A statement on The Titfield Thunderbolt.

[Clearwater]

11 minutes ago, ruggedpeak said:

"As explained before" - was that by experienced IP lawyers who have a detailed understanding of the issues that none of us are privy to? I am not an IP lawyer but I have dealt with IP issues for a high profile multi-billion pound organisation that in its history lost IP rights over an asset in a well documented case and now manages them rather more proactively. I am unclear how anyone is jumping to the conclusion Studio Canal have to act or else they lose in court.

 

It is a big leap to be suggesting that Hornby putting the words "inspired by" on some packaging is some earth shattering piece of game changing IP case law in the making. For example I have yet to see any discussion regarding the law on 'incidental use', which Hornby's actions appear to be at first glance.

 

It is quite possible for Studio Canal to write to Hornby with a strongly worded letter that says we have noted your use of the wording and consider it a breach of our IP but given the trivial nature of it we do not consider it worth pursuing at this time (and English courts prefer court hearings to be avoided if possible) but we reserve the right to take action if we feel approrpiate at any time to reclaim profits etc, and if you repeat this trick we will make a large claim against you and/or send you a bill for £x and tie you up in legal action for the next 5 years. That in itself can be sufficient to protect their IP. That then gives Hornby de facto consent with the threat of the kitchen sink being thrown at them in the future whilst asserting Studio Canal's IP rights so they can demonstrate they have acted in any future case. That then puts the onus on Hornby to then deny SC's rights.

 

But the proof will be in the pudding as to what SC do and whether there is any publicity around it.

 

With the caveat that I'm not a lawyer, I'd have thought the sequence would play out as follows.  Rapido believe they have a contract with StudioCanal that gives them exclusive rights to exploit this IP.  Question as to what is in that contract, what exactly the rights and obligations are of each party, eg to enforce breach of IP, termination etc.  That is not a public contract and we are all speculating (sometimes with the basis of knowledge of what is in similar contracts).  Presumably Rapido feel that if StudioCanal does not enforce their IP rights, and that Rapido have a loss under that contract.  If Rapido claim against StudioCanal, then StudioCanal now has a potential loss for which they can sue Hornby against for breach of their IP.  Of course, if StudioCanal, with much greater power in these negotiations can 'persuade' Hornby to drop their use, then the problem goes away.   I'd expect any competent IP lawyer to be able very quickly to assess the nature of the contract and whether there is a breach.  Whilst lawyers don't, in my experience, give definitive views as to how a court would judge an issue, they can be pretty unequivocal.  This, though, feels like a relationship issue between StudioCanal and Hornby, particularly given the latter's contract with them for the use of the Railway Children licence.

 

[GordonC]

17 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

That's the real challenge the (increasingly numerous) "new boys" are posing to Hornby. 

 

Having "their" models nicked isn't going to be the problem, it'll be the competition making less, but making it better, and building reputations based on that.

 

As a generalist "whole range" supplier, Hornby may not have the DNA to counter that kind of thing.

 

As escalating prices widen the divide between the toy and model ends of their operation (not to mention Railroad Plus somewhere in the middle), it'll be interesting to see how Hornby manage to adapt and evolve. The only certain thing is that they will need to.

 

John 

 

I cant help thinking that Hornby are taking on too much trying to cover everything from pre-school kids to the finest detail for scale modellers to keep everyone happy. Their target market has to be mass market, its a recognisable name to the vast majority of the general population. I applaud them for trying to stay relevant as an introduction to the model railway world for the next generation, and producing items that kids will see on the real railway like FLIRTs, Class 800s and freight 66s, but I cant help questioning whether their models will achieve that aim in the £300-£500 range for units. If they can produce Class 110 centre coaches at £25 and presumably more for motorised driving cars, how have we gotten to £100+ per car for modern units including trailers. Its not even like the Class 800s are bristling with details.

 

I think Hornby need to rein in their ambitions and play nice to leave the highest-spec models to the more responsive newer manufacturers.

[boxbrownie]

1 hour ago, Legend said:

  I just find it inconceivable that a large company would deliberately tread in a minefield without first knowing the route out. 

But Hornby like it or not are not a large company in the scheme of things, 191 (2020) employees is far from large, just because the company is long established doesn’t mean it’s a modern and up there with others.

It might be a big company in Margate, or even the biggest but TBH watching parts of the recent television series made me think of Hornby more in a long established “cottage” industry sense than a cutting edge model making company.

 

In perspective the company I worked for had just 4500 employees at one location in this country, which was one of six locations in the U.K. and only one of over a hundred around the world.

