Hornby 2022 - Trains on Film

[Steamport Southport]

13 minutes ago, mdvle said:

It is possible Bachmann have let their Hogwarts license expire - a search of the Bachmann US website shows no Hogwarts products listed.

 

Given that Harry Potter is fading into the past that wouldn't be a surprise.

 

Is it?  

 

They're opening a new theme park in Japan with the centre piece being 4920 masquerading as that Hogwarts monstrosity. 

 

Some of us are actually livid....

 

 

Jason

[Andy Hayter]

2 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

You don't seem to have any clue about how licencing works!

 

A company will usually licence Intellectual Property on a region or country by country basis - not an 'Entire World' basis.

 

As such Bachmann have the rights from Warner Bros to sell Harry Potter merchandise in many places round the world - but NOT in the UK. Equally Hornby cannot start importing their HP sets into north America as they don't have the necessary WB rights there.

 

This approach will generally bring in more revenue for the IP holder as companies compete to secure the rights, it also sidesteps allegations of creating a worldwide monopoly on merchandising and help keep the business regulators at bay.

 

 

Indeed and that is why DVDs (anyone remember those?) had regional encryption.

[Ozexpatriate]

2 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

4920 masquerading as that Hogwarts monstrosity

Why ever would they bother? The theme park in Florida (Universal Studios) built a partial replica for their 1:1 static model.

[mdvle]

2 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

Is it?  

 

They're opening a new theme park in Japan with the centre piece being 4920 masquerading as that Hogwarts monstrosity.

 

It won't go entirely away, but with no new books or films (the spin-off series don't count, no Hogwarts) the interest has died down significantly - enough that the demand for merchandise like train sets means it isn't worth it.

 

Theme parks are different in part because they are feeding the nostalgia of the adults who grew up with Harry - certainly when my brother took his family to Universal Orlando and they came back it was my brother/sister-in-law who seemed more excited by the visit.

 

[TEAMYAKIMA]

6 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

Is it?  

 

They're opening a new theme park in Japan with the centre piece being 4920 masquerading as that Hogwarts monstrosity. 

 

4 hours ago, Ozexpatriate said:

Why ever would they bother? The theme park in Florida (Universal Studios) built a partial replica for their 1:1 static model.

I don't wish to be pedantic, but my guess is that the attraction built by WB in Japan is similar to the UK original and that it places great emphasis on authenticity and so they want everything as close to the original film as possible. 

 

WB do not see their UK based studio tour as a theme park. I accept that it is a subtle difference but they see their visitor attraction as an interactive museum and not a theme park. Universal in florida is all about rides, whereas the WB facility is all about how the films were made - there is a large education department which gives lectures to school groups. 

 

I worked at the UK attraction for a very long time and over the years many gimmicky ideas were suggested which were turned down with "We don't do that sort of thing, that's the kind of thing that Universal does." 

 

I have absolutely no wish to start a separate discussion on this subject and so let's please not take this any further, all I am saying is that in WB's eyes their attraction is not a theme park, it is more serious than that. Whereas, Universal's attraction certainly is a theme park. 

[Dan Griffin]

I think Hornby are playing a dangerous game. With their well publicised financial difficulties of recent years looking to be behind them, pulling a stunt like this may cost them dearly, both monetary and otherwise. 

 

I do not buy for a moment that they can get around copyright by slapping 'inspired by' on the box, otherwise they would have a blue Anthropomorphic steam loco in the range 'inspired by classic children tales'.  Mattel and Bachmann would not stand for it. 

 

The railway children set clearly shows the Studio Canal branding. Could Studio Canal cancel this contract if Hornby are found to be at fault? The other sets  do not have the branding yet show pictures from the film, and have the title across the packaging. 

 

Speaking to a legal friend of mine, they have said copyright cannot be bypassed by saying it is 'inspired by' otherwise there would be representations of all sorts for sale.  For example Lego have the Star Wars rights, so Playmobil, for example,  cannot release a circular space 'falcon' and say its inspired by Star wars. they would not get away with it.

