DJ Models Announcement 01/05/19

[Vistisen]

His phrase:

 

"Well, if read correctly it could be a complete end to duplication of models, as those who IP them first will literally be in the ‘driving seat’."

 

Means that no matter how terrible my model is, no one is allowed to make a better one. I suggest a total boycott of DJM. If it was Microsoft banning other companies from making a web browser they would get sued within seconds. He might only be a small player, but he should still act like an adult. He wants to ban competition  and enforce a monopoly based on a fantasy that he actually will get these models to the shops..

 

If I were Hornby, once I'd stopped laughing, I would simply patent every potential model!

 

Edited May 1, 2019 by Vistisen

[Markwj]

Another thought he has just said he has IP'd all his models including some not yet announced. If anyone knows how to navigate the system we could find his release plans for the future. 

[woodenhead]

3 minutes ago, mdvle said:

So this appears to be his listing (if the link works):

 

https://www.registered-design.service.gov.uk/find/mibc2je9/92393612/designsbyowner

 

That lists the 1361, 14xx, 02, D600, Class 92, Class 71, J94 in OO and the Class 92 in N.

 

Note that he is registering them as a "registered design" category

So he is claiming models he was commissioned to deliver by Kernow as his own now including one he lost because he didn't actually deliver it and Kernow had to go it alone.

[Wolf27]

If anyone wants an N Gauge 17, sorry, it ain’t gonna happen this millennium.

[sorabain]

I was going to follow through with my crowdfunding on a few 92s out of a feeling of obligation.

 

I'm now out (consider the deposits a loss and lesson learned)

 

Ordering from the competition who seem to be spending time getting the model loco into production rather than going loco themselves.

[woodenhead]

I wish he had announced the Fell now, it would have been a more welcome announcement than this.

[PhilH]

I've always felt a certain sympathy for the bloke believing him to be unfairly maligned by his detractors.

 

Not so sure now...

[KDG]

So he's IP'd his CAD.

 

So what. That stops somebody ripping off his CAD.

 

He can't IP the original 1:1scale prototype. Somebody else does another CAD using different software, on a different computer.......all rubbish.

[Anglian]

I think the lawyers will have a field day with this. At what point in the development of a model does the IP apply to? Do CAD files count? What minor differences count as allowable or an infringement?

 

Take the current Hornby/Rails Terrier model, who got there first, does public announcement count or does landing the product on the shelves become the final arbiter? Who has IP? Who decides if there is enough difference between them to allow both to go to market. If a leading maker with deep pockets produces CAD for every single UK locomotive over the next few months can they claim IP even if a mould hasn't been made?

Currently Accurascale have really impressed me with their approach of just getting on with the job and producing fabulous models. I don't see any good coming of this announcement and wait to see how other manufacturers react. 

 

I can't imagine a legally enforceable position where say Revell can't sell a 1/72 scale Spitfire because Airfix already do, ditto model railways. If there were unique aspects of a design, then yes they can be protected but the broad notion of copying reality – no. When you look at copyright law there are certain things, such as words in common usage, that can't be copyrighted.

 

 

[centraltrains]

Can you copyright models of something which isn't your original design in the first place?

[LBRJ]

I don't think its hyperbole to suggest that this is basically the obituary for DJ Models as a manufacturer.

 

It is also not overly cynical to suggest that the failed company is seeking financial reimbursement (as they may put it) through legal channels.

[Colin_McLeod]

If Dave registers a design then three years later his model is not yet produced, does that mean  that no one else can produce such a model either?

[micklner]

     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. 

[Vistisen]

Just think if Hornby had said to Hattons or Rails , "your not allowed to make models that are in our range" 

[mdvle]

Just now, Colin_McLeod said:

If Dave registers a design then three years later his model is not yet produced, does that mean  that no one else can produce such a model either?

 

That is the goal - hence his comments in the announcement about bartering / trading / etc.

[Roy L S]

So if I am reading this right, Dave is registering each design as his "Intellectual Property" and consequently thinks this will effectively prevent duplication of the same prototype by another manufacturer? 

 

I would hope that this is supported by sound legal advice as I cannot see how anyone can claim exclusivity to a model of a prototype that already exists unless by way of contractual agreement with the owner.

 

Take the design of an N Gauge 43xx Mogul (for example). The GA drawings and plans for this prototype are freely available and anyone is entitled to use these and other sources like 3D scans to design and develop CAD, tooling and produce and market a model of it. I would be very surprised if the fact that he is already developing a model of the 43xx and has registered his design as his IP would stop anyone else developing an N Gauge model of the same loco. I would think the crux of any argument he may have would revolve around whether his CAD or design work was used. 

 

I would welcome the thoughts of someone with more than a lay-man's knowledge of such law, but my thoughts are that this would not prevent anyone else designing and developing a model of anything he has planned, and the legal protection afforded by IP registration only protects his unique designs from being copied not somebody else from designing and producing a model of the same loco.

 

Roy

[Ouroborus]

9 minutes ago, mdvle said:

So this appears to be his listing (if the link works):

 

https://www.registered-design.service.gov.uk/find/mibc2je9/92393612/designsbyowner

 

That lists the 1361, 14xx, 02, D600, Class 92, Class 71, J94 in OO and the Class 92 in N.

 

Note that he is registering them as a "registered design" category

 

So he's registered the J94.   Didn't Hornby produce it before him and still have it in their catalogue?  In other words, a model HE chose to duplicate.  Does he think any of this through?

[Chris M]

I can see where Dave is coming from but I'm not sure it is good . There have been duplications in the past which have caused a certain amount of acrimony. Class 66 and Terrior spring to mind. I can accept that Dave sees this as a way of protecting the value of the work he has put on to designing various models. The problem for Dave is that bigger companies with deeper pockets may well register so many designs that new model projects can no longer be designed.

For instance would Dapol have been able to build the N gauge class 50 if Farish had owned the IP of their class 50? Also if Farish registered the IP for the terrible old Farish large prairie would it stop anyone else from developing one that actually looked like a large Prairie?

[woodenhead]

1 minute 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.

That being the case, then I cannot print what I am thinking - Heljan did the first class 17, Dave tried to do one in N, Heljan must surely have rights to other scales.

[mdvle]

3 minutes ago, Vistisen said:

Just think if Hornby had said to Hattons or Rails , "your not allowed to make models that are in our range" 

 

I think to a certain extent that is what he is hoping, that Hornby / Bachmann will view this as a positive change given the recent/ongoing issues Bachmann has had with Hattons, Hornby's annoyance at the commissioners, etc.

 

 

[Vistisen]

I'm afraid to say that for me from here on in: DJM =TRUMP. A noise that detracts from reality and should be ignored until it dies of irrelevance. 

Edited May 1, 2019 by Vistisen

[LBRJ]

I am assuming here, but it seems DJ thinks that registering an accurate drawing ( ) will stop anyone else from using one that is identical (IE accurate).

 

Surely, altering one single aspect of each CAD makes them non identical and therefore usable anyway?

[Roy L S]

1 minute 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.

 

I would very much doubt that he can claim exclusivity to a specific prototype, he would have a very hard job proving that be his intellectual property. 

[Vistisen]

Just now, mdvle said:

 

I think to a certain extent that is what he is hoping, that Hornby / Bachmann will view this as a positive change given the recent/ongoing issues Bachmann has had with Hattons, Hornby's annoyance at the commissioners, etc.

 

 

But the thing is, they didn't , they just got their models to the shops first and gave us a choice.

[newbryford]

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

 

Nothing to see here.

 

Move on please....

Edited May 1, 2019 by newbryford