A statement on The Titfield Thunderbolt.

[phil-b259]

49 minutes ago, Chris116 said:

Only Rail's don't sell Hornby. Hattons are a tier three shop but Hornby could be very pleased they do still stock some Hornby as Hornby may need to dump them somewhere if things go wrong for them.

 

Firstly, if 'things go wrong for Hornby' (legally speaking) then they will be prevented from dumping them on ANYBODY. Please remember the issue here is IP rights and if they are found to be infringed the Hornby will have no choice but to scrap the offending sets - not pass them on to someone else to sell.

 

However given the sets haven't actually been made yet there is still ample time to revisit them and remove the offending IP items thus allowing Hornby to produce a 'generic' Titfield set if the really want too.

 

As I said earlier:-

 

Redesign the box art (easy)

Design / borrow from their existing range another compartment coach to dump on the Loriot wagon (hard)

Remove the hanging basket details from the brake van (easy to medium difficulty)

 

 

[Coryton]

11 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

In the context of UK LAW they are Toys! You can call them what you like (and Hornby etc obviously do) but when it comes to IP rights then both the Rapido and Hornby will be considered toy manufacturers by StudioCannals legal team.

 

Now you are correct to say that when it comes to toys for very small children / toddlers / babies there are additional requirements (mainly to do with the ability to swallow small parts or the composition of the paints / plastic used given the tendency for toys to be chewed). However these requirements are in effect just a more stringent subset of the legal rules which apply to all toys rather than being a stand alone category as it were.

 

Lead solder was outlawed in the the production of toys LONG before moves were made to get rid of it more generally reflecting the perceived higher risks to children compared adults using non toys.

 

True - but if you actually bother to search the WTO rules you will find that the nearest category a railway model item would fall into if it were not classed as a toy attracts customs charges.

 

There was some discussion on this thread IIRC which illustrated just how complex the issue is.

 

Thanks for an informative response to my post which wasn't mean to come across as rude even if it did.

 

I agree that customs charges are complex...and not always applied in a consistent manner either.

 

 

 

 

[Coryton]

5 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Firstly, if 'things go wrong for Hornby' (legally speaking) then they will be prevented from dumping them on ANYBODY. Please remember the issue here is IP rights and if they are found to be infringed the Hornby will have no choice but to scrap the offending sets - not pass them on to someone else to sell.

 

They could, presumably, legitimately sell them to Rapido...

[Chris116]

6 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Firstly, if 'things go wrong for Hornby' (legally speaking) then they will be prevented from dumping them on ANYBODY. Please remember the issue here is IP rights and if they are found to be infringed the Hornby will have no choice but to scrap the offending sets - not pass them on to someone else to sell.

 

However given the sets haven't actually been made yet there is still ample time to revisit them and remove the offending IP items thus allowing Hornby to produce a 'generic' Titfield set if the really want too.

 

As I said earlier:-

 

Redesign the box art (easy)

Design / borrow from their existing range another compartment coach to dump on the Loriot wagon (hard)

Remove the hanging basket details from the brake van (easy to medium difficulty)

 

 

I was not thinking of the scenario where they had to trash them on a legal judgement. More a case of having been allowed to sell them, they then found everybody had bought the Rapido version and they needed to get rid of them to recoup at least some of their costs.

[phil-b259]

3 minutes ago, Coryton said:

 

They could, presumably, legitimately sell them to Rapido...

 

Well yes, technically that would be permissible from an IP perspective - though Rapido would then need to cover up any references to Hornby on the merchandise and in any case why would they want to do that when they have their own in house product to sell? Its not as though Rapido have only just started development on its models and can short cut the development process by selling re-badged Hornby stuff is it.

[colin smith]

Is anyone contemplating the possibilities of using Lion and the Hornby stock* as a basis for modelling the early railways of the 1830s, 40s and 50s? 

For me it's one of the more interesting eras in this country's railway development and very underrepresented on the modelling scene.

 

*I know the Hornby stock is something of an 'interpretation'.

[Compound2632]

3 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

re-badged Hornby stuff

 

Which would not, on current showing, be the quality we expect from Rapido.

[phil-b259]

8 minutes ago, Coryton said:

 

I agree that customs charges are complex...and not always applied in a consistent manner either.

 

 

Indeed.

 

What we need to remember is that what the law says (and things like tax, customs charges, IP rights etc are all fundamentally all rooted in laws) about something may be very different from what the rest of society thinks. The most famous situation is the concept of 'Common sense' which the population at large embrace - but which simply cannot exist in a legal sense - the closest you can get is the famous 'duck test'.