 

 

[PaulRhB]

Yes money doesn’t need to be frittered away, a simple cease and desist is the best option. If Hornby then decide to ignore it they reap what they sow and it will get expensive for them or Studiocanal. Rapido can quite happily leave that to the rights holder. 

[eldomtom2]

On 10/01/2022 at 11:15, Kris said:

Looking at Copyright of the film would seem to be the wrong avenue to be following.

Copyright of the film would cover the distribution and showing of the film, the recreation of the film, use of the script, use of the music. Hornby do not appear to have done any of this. As this is a pre 1956 film the individual frames of the film would be covered by copyright rather than the film as a whole (Hornby do appear to have use 2 or 3 frames from the film, however these could have been redrawn by their own artists with specific differences).

There do not appear to be any trademarks associated with the film.

 

I would suggest looking at the laws on "deriative works" before making such nonsensical statements!

[kevinlms]

On 10/01/2022 at 21:39, boxbrownie said:

Without getting into another mass thread debate about the rights and wrongs and legality guesswork.

 

I will not be cancelling my order for both sets from Rapido, and this is just another black mark against Hornby being a not very nice company (put simplistically) or maybe it’s just certain people there think they “own” the model railway world?

Is it not part of a greater war about selecting and making models?

 

I'm thinking of the Bachmann/Hattons and Hornby?/Rails of Sheffield challenges.

 

The fact is that there is apparently a lot of money at stake, in the marketing of a dedicated range of licenced products. Hornby must have made a lot of money over the years over their 'Thomas' and 'Harry Potter' ranges and it is unlikely that they gave any quarter on possible infringements.

This time, Hornby aren't the 'victims'!

[Aire Head]

20 minutes ago, GordonC said:

. If they can produce Class 110 centre coaches at £25 and presumably more for motorised driving cars, how have we gotten to £100+ per car for modern units including trailers. Its not even like the Class 800s are bristling with details.

 

The Class 110 is a 1980s tooling and by this point owes Hornby nothing same as the 4F/2P/most of the Railroad range etc. Any sales generated from it have to solely cover the cost of making it and not the cost of development.

 

Notably these cheaper models tend to be the less desirables ones for the majority of their customers (because let's be honest modellers are a smaller market than people who want to play with trains) because of this they can be aimed lower in the market for the people who cannot afford a brand new Class 800 or a big shiny Steam Express loco.

 

The theory is if someone want a class 800 they will find the money for it and if not they will probably grab something else from the cheaper end anyway.

[Graham456]

Well ! All this about the two thunderbolts hasn't changed my thoughts to buy the rapido model. Going by the Stirling single, rapido's will be the better model.but it will trundle in front of Hornby rocket type stock!

[30801]

27 minutes ago, boxbrownie said:

TBH watching parts of the recent television series made me think of Hornby more in a long established “cottage” industry sense than a cutting edge model making company.

 

I was surprised at the teeny tiny monitors they had for doing CAD on.

[boxbrownie]

2 hours ago, Edge said:

i would expect that the loco would be named ‘lion’ or have no name at all and that something like the house being painted a different colour would be along the lines of acceptable if such a compromise were to occur. But even if Hornby has done nothing wrong legally, this is a big problem PR wise . We should all be marvelling at steam generators, turbomotives and black 5s. But we aren’t…

Within IP law it is not just black and white there are also “passing off” and “lookalike” cases to account for, the item doesn’t have to be an exact replica/facsimile or indeed trademark, just enough to give the impression to the general public is all it needed to get a court case threatened.

[The Stationmaster]

3 hours ago, Legend said:

With all the furore I was expecting to get up and see it discussed on Breakfast Telly, but it appears Boris has had another party!

 

As I've said before I dont like Hornbys tactics and I think they've made themselves look rather foolish over this . However I cant believe they've gone down this route without some legal advice , and yes I know it can differ and be a matter of interpretation . But they've also been talking to Studiocanal on other matters ie The Revenge of the Railway Children or whatever its called . They obviously have some contacts at Studiocanal . Is it not conceivable they have discussed this and come up with "inspired by" as a way round it . Possibly getting Studiocanal off the hook with Rapido .    I just find it inconceivable that a large company would deliberately tread in a minefield without first knowing the route out. 

In response to your final sentence - in the case of this particular company, particularly where it has 'form' for doing this sort of thing, it doesn't surprise me in the least.  I even wonder if any 'legal advice' was sought before the decision was made especially as Hornby's original announcement of 'Lion' was all too clearly made very much on the hoof and in a great hurry after they discovered that they had missed the Titfield train.

 

Additionally in a situation like this the legal situation could well be something of a minefield and even a specialist solicitor in the field In such a situation would, I suspect, be very careful when giving an opinion and might advise on caution if there is a lack of clarity.  What the solicitor's client then does is entirely up to the client irrespective even of any 'advice' (assuming, again, that there was any such advice?).  

 

The most telling point is the one that Hornby of late has a record of deliberately setting out to launch something which competes with a model or range which has already been announced by a smaller company.  Most obviously they did it with the Terrier (using a model already under development by Oxford Rail in order to save time) and equally obviously they did it with the generic 4&6 wheeled coaches.   I can't think of any other examples off hand as the 'King', Q6, Class 71, and large prairie were all well underway before competing models were announced.    From the very moment of their rushed announcement it was pretty obvious to me - based on their recent past form - that Hornby would do something to compete with Rapido's Titfield Thunderbolt set and justify their investment in 'Lion'.  But I thought it would be more on the lines of being sufficiently different to be named something more like what I called the Totfield Firebolt in my predictions of 2022 Hornby models.

 

What is different, and in my view a waste of resources or even a substitute for original thinking when developing new models, are the examples where they have gone bald-headed into direct competition with smaller companies.  if Hornby are that frightened of what they presumably perceive as threats to their market position they need to adopt the more original, or even radical, thinking we see continuing to see emerge from the newcomer smaller companies and retail commissioners.   The Turbomotive shows that they can do it if they think about it and the Black 5 shows that they are aware of the way the market is becoming more sophisticated - even if both were pretty obviously the sort of thing that Hornby might announce for 2022.

 

Back to Rapido and perhaps time to have another look at their brilliant video which heads this thread.

Edited January 11, 2022 by The Stationmaster
correct typo

[GordonC]

19 minutes ago, Aire Head said:

 

The Class 110 is a 1980s tooling and by this point owes Hornby nothing same as the 4F/2P/most of the Railroad range etc. Any sales generated from it have to solely cover the cost of making it and not the cost of development.

 

Notably these cheaper models tend to be the less desirables ones for the majority of their customers (because let's be honest modellers are a smaller market than people who want to play with trains) because of this they can be aimed lower in the market for the people who cannot afford a brand new Class 800 or a big shiny Steam Express loco.

 

The theory is if someone want a class 800 they will find the money for it and if not they will probably grab something else from the cheaper end anyway.

 

Of course, that identifies the 'production costs' part of producing the model.

 

If you're adding £75+ to the cost of every coach in multiple car trains forevermore for tooling and development then I'd suggest they need to look at ways either to reduce costs or increase production quantities to spread costs over a larger run. What kind of buyers are FLIRTs aimed at? Are there so many up to the minute Greater Anglia and South Wales modellers that they're expecting to sell thousands? I'm surprised Hornby think they can sell 'enough' even considering they're likely to have a future lifespan and later operators at those kind of price-points

[The Stationmaster]

53 minutes ago, boxbrownie said:

But Hornby like it or not are not a large company in the scheme of things, 191 (2020) employees is far from large, just because the company is long established doesn’t mean it’s a modern and up there with others.

It might be a big company in Margate, or even the biggest but TBH watching parts of the recent television series made me think of Hornby more in a long established “cottage” industry sense than a cutting edge model making company.

 

In perspective the company I worked for had just 4500 employees at one location in this country, which was one of six locations in the U.K. and only one of over a hundred around the world.

 

 

Yes it is odd to think of Hornby as 'a large company' because it obviously isn't although it still seems to carry an awful lot of top weight for a company of its size.   Maybe part of its problem is its own image of itself (or maybe the image of it in the minds of some of its staff?).

[JohnR]

3 hours ago, NHY 581 said:

 

Mornin all, 

 

Setting aside the legality involved in all of this, we've been given a choice. 

 

I grew up watching this film. It was a real treat whenever it came on and if I want a cosy hour or so with a class of port, one option is to plug in the flux capacitor and settle down to once again travel to Titfield. 

 

I've travelled to the area and visited some of the locations. 

 

So, for me it comes down to one thing. Which manufacturer is likely to satisfy the place this film holds with me. 

 

Rapido are going to significant lengths to provide multiple models to replicate each element of the film, creating new models to allow this to happen. One of these models is that of the ex Wisbech and Upwell (another interest of mine)  coach.  Another is the Bedford OB. ( You only need to look at Rapidos other bus models to gauge their approach), the Toady is again a new model of the correct diagram. The exception is of course 1401. Not insummountable though. 

 

Hornby's offering with albeit certain new models feels to me to be a bit more cobbled together. Add to this a few frustrations over the running of some new Hornby models acquired over the last 12/18 months and the picture builds. 

 

This is not saying all Rapido products are without fault. I had a few attempts to get a non-waggling J70. The bunker on the the 1600 was a bit of a disaster as were certain aspects of the electrickery of that model. (Rectified by Rapido) 

 

However, in the case of Tifield I have been given a choice of products. My choice wil be  based on the approach taken,  the commitment shown to producing a model which best reflects my interest and knowledge of the film, obviously the product itself and the way its presented to me the consumer. 

 

Taking this and only this into consideration, it has to be Rapido. 

Even the response to Hornby's announcement yesterday from Rapido showed their approach to this product. Contrast the presentation of Rapidos response to Hornby's clunky at times grand announcement and the occasional muffed lines of the presenters. Rapidos offering was quite a bit slicker. More evidence of the care taken. 

 

The legitimacy of each companies production of these models can  be debated ad nauseum on here but the only people with actual knowledge of what is involved, are those people actually involved and is best left to them. 

 

Pay your money, take your choice. Whichever way up your cash ( Other methods of payment are available ) lands, ultimately rests with yourself. 

 

 

 

 

 

Rob. 

 

 

Am I the only person who read this in the voice of the official from the Ministry who holds the inquiry in Mallingford?

[Neil]

I'm left wondering if the delay to the Ruston 88DS, which I'd like and looked to be an oven ready production for sometime last year is because Hornby have been pushing (rushing ?) the Titfield stuff through ahead of it?

[Dunsignalling]

20 minutes ago, GordonC said:

 

Of course, that identifies the 'production costs' part of producing the model.

 

If you're adding £75+ to the cost of every coach in multiple car trains forevermore for tooling and development then I'd suggest they need to look at ways either to reduce costs or increase production quantities to spread costs over a larger run. What kind of buyers are FLIRTs aimed at? Are there so many up to the minute Greater Anglia and South Wales modellers that they're expecting to sell thousands? I'm surprised Hornby think they can sell 'enough' even considering they're likely to have a future lifespan and later operators at those kind of price-points

I long ago accepted that a high proportion of Hornby's sales are to people who just like the look of a particular models and have few scruples about anachronisms or geographical disconnect.

 

Even a modeller of the standing of the late David Jenkinson wasn't above building and running the odd "funny train" that he just fancied the look of. 

 

Rule One Rules and those of us who keep fairly rigidly to our chosen themes represent a minority that sometimes benefits when the random tastes of others intersect with our own, whilst occasionally wondering WTF is going on?

 

By picking the FLIRT, which seems to be an odd subject, maybe Hornby are assessing what will sell to the market at large rather than listening to the partisans who make the most noise?

 

John  

Edited January 11, 2022 by Dunsignalling

[boxbrownie]

43 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

 

 

Additionally in a situation like this the legal situation could well be something of a minefield and even a specialist solicitor in the field In such a situation would, I suspect, be very careful when giving an opinion and might advise on caution if there is a lack of clarity.  What the solicitor's client then does is entirely up to the client irrespective even of any 'advice' (assuming, again, that there was any such advice?).  

 

Back to Rapido and perhaps time to have another look at their brilliant video which heads this thread.

First point….my daughter in law is an IP lawyer and has represented such as Microsoft and JLR and your correct I wouldn’t even dream of asking her what she thought of this debacle as I know exactly what her answer would be

”don’t ask me” 

 

And the second point…..exactly so.

Edited January 11, 2022 by boxbrownie

[JohnR]

I'm surprised that there wasnt some action from Studio Canal at the time of the Hornby announcement last March. Maybe there was, and Hornby think this "inspired by" thing, and not using any graphics from the film is enough to satisfy?

 

I simply cant imagine that Hornby would knowingly court such trouble without having done at lease some due diligence on the legality of what they are doing in this instance. 

 

Theres the potential for action to be taken against individual directors if they knowingly broke the law, and it affected the company (eg through massive legal costs)

[Kris]

1 hour ago, eldomtom2 said:

I would suggest looking at the laws on "deriative works" before making such nonsensical statements!

Other than the use of images on the box shown on Hornby's website, the derivative works defence you are putting forward would seem unlikely to count, unless you feel like adding some more detail rather than just making bland statements with no supporting information. 

