Hornby 2022 - Trains on Film

[Steamport Southport]

1 hour ago, Global said:

Oh, I do remember watching Herbie! And probably some of the better Carry Ons! Was there some Doctor ones that were similar with, I think, Leslie Philips?!

 

Sorry gone a bit off topic here!

 

Were there any trains in Carry On?! Maybe they could rework a TPO model so that instead of depositing the mail bags a OO gauge Barbara Windsors bra is left hanging on the hook as the train speeds by?! And back on topic! 

 

Some very nice views in Carry On Girls. 

 

Some of which are DMUs at Marylebone.

 

A screenshot or two here.

 

https://www.reelstreets.com/films/carry-on-girls/

Edited January 12, 2022 by Steamport Southport

[melmerby]

OK as it seems that from what others have said that Rapido are available in loads of places, how many on here are actually going to buy?

 

I like the film, have watched it several times but have absolutely no interest in a film tie-in model and couldn't really care who makes it. (Licensing deals permitting)

(I wonder whether anyone will make the street running 14XX?)

 

[Porcy Mane]

15 minutes ago, melmerby said:

I like the film, have watched it several times but have absolutely no interest in a film tie-in model and couldn't really care who makes it. (Licensing deals permitting)

 

I would respectfully suggest, that you may not be typically, part of the prospective market that both Hornby & Rapido are targeting.

Edited January 12, 2022 by Porcy Mane

[RichardT]

1 hour ago, melmerby said:

 

I like the film, have watched it several times but have absolutely no interest in a film tie-in model and couldn't really care who makes it.

Sometimes these threads go on for so long that we end up arguing round in circles.  Like you, I like the film but I have no interest in a film tie-in model (and, indeed, in any “collectibles” - dust-gatherers, as my old mum used to call them) and if one is produced I likewise don’t care who makes it: I won’t be putting in an order for the Rapido Thunderbolt models.  

But I do think the ethics and legalities of this are interesting and matter when it comes to the health of the model railway hobby.  As I’ve said elsewhere, as I model in N Hornby are irrelevant to me. But Rapido are a company whose products I’ve already bought and am happy with, and I’m very pleased to see them moving into the Uk N market. I don’t want them squeezed on these dubious grounds.

 

EDIT Just to add, though, that also for the wider health of the model railway hobby, I don’t especially want to see Hornby lose money thanks to daft errors. But a bit of humility might not come amiss.

 

Richard

Edited January 12, 2022 by RichardT
Grammar & clarity. Then to add something.

[Coppercap]

Hornby could resurrect their old Ivatt 2-6-0 along with coaches badly stickered 'Midland' to do 'The 39 Steps', or perhaps use the A4 in the earlier 1950s version. An even earlier Gresley Pacific was used in the 1930s film...so Gresley coaches there.

Or how about 'Train of Events', from which several ex-LMS engines produced by Hornby could be used. (On the Saturday TPTV, I think).

'The last Journey' has many Great Western locos to choose from (they could even resurrect their awful rendition of a Saint for that!).

Edited January 12, 2022 by Coppercap

[Porcy Mane]

3 minutes ago, Coppercap said:

Hornby could resurrect their old Ivatt 2-6-0 along with coaches badly stickered 'Midland' to do 'The 39 Steps', or perhaps use the A4 in the earlier 1950s version.

 

Now there's an idea. A modelu scan of a certain member of this forum could be included as he had a speaking part in one adaptation of the 39 steps.  It's OK Mr F. I'll not post the picture this time.

[melmerby]

24 minutes ago, Porcy Mane said:

 

I would respectfully suggest, that you may not be typically, part of the prospective market that both Hornby & Rapido are targeting.

I don't collect memorabilia, which IMHO this is, in any form.

 

Maybe in that case they should be targeting me with something I would buy?