 

Therefore Where a dispute, or question of what is owed in taxes / charges comes into play it is necessary to consider the situation from a legal perspective and not appearances (or marketing slogans like 'detail scale models') which do not have any force in law.

[phil-b259]

13 minutes ago, Chris116 said:

I was not thinking of the scenario where they had to trash them on a legal judgement. More a case of having been allowed to sell them, they then found everybody had bought the Rapido version and they needed to get rid of them to recoup at least some of their costs.

 

True - but one step at a time.

 

Its by no means certain that Hornby will be able to produce them in the first place!

[RichardT]

1 hour ago, Din said:

instead of an interesting, but perhaps ill branded, steampunk range?

Gosh, the steampunk range - I'd almost forgotten about that.  Something else that was a waste of time and effort for very little return didn't seem to feature in this year's Hornby announcement.

 

Sorry - OT on the TT thread.

 

Richard

[colin smith]

Am I reading this right? It's from Hornby's website: https://uk.Hornby.com/products/trains-film-seen-titfield-thunderbolt-train-pack-era-1-r30093

What it appears to say is that this is NOT a model of the Thunderbolt. Instead, it's actually a model of Lion masquerading as Thunderbolt. Now, my main interest is writing novels so I'm used to metafiction but I haven't seen metafiction applied to model railways before. Presumably, Hornby could take their GWR Hall, paint it red and stick on a nameplate and say it's a model of Olton Hall masquerading as the Hogwarts Express. 

NB. I'm currently taking courses in proofreading. I wonder if I could interest Hornby in my services.

Edited January 12, 2022 by colin smith
Added the wrong link

[Din]

9 minutes ago, colin smith said:

Am I reading this right? It's from Hornby's website: https://uk.Hornby.com/products/trains-film-seen-titfield-thunderbolt-train-pack-era-1-r30093

What it appears to say is that this is NOT a model of the Thunderbolt. Instead, it's actually a model of Lion masquerading as Thunderbolt. Now, my main interest is writing novels so I'm used to metafiction but I haven't seen metafiction applied to model railways before. Presumably, Hornby could take their GWR Hall, paint it red and stick on a nameplate and say it's a model of Olton Hall masquerading as the Hogwarts Express. 

NB. I'm currently taking courses in proofreading. I wonder if I could interest Hornby in my services.

 

They did get away with Olton Hall, mostly because she was in use outside the films in red as "herself" but in the Harry Potter inspired livery. This is flying hilariously close to the sun.

[Compound2632]

58 minutes ago, colin smith said:

What it appears to say is that this is NOT a model of the Thunderbolt. Instead, it's actually a model of Lion masquerading as Thunderbolt. 

 

Now, that's an interesting philosophical question. It seems to me, as a naive realist, that the locomotive in the film is Lion masquerading as Thunderbolt. The concept (Platonic ideal, if you like) of Thunderbolt exists only in the book/screenplay. Just as, for example, in Some Like it Hot, we see Marilyn Munroe masquerading as Sugar Kowalczyk; we don't see the "real" Sugar Kowalczyk, since she is a fiction. Or to take another example closer to the present discussion, consider a Lego minifigure of Indiana Jones. It has been stated that Harrison Ford is of all human beings the most widely represented as a 3D figure after Jesus Christ, thanks to all the collectibles from the Star Wars and Indiana Jones film franchises (there are Lego minifigures of Han Solo too, of course). For that claim to be true, the minifigures must be representations of Harrison Ford masquerading as Indie or Han - all anybody has ever seen is Ford masquerading as these characters; the characters themselves are fictions.

 

So, I conclude that if Hornby say they are producing a model of Lion masquerading as Thunderbolt, then they are doing nothing different to what Rapido are doing, producing a model of Lion masquerading as Thunderbolt. Thunderbolt itself is a pure literary fiction and could take whatever form best pleased the fancy of your mind's eye as you read the screenplay. The makers of the film have simply narrowed the field of imagination by inserting Lion as a stand-in for your idealised Thunderbolt, influencing your expectations; just as, say, my ideal mental image of Bobbie from The Railway Children, formed when I first read Edith Nesbit's text, has subsequently been irrevocably modified by seeing Jenny Agutter in the classic film version.

Edited January 12, 2022 by Compound2632
Improved grammar.

[Covkid]

2 hours ago, Bernard Lamb said:

Just wait until next year.

We will probably have The Great Bear from Hornby.

With the tag line. "Inspired by Paddington".

Bernard 

 

2 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

I hope so.

 

Would save me about £400 trying to find a Gibson one.....

Jason

 

You need to wait until Rails of Sheffield announce it.  They are good at niche GWR express one-offs aren't they ?

[Sadnerd]

1 minute ago, Covkid said:

You need to wait until Rails of Sheffield announce it.  They are good at niche GWR express one-offs aren't they ?