[ruggedpeak]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

What is different, and in my view a waste of resources or even a substitute for original thinking when developing new models, are the examples where they have gone bald-headed into direct competition with smaller companies.  if Hornby are that frightened of what they presumably perceive as threats to their market position they need to adopt the more original, or even radical, thinking we see continuing to see emerge from the newcomer smaller companies and retail commissioners. 

Basic strategy fail is focusing too much on what the competition are doing and not sorting out your own issues - as they say in sport "run your own race"/"play your own game". Hornby have a lot still to sort out on their side and IMHO are failing to invest in more and better models of a range of prototypes (noting this is a bit like playing blindfold darts to land something the market actually buys!). I don't yet get the Titfield thing with them, and as you say it is wasted time and effort that could be spent on things Rapido and others aren't doing. Maybe SK has just decided that licensed products is Hornby's turf along side Terriers etc and to be defended at all costs. After all they have been doing the Coke and Beatles licensing for some time and there is a lot of it in the Corgi area e.g. Bond.

 

It lends weight to the view that various companies are following the Lego route of using licensing to boost sales. Whether that works in model rail is TBC.

 

43 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

Yes it is odd to think of Hornby as 'a large company' because it obviously isn't although it still seems to carry an awful lot of top weight for a company of its size.   Maybe part of its problem is its own image of itself (or maybe the image of it in the minds of some of its staff?).

It is one of the biggest in the sector, but it is a small sector. However its brand awareness and power is enormous across its core brands. Everyone has heard of Hornby and Airfix, regardless of gender, status etc.

Edited January 11, 2022 by ruggedpeak

[Michael Hodgson]

Those of a religious disposition may envisage an elderly gentleman in a long white robe sitting on a cloud playing the harp throwing the odd Thunderbolt at miserable sinners.  Some others seem to envisage an elderly gentleman in a red robe trimmed with ermine wearing a powdered wig sitting on a Bench throwing Thunderbolts at the miserable sinners.

[asmay2002]

30 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

Yes it is odd to think of Hornby as 'a large company' because it obviously isn't although it still seems to carry an awful lot of top weight for a company of its size.   Maybe part of its problem is its own image of itself (or maybe the image of it in the minds of some of its staff?).

The only big beast in model trains in the UK is the Bachmann part of the Kader empire.  Kader could very easily have put Hornby out of business when they took over the Sanda Kan factories if they had wanted to.  Hornby are just a small design house by comparison and are bullying the other small design houses.

[Michael Hodgson]

2 minutes ago, asmay2002 said:

The only big beast in model trains in the UK is the Bachmann part of the Kader empire.  Kader could very easily have put Hornby out of business when they took over the Sanda Kan factories if they had wanted to.  Hornby are just a small design house by comparison and are bullying the other small design houses.

 

Hornby is a household name in this country, a brand as unambiguously associated with one product type, almost like "Hoover" means a vacuum cleaner.  The brand has meant "toy train sets" to just about everybody born in this country since before WW2.

 

People don't know or care who has taken over whom, or that today's products are somewhat different from what our fathers and grandfathers remember.  Most of the population hasn't even heard of Bachmann, Studio Canal or Kader let alone the likes of Rapido.

 

[ruggedpeak]

33 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

By picking the FLIRT, which seems to be an odd subject, maybe Hornby are assessing what will sell to the market at large rather than listening to the partisans who make the most noise?

As others have said it is bi-mode so can used on single track branchlines or OHL mainlines (as it is used by GA). It can be dragged by a ROG loco back and forth across the country as well, or stored in long lines at heritage railways! It also has ultra modern looks that will appeal to some and also be what some customers see and/or travel on. And in theory will be operating for several decades so plenty of opportunity for re-runs. I would argue it is exactly the sort of thing they should be doing more of instead of titfielding about with questionable movies stuff.

[ruggedpeak]

2 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

 

Hornby is a household name in this country, a brand as unambiguously associated with one product type, almost like "Hoover" means a vacuum cleaner.  The brand has meant "toy train sets" to just about everybody born in this country since before WW2.

 

People don't know or care who has taken over whom, or that today's products are somewhat different from what our fathers and grandfathers remember.  Most of the population hasn't even heard of Bachmann, Studio Canal or Kader let alone the likes of Rapido.

 

Exactly. Show the average person off the street a Rapido APT-E and they will almost certainly refer to Hornby and/or trainset in some way.....

 

Same as the generic "Airfix kit" means something you cut off a sprue and glue together and stick transfers on (paint is optional!) and pretty likely anyone over a certain age did as a child at some point.