C'mon Hornby do the Collett tank from the film to modern standards

 

 

Edited January 12, 2022 by melmerby

[Legend]

I with Melmerby on this one . I've seen the film , probably a good few times . Its a pleasant reflection of old England , but not so memorable I'd consider acquiring anything from it  .  And I agree . Perhaps the wider view is instead of spending the resources on what was known to be a duplication , putting the licencing issues aside for the moment,  it might have been better targetting something we want .......... 313/314/315/507/508 for instance  a J69,14XX  or even another Period 1 Steam loco .  Hornby need to max revenue . Does producing models "inspired by" a 70 year old film do that compared to more mainstream stuff ?   I think Simon Kohler has a bee in his bonnet about this . 

Edited January 12, 2022 by Legend

[Darius43]

33 minutes ago, Porcy Mane said:

 A modelu scan of a certain member of this forum could be included as he had a speaking part in one adaptation of the 39 steps. 

Presumably not the Hitchcock version…

 

Cheers

 

Darius

[Steamport Southport]

1 minute ago, Legend said:

I with Melmerby on this one . I've seen the film , probably a good few times . Its a pleasant reflection of old England , but not so memorable I'd consider acquiring anything from it  .  And I agree . Perhaps the wider view is instead of spending the resources on what was known to be a duplication , putting the licencing issues aside for the moment,  it might have been better targetting something we want .......... 313/314/315/507/508 for instance  a J69,14XX  or even another Period 1 Steam loco .  Hornby need to max revenue . Does producing models "inspired by" a 70 year old film do that compared to more mainstream stuff ?   I think Simon Kohler has a bee in his bonnet about this . 

 

I think more people have seen Lion than know what most of those things are though. It is mainstream.

 

It's in a major museum that has about 4 million visitors a year. It was watched on TV by about 10 million people when it was at Rainhill in 1980. The film is a small part of it's history and usually just a footnote in any reputable books written about it.

 

Are people really thinking it's being made just because of the film? 

 

 

 

Jason

[Titan]

15 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

 

 

Are people really thinking it's being made just because of the film? 

 

 

 

Jason

 

Clearly Hornby do, as they have dropped any pretence of making a model of lion with no film association...

[I.C.L. 11]

7 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

It's in a major museum that has about 4 million visitors a year. It was watched on TV by about 10 million people when it was at Rainhill in 1980. The film is a small part of it's history and usually just a footnote in any reputable books written about it.

 

Are people really thinking it's being made just because of the film? 

Lion deserves to be known for more than just the film. I don't think it can even be said it assured her survival as we need to thank those who 'found' and restored her for the L&MR centenary for that and her survival as a historic curio was fairly secure after that, even if no film contracts ever came along. There would be no shame in Hornby offering their Lion simply as a loco rather than a film star.

[knitpick]

As noted before, Hornby have previously done a Titfield Thunderbolt set with assorted errors.  The set consisted a 14xx numbered as the film version; a Lowmac with the body from a 4 wheel coach and a Toad.  The correct Loriot is makedly different from a Lowmac as is the "converted" coach body compared with the standard 4 wheel coach body.  Also, this rush hybrid train was not pulled by the 14xx; rather it was "pulled" by Lion under the name Thunderbolt and removed from the "local museum".  So following their recent issues of updates to historical Hornby and Tri-Ang models, Hornby seem to be issuing an updated and more accurate Titfield Thunderbolt set.  We do not know what licensing agreement Hornby had when they issued their cruder model and how long that may have lasted for.  But there does seem to be another point from the Copyright viewpoint.  From memory, copyright has a limited lifetime.  I thought is was extended to 50 years as pop stars lived longer; but it may be even longer than that.  But if it is 50 years and the film is 70 years old - then there is no copyright issue.

 

Also, it would have been nice if the Wisbech & Upwell tramway coach were issued possibly with the 14xx?  But it would seem that even Rapido do not plan to issue that coach from the initial Titfield railway preservation train consist other than as part of a very pricey set.

[Titan]

I am not sure that someone has mentioned this before, but as the "Lady of the Lamp" pack is marketed in an identical way to "The Titfield Thunderbolt", Hornby cannot have a license for that either else it would seriously undermine any defence of not needing a license for the Titfield Thunderbolt...

 

Also one does wonder if the "Lady of the Lamp" set was just going to be a L&MR train pack with no film association, but it was hastily tuned into a "Lady of the Lamp" set to help support a "Trains in Film" defence.  This would also explain why there is no longer a non filmed linked Lion set, which would have seemed to be the original intention from Hornby's earlier announcements.

[The Stationmaster]

2 minutes ago, Titan said:

I am not sure that someone has mentioned this before, but as the "Lady of the Lamp" pack is marketed in an identical way to "The Titfield Thunderbolt", Hornby cannot have a license for that either else it would seriously undermine any defence of not needing a license for the Titfield Thunderbolt...

 

Also one does wonder if the "Lady of the Lamp" set was just going to be a L&MR train pack with no film association, but it was hastily tuned into a "Lady of the Lamp" set to help support a "Trains in Film" defence.  This would also explain why there is no longer a non filmed linked Lion set, which would have seemed to be the original intention from Hornby's earlier announcements.

You could well have a point but the change, if one happened, appears to have been done very deliberately.  And presumably using a licence from Studio Canal because if you look carefully the presentation , especially the box lid,  for 'The Lady With A Lamp' is different.

 

1. It does not say 'inspired by', and

2. The 'film reel' illustrations are actually frames from the film rather than pastiches of frames.

 

So maybe they either did come up with the  with the 'Trains In Film' idea and sought some licences and couldn't get one for The Titfield Thunderbolt or they did what you suggested and managed to get a licence for The Lady With A Lamp because it's a much less well known film (I've only seen it a couple of times in the past several years whereas I've seen The Titifield Thunderbolt a number of times in the same period).

[Vistisen]

On 10/01/2022 at 10:25, Legend said:

Maybe Studiocanal not that bothered . its additional publicity after all and its only model trains .   Rapido , would they go to court .................it all costs money.  Maybe thats what Hornby gambling on ?  But it all seems so unnecessary 

 

I’m not commenting on the rights and wrongs of this situation.  I have no knowledge of what communications there have, or have not been between any of the concerned parties, nor the timing of various projects, neither have I any knowledge of law.  But there is something that puzzles me. Let's take a completely hypothical situation. My son is in a band, and this band is approached by two different doll manufactures who say that they would like to have license to sell dolls depicting the band. One is Mattel who want to make a barbie doll of him (perish the thought!) the other is TTS who make correct Anatomically dolls. If I was in this band ,I would probably assume that I would get more publicity by being the next ‘Ken’ than doll number17. So maybe StudioCanal has other reasons for not really minding who wins.

[30801]

8 minutes ago, Vistisen said:

.My son is in a band, and this band is approached by two different doll manufactures who say that they would like to have license to sell dolls depicting the band. One is Mattel who want to make a barbie doll of him (perish the thought!) the other is TTS who make correct Anatomically dolls. If I was in this band ,I would probably assume that I would get more publicity by being the next ‘Ken’ than doll number17. So maybe StudioCanal has other reasons for not really minding who wins.

 

But that's not the same.

One manufacturer approached StudioCanal and they signed a contract.

That another possibly more desirable manufacturer comes along later doesn't matter.

[Titan]

44 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

1. It does not say 'inspired by', and

 

 

I beg to differ! And if you missed that there will be a strong case that other people will, thus denting the  "inspired by" defence further!

 

And I now see that the background black and white film on this box is the Titfield Thunderbolt, more evidence of something hastily put together?

Edited January 12, 2022 by Titan

[Vistisen]

9 minutes ago, 30801 said:

 

But that's not the same.

One manufacturer approached StudioCanal and they signed a contract.

That another possibly more desirable manufacturer comes along later doesn't matter.

I very carefully wrote that I was not commenting on the right and wrongs. I was wodering whether Studio Canal was that worried by it

[30801]

3 minutes ago, Vistisen said:

I very carefully wrote that I was not commenting on the right and wrongs. I was wodering whether Studio Canal was that worried by it

 

I doubt they're losing much sleep over it. How many sets will be sold? A couple of thousand? Can't imagine the royalties will be huge. 