And then choose between that an the Hornby one announced an hour later?

[colin smith]

14 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Now, that's an interesting philosophical question. It seems to me, as a naive realist, that the locomotive in the film is Lion masquerading as Thunderbolt. The concept (Platonic ideal, if you like) of Thunderbolt exists only in the book/screenplay. Just as, for example, in Some Like it Hot, we see Marilyn Munroe masquerading as Sugar Kowalczyk; we don't see the "real" Sugar Kowalczyk, since she is a fiction. Or to take another example closer to the present discussion, consider a Lego minifigure of Indiana Jones. It has been stated that Harrison Ford is of all human beings the most widely represented as a 3D figure after Jesus Christ, thanks to all the collectibles from the Star Wars and Indiana Jones film franchises (there are Lego minifigures of Han Solo too, of course). For that claim to be true, the minifigures must be representations of Harrison Ford masquerading as Indie or Han - all anybody has ever seen is Ford masquerading as these characters; the characters themselves are fictions.

 

So, I conclude that if Hornby say they are producing a model of Lion masquerading as Thunderbolt, then they are doing nothing different to what Rapido are doing, producing a model of Lion masquerading as Thunderbolt. Thunderbolt itself is a pure literary fiction and could take whatever form best pleased the fancy of your mind's eye as you read the screenplay. The makers of the film have simply narrowed the field of imagination by inserting Lion as a stand-in for your idealised Thunderbolt, influencing my expectations; just as, say, my ideal mental image of Bobbie from The Railway Children, formed when I first read Edith Nesbit's text, has subsequently been irrevocably modified by seeing Jenny Agutter in the classic film version.

 

I would say that my mental image of Bobbie from The Railway Children was somewhat affected by seeing Jenny Agutter in Walkabout, but that's another issue.

Anyway, yes, it's a bizarre take on things and reminds me of this 

[Covkid]

1 hour ago, phil-b259 said:

However given the sets haven't actually been made yet there is still ample time to revisit them and remove the offending IP items thus allowing Hornby to produce a 'generic' Titfield set if the really want too.

 

How do you know Hornby didn't already "press the button" to quote Simon Kohler's catchphrase ?

1 hour ago, Coryton said:

They could, presumably, legitimately sell them to Rapido...

Do you really think Jason Shron would buy Hornby products commercially ?

1 hour ago, phil-b259 said:

Well yes, technically that would be permissible from an IP perspective - though Rapido would then need to cover up any references to Hornby on the merchandise and in any case why would they want to do that when they have their own in house product to sell? Its not as though Rapido have only just started development on its models and can short cut the development process by selling re-badged Hornby stuff is it.

Do you really think Jason Shron would buy Hornby products commercially ?

[ruggedpeak]

1 hour ago, Coryton said:

Thanks for an informative response to my post which wasn't mean to come across as rude even if it did.

 

I agree that customs charges are complex...and not always applied in a consistent manner either.

To clarify, model trains are not toys under the Toy Safety Directive. Here's the relevant extract:

 

 

That is why on Hornby, Bachmann etc models it states they are not suitable for under 14's and Bachmann for example have the words "Authentically Detailed Model" in big type on the back of their boxes. No 'proper' model train can meet the Toy Safety Directive rules so is not a toy under this legislation. That is of course entirely separate from customs classification and other legislation which may or may not define them as toys.

 

 

 

[LimboBrit]

2 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

True - but if you actually bother to search the WTO rules you will find that the nearest category a railway model item would fall into if it were not classed as a toy attracts customs charges.

For trade between the UK and EU scale models fall under a zero tariff

[phil-b259]

7 hours ago, Din said:

 

They did get away with Olton Hall, mostly because she was in use outside the films in red as "herself" but in the Harry Potter inspired livery. This is flying hilariously close to the sun.

 

Painting Olton Hall in red / making a model of it does not infringe the WB Harry Potter IP as long as (1) you don't call / refer to it as 'Hogwarts Castle' and (2) the totem on the tender is the 'British Railways' one and not 'Hogwarts Railways'

 

You should note that the basic premise of painting a loco red cannot be covered by IP rights and because the lining the loco carries in the film is basically the same as the publicly owned 'British Railways' used then neither can it be considered IP of WB

 

If we translate this to the Locomotive in the Titfield Thunderbolt film , no StudioCanal IP rights are infringed if it is named 'Lion' (or not given a name at all) rather than' Thunderbolt'. Similarly if the livery it wore in the film was also carried during its time on display in a museum or when restored by the LMS in the 1930s then that livery is not protected by IP rights either. 

Edited January 13, 2022 by phil-b259

[phil-b259]

36 minutes ago, Covkid said:

How do you know Hornby didn't already "press the button" to quote Simon Kohler's catchphrase ?

 

 

We don't - but lets put it this way, if Hornby give a release date, then its not rocket science to work backwards and make an educated guess as to when the factory will actually start to make the things.

 

Unless Hornby are planning to put them on sale from late spring I think its fair to say that its not too late to halt production.

 

As for Simon's 'catchphrase - that appeared in an entertainment based TV programme (it was hardly a warts and all Dispatches style investigation was it) and seeing as the whole reason Hornby agreed to be involved is to create a positive spin about the company, anything which does appear in it (and one presumes Hornby had an say in the final edit) is not necessarily how things are done when the cameras aren't rolling.

Edited January 12, 2022 by phil-b259

[phil-b259]

 

12 minutes ago, LimboBrit said:

For trade between the UK and EU scale models fall under a zero tariff

 

But pretty much all UK RTR is not made within the UK or the EU - its made in China by 3rd parties and as such would be subject to significant extra customs charges when the likes of Hornby / Bachmann / etc bring it into the UK or EU.

 

By making sure their products fall under the WTO 'Toy' category there is zero duty to be paid worldwide - however IIRC 'scale models' do in fact attract duty under WTO rules!

 

So there is a financial incentive for Hornby to make sure they are classed as a 'toy' company, even if most of their products fall outside the scope of the toy safety legislation as highlighted by ruggedpeak above.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[The Stationmaster]

4 hours ago, jaym481 said:

There have been several mentions that the project wouldn't be profitable for Hornby. Is that actually the case? Jason Shron isn't the sort to take on a project if it would be a drain on the company coffers. He's cancelled a few projects when the pre-order book didn't reach certain thresholds. It's why Rapido doesn't ask for money up front.

4 hours ago, Chris116 said:

Only Rail's don't sell Hornby. Hattons are a tier three shop but Hornby could be very pleased they do still stock some Hornby as Hornby may need to dump them somewhere if things go wrong for them. I just hope that by the time that happens Rapido have sold all they have made.

 

I should also add that I hope a solution to the current situation that both sides are happy about is found and both sell well.

Yes but don't forget that even Tier 1 retailers are being told that they can't order the Hornby Titifield pack.  So it doesn't really matter who does or doesn't sell Hornby if none of them can order the thing!  So what do they do if they have customer interest extending to people saying they want to pre-order one?  Simples, if they are one of Rapido's considerable number of appointed British retailers it's obvious what they will say in order to make sure that they get a sale.

 

Smoking hole in Hornby's foot or are the being cautious in case they end up on the wrong end of some unwelcome correspondence from Studio Canal's legal eagles?   Doesn't matter because what ever might be to come they've effectively thrown a sale in Rapido's direction.

 

And don't forget, even without considering the £70 price difference, Rapido in total is a small organisation which means much lower overheads so theri model will get into profitability and making a contribution to the company's bottom line before Hornby reach that state.

[The Stationmaster]

3 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Firstly, if 'things go wrong for Hornby' (legally speaking) then they will be prevented from dumping them on ANYBODY. Please remember the issue here is IP rights and if they are found to be infringed the Hornby will have no choice but to scrap the offending sets - not pass them on to someone else to sell.

 

However given the sets haven't actually been made yet there is still ample time to revisit them and remove the offending IP items thus allowing Hornby to produce a 'generic' Titfield set if the really want too.

 

As I said earlier:-

 

Redesign the box art (easy)

Design / borrow from their existing range another compartment coach to dump on the Loriot wagon (hard)

Remove the hanging basket details from the brake van (easy to medium difficulty)

 

 

If they are being upfront about their November delivery date (Covid, shipping and container availability, and so on, permitting) then these things won't even have been made yet.  And they are not going to be made until after production ramps up following CNY because they won't need to be shipped until August.  And of course it all depends on what else the factories are doing and to what extent one factory might have to get their mates down the road to do the moulding work for them and so on ad infinitum and assuming any factory is getting enough electric power for more than a couple of hours a day.

 

Hornby might well be queue jumping other items in the production queue (as they would seem to have done with the Terrier)  but will they get production underway before CNY whatever happens?  Maybe we now know why the 78XXX is running somewhat behind time?

[adb968008]

1 hour ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Painting Olton Hall in red / making a model of it does not infringe the WB Harry Potter IP as long as (1) you don't call / refer to it as 'Hogwarts Castle' and (2) the totem on the tender is the 'British Railways' one and not 'Hogwarts Railways'

Does that apply to 4920 Dumbleton Hall as well ?

 

(retreats back hastily from that other pending firework).