 

The next few weeks/months will be interesting to see how it pans out, my money would go to Hornby quietly dropping the 'trains on film' range, it won't feature in next years catalogue and will remain a taboo subject that Hornby will conveniently  'forget'. 

 

They (Hornby) do seem to be getting a reputation for throwing a wobbly at the smaller manufactures, and trouncing others announcements with their own, Cavalex 91 and Rapido Titifield being just two examples. 

 

as they saying goes, those in higher places have further to fall!

 

 

[PhilJ W]

Very well put @Dan Griffin. I can see SK being shown the door if Hornby finds itself in trouble over this.

[Legend]

I still have this feeling that Simon Kohler is having a chuckle over all the fuss created by this . I think it’s likely he’s got the nod from Studiocanal given contacts they must have had over the Railway Children . I appreciate that puts Rapido in an unfortunate position , but what are they going to do , sue Studiocanal , I think unlikely.
 

This is based on the premise that no one would be that stupid to introduce a range without some sort of permission . No matter what you think of SK I can’t  see him being that stupid . He must have had years of experience of these deals with TTTE , Harry Potter etc  in addition the bigger Hornby group Scalextric, Airfix, Corgi all have experience of licensing deals . I just can’t see this company stumbling into an issue with this without prior consideration .

 

Whether it’s morally correct is another thing . And I think here people can vote with their wallets . 

[ruggedpeak]

4 hours ago, Dan Griffin said:

I think Hornby are playing a dangerous game. With their well publicised financial difficulties of recent years looking to be behind them, pulling a stunt like this may cost them dearly, both monetary and otherwise. 

 

I do not buy for a moment that they can get around copyright by slapping 'inspired by' on the box, otherwise they would have a blue Anthropomorphic steam loco in the range 'inspired by classic children tales'.  Mattel and Bachmann would not stand for it. 

 

The railway children set clearly shows the Studio Canal branding. Could Studio Canal cancel this contract if Hornby are found to be at fault? The other sets  do not have the branding yet show pictures from the film, and have the title across the packaging. 

 

Speaking to a legal friend of mine, they have said copyright cannot be bypassed by saying it is 'inspired by' otherwise there would be representations of all sorts for sale.  For example Lego have the Star Wars rights, so Playmobil, for example,  cannot release a circular space 'falcon' and say its inspired by Star wars. they would not get away with it.

 

The next few weeks/months will be interesting to see how it pans out, my money would go to Hornby quietly dropping the 'trains on film' range, it won't feature in next years catalogue and will remain a taboo subject that Hornby will conveniently  'forget'. 

 

They (Hornby) do seem to be getting a reputation for throwing a wobbly at the smaller manufactures, and trouncing others announcements with their own, Cavalex 91 and Rapido Titifield being just two examples. 

 

as they saying goes, those in higher places have further to fall!

 

 

But we are back into speculation of the precise details. You can't do a circular space 'falcon' inspired by Star Wars because the IP that arises from that was created by Star Wars, it did not exist prior to Star Wars. It is in simple terms 100% Star Wars. Similarly TTTE where the locos are clearly new and novel IP even if loosely based on real rolling stock.

 

The locos and rolling stock in Titfield Thunderbolt are not 100% new and novel and existed independently of the film. This is not a simple copying of the owner's entirely newly created IP. The coach body on the Lowmac may be an exception but even that is not clear - it is perfectly possible it was based on something that actually happened back in the day knowing how things could be cobbled together and if someone finds a photo of that then......If you look at vehicles and aircraft in computer games, they are licensed from the manufacturer not the users. Start a fight over 'Lion' and who knows who owns the original rights to the loco design? Won't be Studio Canal. Last thing anyone wants is someone popping up making a claim against Studio Canal, Rapido and Hornby! Plenty of people out their plundering forgotten IP rights.

 

Overall this doesn't mean that Hornby may not be at serious risk but this is a complex area of law and we are back to copyright v trademark, ownership of various sets of IP and their inter-relationship (original design of rolling stock, rolling stock as used/potrayed in the film etc) etc etc. It still seems like an odd move by Hornby that has clearly ruffled feathers but it does not necessarily follow they will be found legally liable. But even if they are not, they may wish they hadn't bothered.....

