design website mention scale. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LBRJ Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 2 minutes ago, Anglian said: If he tries to enforce an action he might end up even more out of pocket. There is a very true, but somewhat cynical phrase that comes to mind. You may as well go out with a bang as a whimper Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sorabain Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 1 minute ago, mdvle said: His listings on the UK registered design website mention scale. The one for the class 17 was more vague "Model locomotive" submitted a few days before the others. https://www.registered-design.service.gov.uk/find/6043225 But it's a pitiful set of drawings, would fail any prior art test just by showing pics of an actual class 17 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Phil Parker Posted May 1, 2019 Administrators Share Posted May 1, 2019 2 minutes ago, mdvle said: His listings on the UK registered design website mention scale. Not all of them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PhilH Posted May 1, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 1, 2019 I suspect that DJM models will lose a good deal of any of the remaining goodwill it had prior to this announcement, indeed judging by comments on this and other forums there are certainly those who just simply don't trust him any more. What happens if his company folds up? Does he still retain the IP to these models which would mean that nobody would be able to produce them? 1 11 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig85 Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 It strikes me that he is throwing his toys out of the pram a little, as new companies have shown how to announce projects and then get them to market in a reasonable time scale. Craig 1 10 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anglian Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 What about a model produced in a different colour scheme that makes it look significantly different, to the lay person? I should think that this would also infringe fair competition laws. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold adb968008 Posted May 1, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 1, 2019 So for modern image: I wonder what the OEM manufacturer thinks about having a CAD image of their 1:1 full size piece of rolling stock IP registered by another company not in their control in miniature ? For reproduced rolling stock... How can a design of say a class 52 (made by Trix, Hornby, Lima, Dapol and Heljan) be retrospectively applied to “my brand new CAD” that I can draw tonight and register tomorrow ? Making a copy of a designed component is not new. Bachmann (Kader) has already done this, including the “square” axle ends for quartering and other components. Controversial move, This won’t pass without being tested. 3 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sorabain Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 This whole thing gives the impression that the company is struggling and he has been winding himself up and getting paranoid. The amount of monies mentioned as spent (£250k) exceeds the company's current assets etc. so unless he's been drawing a decent salary/paying himself a nice dividend perhaps this has been losing money for a while. If so the best choice might have been to retain some dignity and fold the company but end up working in the industry under the umbrella of another company. I fear that with all this he's destroying any prospect of being employed and he may be left without a company, or realistic prospect of employment. I fear this may not end well and a talent will be lost. 3 8 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Vistisen Posted May 1, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 1, 2019 Just now, Anglian said: What about a model produced in a different colour scheme that makes it look significantly different, to the lay person? I should think that this would also infringe fair competition laws. Oh dear, the "all Great Western locomotives look alike" could just mean that no new GWR models can be produced for decades 19 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Popular Post Bucoops Posted May 1, 2019 RMweb Gold Popular Post Share Posted May 1, 2019 Just now, Vistisen said: Oh dear, the "all Great Western locomotives look alike" could just mean that no new GWR models can be produced for decades Finally a positive 3 1 25 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Harvey Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 What a load of unmitigated tosh. Even the dyed in the wool DJM supporters must be scratching their heads. I have heard more convincing ideas from my terrapin. At least I know what small model railway business owners do when they are not designing and developing models. My interest in acquiring anything from DJModels has now officially evaporated. Probably a good idea to let him have email confirmation. 2 7 4 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
centraltrains Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 Unless it's just a clever marketing tactic to get us thinking about DJM! Do you think any of the modelling magazines will be publishing an article from this press release? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold adb968008 Posted May 1, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 1, 2019 4 minutes ago, Persephone said: I suspect that people who have crowdfunded him wont be seeing anything for the cash they have stumped up front, the tale of woe comes across as that of a business failing. I suspect there’s grounds for a potential claim in the offing here too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sorabain Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 6 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said: Have I missed DJM announce the class 306? sorry i've just claimed IP on the design, you'll have to wait at elast 5 years now 15 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Reid Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 16 minutes ago, micklner said: So why the hype about the big announcements etc , a very simple statement would have done. I doubt if many people will now take much notice of it anyway. How would that stop anyone making the same locomotive etc , at best it protects his design , how would that stop another company from making the same locomotive etc , it simply needs a different mechanism and a slightly different detail layout to get over this "protection" . Does he has his own money to start sueing other companies anyway . No idea either way , from what I have seen of his designs I doubt if I will ever buy anyway. I think you've hit the nail on the head Mick. I fear for Dave Jones, no matter what respect I do have for him, he's been sold a pup taking this line for protection of his Designs for a classs of toy. If you read the qualifiers for IP protection of the design by registering them does not mean that it automatically becomes your IP. Bear in mind he will have to be the one taking them to court I'm sure all the other manufacturers will just carry on, do what they always do, and await the registered letter from DJM hitting the doormat. Bob 3 8 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roy L S Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 24 minutes ago, LBRJ said: I don't think its hyperbole to suggest that this is basically the obituary for DJ Models as a manufacturer. Sadly I have to agree with this. I have had a lot of time for Dave over the years, and have been supportive including stumping up cash up front for some Claytons. However this announcement will do nothing to endear him to the modelling public at large and I suspect will turn many away, me included. A business is nothing without loyal and satisfied customers. Roy 1 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Widnes Model Centre Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 In other news.... Hornby have today announced that they have significantly lowered the RRP of their Class 92’s. 2 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Kris Posted May 1, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted May 1, 2019 I wonder how many shops that had signed up to be retailers of DJ models will still want to be associated with him after this announcement? 1 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcroz Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 (edited) 23 minutes ago, 37505bstp said: In my opinion what he may be allowed to protect is his mechanism or a specific feature like an opening/closing door ... The one thing that the CAD of the J94 that I looked at doesn’t show is the mechanism! Edited May 1, 2019 by dcroz Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts