Hornby 2022 - Trains on Film

[caradoc]

12 minutes ago, jonnyuk said:

Car companies all make the same looking cars, same size engines, same number of doors, they copy each other all the time, so does nearly every other industry, why are trains any different?

 

Model trains are very different in that the demand for them generally is smaller than the demand for cars, and the demand for Titfield Thunderbolt in particular is smaller again, to the point where there is absolutely no need or market for two versions of the same extremely niche product. 

Edited January 10, 2022 by caradoc
Grammar

[TrainMan2001]

44 minutes ago, Pmorgancym said:

Will it thought?  Let's think back, Bachmann couldn't release TR versions of Skarleoy and Rheanus because of Hornby's exclusinve rights to TTE, similarly Bachman's start set that used a non face, non TTE liveried Thomas and Percy.

The odd thing is, now Hornby are producing non-faced versions of their Percy, and haven't had any issues copyright thrown at them, considering Bachmann now own the license.

[PaulRhB]

18 minutes ago, Bluebell Model Railway said:

Certainly quite a risk, its a new range for sure... I am just trying to remember who announced what first.... as it was last year all this came out,

Hornby tried to buy the license, proving they knew they need one. When they were told sorry Rapido have it they announced Lion, probably as a spoiler.

Edited January 10, 2022 by PaulRhB

[HonestTom]

22 minutes ago, m0rris said:

 

 

A very good point, I can't help but feel that the "inspired by" element runs far too close for comfort on the Duck test... 

 

The real issue is the pattern of behaviour, yes, it was understandable that they try to defend 66 and Terrier sales as they are a bread and butter staple of the range. However, this time though they've dodged the traffic, crossed the road and walked another quarter of a mile to start a fight - for what? The excuse of "this has been long in development" is a fair one but only goes so far, so now it looks like something else. The hobby doesn't need this and actually they should be squeezing out other manufacturers with quality products, not by chasing market share on niche products.

 

 

This is really a different kind of issue. While one can argue the morals of producing a model that pulls the rug out from under a rival (e.g. the Terriers, the generic coaches), it's not actually illegal. That being said, there have been some interesting discussions on the subject. But the rights to a movie are very different - they have a clear owner and licensing arrangements.

 

I wonder how Hornby would feel if someone produced a model train marketed with the tagline "Inspired by Hornby?"

Edited January 10, 2022 by HonestTom

[PaulRhB]

1 hour ago, Steven B said:

 

I suspect the wording "inspired by" will be Hornby's get out of jail free card.

 

Except using the same name and colours puts it at odds with that. Chinese companies get away with this all the time as the government ignores it but with Hornby being UK based the legal system will take a gleeful jump at it if Studiocanal  lodge a complaint. 
I suspect a cease and desist will go in quietly. 

[jonnyuk]

18 minutes ago, stovepipe said:

 

Wasn't that Bachman with the SECR C Class in 2012?

i should of phrased it better, pioneering

[Fireline]

12 minutes ago, TrainMan2001 said:

The odd thing is, now Hornby are producing non-faced versions of their Percy, and haven't had any issues copyright thrown at them, considering Bachmann now own the license.

 

The people who own the Licence deem the face being attached to the loco the thing that identifies it as one of the Thomas & Friends franchise. The rules they lay down for preserved lines running events have to be seen to be believed. The shape of Percy, or any other loco, in model form has never been 100% as originally drawn, but close. It was tolerated, on the basis that the face then made it the loco. Without the face, it's just something that looks similar.

 

[Chamby]

I would have thought that Hornby have most to lose from this scrap, by establishing a precedent.  

 

Rapido should announce their new Flying Scotsman and IC125 models next week.

[LNERandBR]

My understanding is if Hornby want to produce 'Lion' they can. Their tooling will be their poperty just like Rapido's tooling will be theres.

 

This is just like when you get Hornby, Bachmann and Hattons all making 66's. Each product is a different design so its unique to each company.

 

It's the name 'The Titfield Thunderbolt' which will be the sticking point. It depends on Studio Canal and if they want to stop Hornby using it on their product.

[Phatbob]

I have come to the conclusion this morning that today's announcement by Hornby has been a resounding shot in the foot, at least in terms of their reputation within this forum.  They've made a huge annoucemnt of all sorts of new stuff, and the only thing people are talking about is their deliberate attempt to damage the sales of a competitor's new product by a deliberate and wasteful duplication, which is being perceived (rightly or wrongly) as a spiteful act of bullying. 
Whether or not they get sued sucessfully over this is a moot point IMHO.  They've done themselves no favours with modellers by deliberate duplication, which we all hate.  THe biggest frustration as a modeller these days is lack of supply and huge waiting times for new products.  None us us want to have to choose between two duplicate new models.  We want to see two new models of something different, where we might even buy both of them.
This is weapons grade stupidity.

[HonestTom]

14 minutes ago, TrainMan2001 said:

The odd thing is, now Hornby are producing non-faced versions of their Percy, and haven't had any issues copyright thrown at them, considering Bachmann now own the license.