 

On the plus side, the younger members of the Hornby team like Montana will have a front row seat to what could be an interesting IP fight, great experience for their careers.

[Compound2632]

13 hours ago, Porcy Mane said:

Saucy.

 

No, no. Confusion. That's a road Rails of Sheffield have been going down - one we've been relishing watching.

[Titan]

33 minutes ago, Legend said:

 I think it’s likely he’s got the nod from Studiocanal given contacts they must have had over the Railway Children .

 

I cannot understand how people continue to think this,  It has been explicitly stated in the Rapido video that Studio Canal are very unhappy with what Hornby have done.  And it is worth reminding that this video has been produced with the endorsement and co-operation of Studio Canal themselves. So any notion that Hornby had even the slightest "nod" or any other kind of permission is not only false, it is completely impossible.

[AY Mod]

42 minutes ago, ruggedpeak said:

Start a fight over 'Lion' and who knows who owns the original rights to the loco design?

 

There is no 'fight' over Lion.

 

44 minutes ago, ruggedpeak said:

IP that arises from that was created by Star Wars, it did not exist prior to Star Wars. It is in simple terms 100% Star Wars.

 

And neither did 'Titfield Thunderbolt' until it was created by the writers and it is simply that name which is the subject of the issue so can we please stop the red herrings of the stock used?

[Dan Griffin]

44 minutes ago, ruggedpeak said:

But we are back into speculation of the precise details. You can't do a circular space 'falcon' inspired by Star Wars because the IP that arises from that was created by Star Wars, it did not exist prior to Star Wars. It is in simple terms 100% Star Wars. Similarly TTTE where the locos are clearly new and novel IP even if loosely based on real rolling stock.

 

The locos and rolling stock in Titfield Thunderbolt are not 100% new and novel and existed independently of the film. 

 

To quote your opening paragraph, that's where the 'inspired' wording comes in. No the Falcon did not exist before Star wars, but what I'm saying is no one can make a look-a-like and say its 'inspired' by Star wars. it would be a clear breach of copyright and IP. Same with releasing Lion as Thunderbolt as it was ONLY Thunderbolt in the film.  

 

and to say that the rolling stock in Titfield Thunderbolt are not 100% new is slightly incorrect. Before the film there was never a Loriot Y with a coach body on in use on a railway, it was only in the film. As mentioned before this design of wagon could be seen as IP rights to Studio Canal. 

[ruggedpeak]

1 minute ago, Dan Griffin said:

 

To quote your opening paragraph, that's where the 'inspired' wording comes in. No the Falcon did not exist before Star wars, but what I'm saying is no one can make a look-a-like and say its 'inspired' by Star wars. it would be a clear breach of copyright and IP. Same with releasing Lion as Thunderbolt as it was ONLY Thunderbolt in the film. 

That is my point, it is not the same as the Millennium Falcon at all. But I will leave it there.

 

[adb968008]

13 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

Is it?  

 

They're opening a new theme park in Japan with the centre piece being 4920 masquerading as that Hogwarts monstrosity. 

 

Some of us are actually livid....

 

 

Jason

Sits uncomfortable with me too.

 

in the 1970’s it was a very professional preservation group, with regular “Dumbleton Hall news” publications raising money for the loco. It was a volunteer effort end to end, including funding.

 

It seems a waste to me seeing it sat around at the SDR as it was, but it was at least “in care”. However being sold, it is alleged, without consultation of its membership, as a simple commercial transaction without regard for the above history sits unwell, if true. It means a mechanically complete loco has been sacrificed, when, with hindsight, several Barry wrecks could have recieved that funding in the 1980’s instead, and be running now. Alternatively a barry wreck could have been cosmetically restored for the role instead, of which there are a few, which, imo are at best, just aspirational restorations at this point.