[I.C.L. 11]

7 minutes ago, Titan said:

And I now see that the background black and white film on this box is the Titfield Thunderbolt, more evidence of something hastily put together?

Yes. Lady With a Lamp frames in the background of the Thunderbolt box and vice versa! But pastiches rather than original frames implying there is no permission to use anything from the actual films. The 2013 licenced Titfield pack had actual frames on the box.

[Helmdon]

1 hour ago, knitpick said:

From memory, copyright has a limited lifetime.  I thought is was extended to 50 years as pop stars lived longer; but it may be even longer than that.  But if it is 50 years and the film is 70 years old - then there is no copyright issue.

 

I think this is a bit of a red herring to be honest, but for the sake of accuracy, film (as opposed to television which is 50 years from broadcast) is + 70 years from the last to die of: principal director, author of screenplay, author of dialogue, or composer of music specifically created for and used in the film.

 

Given the Titfield Thunderbolt's director died in 1999 I think any 'it's out of copyright' argument is a total non-starter*. But I don't suppose that would be the argument anyway.

 

*unless the 1956 act didn't retrospectively supercede the 1911 act, but we really are into IANAL territory there.

Edited January 12, 2022 by Helmdon

[mdvle]

1 hour ago, knitpick said:

But there does seem to be another point from the Copyright viewpoint.  From memory, copyright has a limited lifetime.  I thought is was extended to 50 years as pop stars lived longer; but it may be even longer than that.  But if it is 50 years and the film is 70 years old - then there is no copyright issue.

 

Already covered, either in this thread or the one in the Rapido section - it is 70 years from death of a significant contributor ie. director, writer.

 

Someone posted all the relevant dates for the deaths of those people, but needless to say it very much still is in copyright.

 

1 hour ago, knitpick said:

Also, it would have been nice if the Wisbech & Upwell tramway coach were issued possibly with the 14xx?  But it would seem that even Rapido do not plan to issue that coach from the initial Titfield railway preservation train consist other than as part of a very pricey set.

 

Wrong.  Rapido have indicated all of the items tooled for the Titfield set will be released separately as well.  So the W&U coach will be available, it just hasn't been officially announced as a separate product yet.

[eldomtom2]

10 minutes ago, I.C.L. 11 said:

Yes. Lady With a Lamp frames in the background of the Thunderbolt box and vice versa! But pastiches rather than original frames implying there is no permission to use anything from the actual films. The 2013 licenced Titfield pack had actual frames on the box.

 

They're illustrations rather than still frames, but they're definitely direct tracings from the film, and that is copyright infringement regardless of whether or not the items inside the box are.

[mdvle]

40 minutes ago, Vistisen said:

But there is something that puzzles me. Let's take a completely hypothical situation. My son is in a band, and this band is approached by two different doll manufactures who say that they would like to have license to sell dolls depicting the band. One is Mattel who want to make a barbie doll of him (perish the thought!) the other is TTS who make correct Anatomically dolls. If I was in this band ,I would probably assume that I would get more publicity by being the next ‘Ken’ than doll number17. So maybe StudioCanal has other reasons for not really minding who wins.

 

So lets stretch this hypothetical a bit further.

 

the advantage of going with "doll number17" is that you know the fans that want one will get one - because that company makes to order and doesn't play games with retailers.

 

On the other hand, the fans of the band end up playing russian roulette when attempting to buy "ken" - because the retailer they place their order with may not get all the product they order, or they may get dropped as a retailer, or the shop they ordered with may get dropped in the priority list because somebody decides that - despite all the photographic evidence otherwise - they are actually a museum and not a full service shop.

 

Yes, Hornby have a brand with great awareness - but if anybody actually looks beyond that it quickly becomes apparent that Hornby may not be a company you want to be associated with if your goal is for the people who want your IP want a good experience.