This is something I've wondered about. The range was introduced in 1985 and the TV series premiered in October 1984, which suggests that Hornby were likely working on it before the TV series came out. At that time, Thomas was something of a gamble - Britt Allcroft said that a number of companies thought she was crazy for producing a TV series based on a forty-year-old series of books about steam trains. On that basis, perhaps Hornby were able to come up with a more favourable deal than Bachmann were when the brand was a multinational success.

[TrainMan2001]

10 minutes ago, Fireline said:

 

The people who own the Licence deem the face being attached to the loco the thing that identifies it as one of the Thomas & Friends franchise. The rules they lay down for preserved lines running events have to be seen to be believed. The shape of Percy, or any other loco, in model form has never been 100% as originally drawn, but close. It was tolerated, on the basis that the face then made it the loco. Without the face, it's just something that looks similar.

 

Maybe, but Bachmann did the same thing (no face, different livery), and they were shot down with copyright when Hornby owned the license.

[Kris]

2 minutes ago, LNERandBR said:

It's the name 'The Titfield Thunderbolt' which will be the sticking point. It depends on Studio Canal and if they want to stop Hornby using it on their product.

You can't copyright a name but you can trademark one, StudioCanal appear not to have done this as a simple search on the .gov.uk trademark website shows no records, either in a search for the name or from a search of all of the trademarked names that StudioCanal have. 

[MarkSG]

On a different note, am I the only one who thinks that "Trains on Film" sounds like a song title? Well, anyway...

 

 

See them walking hand in hand across the bridge at midnight
Heads turning as the lights flashing out are so bright
Then walk right out to the main line track
There's a camera rolling at the back, at the back
And I sense the spotters frothing in a frenzy all the way down the line

 

Trains on film
Trains on film
Trains on film
Trains on film

 

Titfield livery over the Lion as it's falling
In legal deep blue water coming in on the wire
The driving man's pulling up right there
'Cause the crowd all love putting money on the pair, on the pair
And they wonder how they ever got here as it rolls onwards again

 

Trains on film (two mini-heroes)
Trains on film
Trains on film (from the pictures)
Trains on film

 

Margate bosses smiling like they've made a million
Rivals pumping live heat saying this will go higher
Take one last glimpse at things ahead
Before the forums close the thread, close the thread
Give me rumours in a whisper and we'll see that on YouTube's a star

 

Trains on film (it's more than a loco)
Trains on film
Trains on film (two mini-heroes)
Trains on film
Trains on film (see you in court now)
Trains on film
Trains on film (see you later)
Trains on film
Trains on film (what will you buy)
Trains on film

[Compound2632]

3 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

I doubt any lawyers would feel the need to get involved in an old but extremely delightful saddle tank

 

 

 

Now that I'd buy, so long as I could get hold of a replacement Dean smokebox door...

 

But I dare say you can point out to me a myriad other differences between 1949 and 1902 condition!

[Bernard Lamb]

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

Chances of me buying a TF from either maker: nil, because neither is the right scale for my interests, however …….

What a nasty, unpleasant, mean-spirited, brattish piece of behaviour from Hornby.

 

They may well have found a way of doing it legally, or at least be confident that they have, and it might be argued that all’s fair in love and commercial competition, but I just can’t help hoping that the gods of natural justice cause warps in their moulding tool, and Mazak-rot in their castings.

 

Deeply, deeply unlikeable.

 

Any worse than how they reacted to Hattons and Rails?

Sounds about par for the course to me.

Bernard

[GWR8700]

I know nothing of Intellectual Property Rights and the legal issues surrounding this but it just leaves a sour taste.

Rapido bought the rights to sell a set with 'Titfield Thurderbolt' and market it as such.  Hornby missed the train and have decided to go ahead anyway and throw their weight around...again.

I know they were in a difficult position for a few years and have to look out for number one, first and foremost.  However, surely they can turn a profit without duplicating models by other competitors and in some cases, straight up copying their ideas!

[Johann Marsbar]

Have Hornby got anything suitable to be used for a set commemorating that infamous production filmed at the Epping & Ongar a few years back........???? 

[Nearholmer]

The legal stuff, if there actually is any of substance, will play out, but it seems to me that what r-t-r 00 buyers really ought to be focusing on is a question that goes something like this:

 

Is it in the better interests of r-t-r 00 buyers to have:

 

a) Hornby as a very large part of the hobby, acting as the default public face, and probably providing an “entry point” for at least some new recruits, and at the same acting to crush nascent competition if it can; or,

 

b) for Hornby to descend to a slightly lesser place, and “the trade” to re-shape to be much more pluralistic, and without a single company sufficiently dominant to be the default public face?

 

I don’t claim to know what is in the best interests of buyers of r-t-r 00, but I do think that trying to maintain a “broad spectrum, complete system, entry-level to highly-specialised” model railway company is rowing against the tide of history at the moment, because the technology enables new entrants, and because the lucrative part of the market (adult enthusiasts, many not exactly youthful) doesn’t really want or need to buy a complete system from one company, it actively enjoys pluralistic supply. 