 

Whats worse, justifying the sale by robbing it of bits to feed other Barry wrecks simply means 4920 is highly likely on a one way trip to Japan, as whoever brings it back is going to need to fund a lot of missing bits too..not that film studios have a good record on returning history anyway.. those Scotsman teak Gresley BGs were lost, but not before being parted out to make serving hatches as a restaurant…

 

Japanese engineers are very savvy, one steam loco there had its boiler removed and a compressed air pump fitted to operate it., which it successfully does. Another was cut up, and fitted with electronic gadgets to make a fully working full size, moving simulator.. fantastic in its own right, but it destroyed the fabric of the loco. 4920 is their property now to maximise potential in their own way, now and in the future.

 

All is lost now anyway, preservation is becoming just another business transaction, with profits off the back of volunteers (or someday in the future we may call them slaves)… 
 

Sadly I doubt it will be the last to leave our shores, steam around the world is mechanically poorer, and lesser volume than our own. As the UK diminishes economically, and with dwindling skillset in the hobby, other countries railway’s may yet feast on our collection of mechanically complete siding queens to bolster their own railway fleets in the future as a cheaper alternative than their own.

 

but anyway, we digress… onto more uplifting thoughts, such as Lion  in an “inspired by set”…

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 16, 2022 by adb968008

[Porcy Mane]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

No, no. Confusion. That's a road Rails of Sheffield have been going down - one we've been relishing watching.

 

For those who like accuracy, you're really milking it.

For those who don't do Sheffield you'e being a bit of a tartare.

[Sadnerd]

16 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

You don't seem to have any clue about how licencing works!

I don't know what you've read into my comment to prompt this condescending sentence.

 

To the comment that Bachmann could do a Harry Potter inspired train (by Hornby's interpretation of Inspired By...), I said they already have one.

 

It's not inspired by, it is a Harry Potter train, because they have a licence. And many other brands have a Harry Potter licence of some sort too, for different areas, at different times. Hence lots of Hogwarts Express models.

 

I've not said anything about that being in the UK, the US or 'Entire World'. Who are you quoting? I've not mentioned importing anything to anywhere.

 

I did say that with regard to the Thunderbolt, Rapido say the have exclusive licence. We should therefore expect to see only one TT model.

 

You seem to be arguing against a point I haven't made. 

 

[melmerby]

15 hours ago, Andy Hayter said:

 

 

Indeed and that is why DVDs (anyone remember those?) had regional encryption.

Which almost instantly got nullified by 'all region' players....

 

 

[Downendian]

18 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

You don't seem to have any clue about how licencing works!

 

A company will usually licence Intellectual Property on a region or country by country basis - not an 'Entire World' basis.

 

This is true for patent law, but this is a copyright issue and is covered by the Berne convention of which only a handful of countries are not signatories.

[mdvle]

4 hours ago, Legend said:

I still have this feeling that Simon Kohler is having a chuckle over all the fuss created by this . I think it’s likely he’s got the nod from Studiocanal given contacts they must have had over the Railway Children.

 

Whether given a nod or not, what matters is what is put on paper (or its modern electronic equivalent) as a binding legal agreement - and those legal agreements are evidence in any legal proceedings.

 

You can think whatever you want, but that is not how StudioCanal will operate - simply put IP licensing is very big business entertainment world and they aren't just going to cavalierly give "the nod" for a 3rd party to invalidate a legally binding agreement that they have with a different 3rd party - that would jeopardize the entire licensing business that rakes in some multiple of millions of dollars a year for them (and likely billions per year for the entire entertainment industry).

 

4 hours ago, Legend said:

I appreciate that puts Rapido in an unfortunate position , but what are they going to do , sue Studiocanal , I think unlikely.

 

Perhaps - but if StudioCanal do nothing, or are found to have encouraged Hornby, Rapido would be in a far firmer legal position given that StudioCanal will have done nothing to enforce at best, and actively encouraged the violation of at worst, a binding legal contract.

 

It may be, if this gets to the courts, that Hornby will be found to have found a way around the issue (perhaps in part due to the age of the IP and that it thus was as securely protected as a modern film would be).

 

But StudioCanal needs to go through that to get off the hook with Rapido.