 

Other hobbies seem to thrive, and attract new entrants, without needing a dominant, whole-system supplier to act as their public face. There are big suppliers of fishing tackle, plastic model ‘plane kits, football gear etc, but they aren’t “the hobby” in the same way that some seem to believe Hornby necessarily has to be.

 

In short: is it in your interests for Hornby to crush competition, because Hornby is so important to your hobby that it has to be defended against all threats, by any legal means?

 

(Phatbob has nailed a very good point: I will remember only this Titfield Truculence from today’s announcement)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 10, 2022 by Nearholmer

[Not Jeremy]

I would guess that Hornby have checked out the legal situation, but whatever the legality may be this is a poor move on Hornby's part I think.

 

Sour grapes would seem to feature, and speaking as a Simon I rather wish Simon would stop giving Simons a bad name.

 

What is it that he says on the television - "we are selling dreams"....

 

Strange dreams.

 

Simon

[Global]

44 minutes ago, Phatbob said:

I have come to the conclusion this morning that today's announcement by Hornby has been a resounding shot in the foot, at least in terms of their reputation within this forum.  They've made a huge annoucemnt of all sorts of new stuff, and the only thing people are talking about is their deliberate attempt to damage the sales of a competitor's new product by a deliberate and wasteful duplication, which is being perceived (rightly or wrongly) as a spiteful act of bullying. 
Whether or not they get sued sucessfully over this is a moot point IMHO.  They've done themselves no favours with modellers by deliberate duplication, which we all hate.  THe biggest frustration as a modeller these days is lack of supply and huge waiting times for new products.  None us us want to have to choose between two duplicate new models.  We want to see two new models of something different, where we might even buy both of them.
This is weapons grade stupidity.

Personally I don’t agree with no duplication across the board as that would mean some of the Hornby models I’d like to see done much better (31 and HST for example) wouldn’t! 
 

I do believe in an open market and that those who bring out the better models and for the best value succeed.

 

Where my issues lies is in Hornby’s bullying tactics and trying to spoil the market for better models by flooding the market with mediocre ones when they get a whiff of competition! I’m sure if someone else announced a BR Blue 31/4 for example then suddenly one would appear from Hornby despite ignoring requests for one for years! 

In the past I probably would of or have purchased Hornby, but I’ve now reached the point where I’d rather do without and hope that someone better produces a competing model

[Miss Prism]

21 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

But I dare say you can point out to me a myriad other differences between 1949 and 1902 condition!

 

err, yes, but this thread is not the right place!

 

[Global]

11 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

The legal stuff, if there actually is any of substance, will play out, but it seems to me that what r-t-r 00 buyers really ought to be focusing on is a question that goes something like this:

 

Is it in the better interests of r-t-r 00 buyers to have:

 

a) Hornby as a very large part of the hobby, acting as the default public face, and probably providing an “entry point” for at least some new recruits, and at the same acting to crush nascent competition if it can; or,

 

b) for Hornby to descend to a slightly lesser place, and “the trade” to re-shape to be much more pluralistic, and without a single company sufficiently dominant to be the default public face?

 

I don’t claim to know what is in the best interests of buyers of r-t-r 00, but I do think that trying to maintain a “broad spectrum, complete system, entry-level to highly-specialised” model railway company is rowing against the tide of history at the moment, because the technology enables new entrants, and because the lucrative part of the market (adult enthusiasts, many not exactly youthful) doesn’t really want or need to buy a complete system from one company, it actively enjoys pluralistic supply. 

 

Other hobbies seem to thrive, and attract new entrants, without needing a dominant, whole-system supplier to act as their public face. There are big suppliers of fishing tackle, plastic model ‘plane kits, football gear etc, but they aren’t “the hobby” in the same way that some seem to believe Hornby necessarily has to be.

 

In short: is it in your interests for Hornby to crush completion?

 

 

My own view would be for Hornby to stick to Railroad and Playtrain type stuff and leave the serious models to those who can do them justice! They have that segment of the market almost to themselves and should probably maximise that rather than picking fights and trying to snub out competition. 

[freightliner_bond_57007]

2 hours ago, Steven B said:

I suspect the wording "inspired by" will be Hornby's get out of jail free card. There's no other branding relating to the film on the packaging - unlike the Rapido artwork which borrows heavily from the film.

 

I wonder if there will be an "inspired by James Bond" limited edition of the ex-Lima class 20 painted black with a glued on shart nose and couple of Russian looking Mk1s...

 

Steven B.

Yes please. 
 

Cheers

Alan

 

 

[TEAMYAKIMA]

One thing is not clear to me.

 

I thought (and perhaps I'm wrong) that Hornby had been working on their concept before Rapido made their announcement. Now, I wish to make it clear that, if that is the case, I am not accusing Rapido of copying Hornby, but equally if that is the case it would be an unfortunate case of two companies working on 'secret' projects, each without being aware of the other.

 

I have based my previous comments on my belief that Hornby had been planning/developing their range after the success of ROCKET. Therefore their range was being developed before the Rapido intervention and Hornby are not copying Rapido. If I am wrong and it were the case that Hornby invented this range just to crush RAPIDO then that is another matter. Can someone give any guidance please?