 

4 hours ago, Legend said:

This is based on the premise that no one would be that stupid to introduce a range without some sort of permission . No matter what you think of SK I can’t  see him being that stupid . He must have had years of experience of these deals with TTTE , Harry Potter etc  in addition the bigger Hornby group Scalextric, Airfix, Corgi all have experience of licensing deals . I just can’t see this company stumbling into an issue with this without prior consideration .

 

Except as noted previously, companies and people behave stupidly all the time.

 

 

[melmerby]

1 hour ago, mdvle said:

 

You can think whatever you want, but that is not how StudioCanal will operate - simply put IP licensing is very big business entertainment world and they aren't just going to cavalierly give "the nod" for a 3rd party to invalidate a legally binding agreement that they have with a different 3rd party - that would jeopardize the entire licensing business that rakes in some multiple of millions of dollars a year for them (and likely billions per year for the entire entertainment industry).

 

As an example with Star Wars, Lucasfilm/Disney made more from the product licensing than they did from the films and the films were huge.

 

Studio Canal would not have acquired the Ealing archive so they could make money on film royalties, they would have seen the potential for product licensing, which gives a lot longer period over which to get earnings from it.

As a film studio they are on the small size but as the rights holder on various archives they are huge.

[MarkSG]

On 16/01/2022 at 08:17, Dan Griffin said:

IThe railway children set clearly shows the Studio Canal branding. Could Studio Canal cancel this contract if Hornby are found to be at fault? The other sets  do not have the branding yet show pictures from the film, and have the title across the packaging. 

 

I doubt the contract includes a clause allowing cancellation on those grounds. But, of course, it may well make StudioCanal less inclined to do deals with Hornby in future.

 

On 16/01/2022 at 08:17, Dan Griffin said:

 

Speaking to a legal friend of mine, they have said copyright cannot be bypassed by saying it is 'inspired by' otherwise there would be representations of all sorts for sale.  For example Lego have the Star Wars rights, so Playmobil, for example,  cannot release a circular space 'falcon' and say its inspired by Star wars. they would not get away with it.

 

The big difference here, though, is that Star Wars is covered by a large number of trade marks, which give much stronger protection than copyright. And because the franchise is still being expanded and new movies made, there are various design rights which are applicable. StudioCanal's problem with Titfield is that it doesn't have any trade marks, at least as far as I'm aware, and as a single movie made in the 50s with no recent sequels all the design right has long since expired. The name alone isn't protected, as it's too short to be subject to copyright, so provided Hornby don't use any actual material from the movie (eg, stills, or advertising artwork) then copyright is unlikely to be engaged.

 

That's why I think Hornby have concluded they've got enough wriggle room, because none of the usual grounds for IP infringement apply. StudioCanal's best recourse is likely to be an action for passing off, which doesn't rely on any copyright or trade marks. But that's a different thing, and a somewhat harder argument to make. Hornby may well feel that any such action is defendable.

 

 

[Aire Head]

10 minutes ago, Philip Jackson said:

I've seen it on youtube. the corridors are much wider to cope with the girth of the average yank

 

That's the problem with using 00 scale figures in HO scale stock 

[Legend]

You know standing back from this  you can see how big a misjudgement this has been.  I've said before that to me its inconceivable Hornby have done this without investigating consequences .....but who knows .

 

The thing is if they just had announced Lion , maybe with a set of coaches , everyone would have been happy and the whole 2022 Range launch would have been much better . Imagine everything from Lion to Flirt  with new mk3s , HST and Black 5 . A fantastic program that should have generated huge interest. One week on an the threads on most of the launch are disappearing down the lists . There seems to have been less interest in previous years . The only thing thats still appearing is this and the equivalent Rapido thread .   They really have tarnished the launch and I think their reputation .  If it really is one person thats responsible for everything, as suggested by the latest documentary , I'd say he's made a right hash of it !

 

[PhilJ W]

Has the Hornby 2022 catalogue been distributed yet? I haven't seen one yet in the usual stockists.

Edited January 17, 2022 by PhilJ W