Stryker MGS in 2007

[Dook]

Saw the Stryker MGS at the AUSA Meeting today. I asked the GD rep when he expected it to be fielded. He said it is currently in low-rate production and is undergoing gunnery trials. The next decision point is summer 2007. Assuming that decision is favorable, he expected the Army to start fielding them soon thereafter.

Amazingly enough, he was unaware of CMSF. Could be a giant marketing opportunity for GD.

[MikeyD]

I don't know which is the more exciting, you getting up-close to a Sryker MGS or you informing General Dynamics of CMSF's existance! Of course, absolute worse case scenario is BFC gets contacted by a pack of legal wiesels concerning copyright concerns.

But I hear Trumpeter models has come out with a new 1:35 Stryker kit. So maybe General Dynamics isn't a real a hard-ass on the issue, like some companies are these days.

[Battlefront.com]

Oddly enough, I am trying to figure out what the legal issues are. I'm waiting for a return phonecall. Half the battle is knowing who to talk to

Steve

[metalbrew]

Forgive me if this is simplistic, but we own the Stryker. Paid for with our taxes. Does GD actually own the brand image? Someday, very soon I'm sure, our troops are going to war with Yahoo.com fighting vehicles and Taco Bell rifles.

If the media can use images of the vehicle without worries (for their own profit) why would BFC be held to a different standard? With the flood of crappy games using Strykers in their artwork you'd think this issue would be hashed out already.

[MikeyD]

"... but we own the Stryker. Paid for with our taxes."

Try using the 'Smokey Bear' image without government approval and you're liable to find yourself chained to a steel floor on Gitmo! :eek:

I've heard grumblings on other hobby boards in the past that aircraft manufacurers especially are becoming more posessive with thier "intellectual property" and giving kit manufaturers fits in the process. I've wondered if that was why we haven't see armored M1114 models for example - they'd be considered part of the proprietary "Hummer®" label and legally off-limits?

Again this is all worst-case-scenario stuff. In the current environment manufacturers - and the Pentagon - PAYS production companies to sneak their products into TV shows.

[Sequoia]

Steve

Talk to Tanq Tonic. He's a patent law attorney.

[Sgt Joch]

It's an interesting question. I'm an attorney in real life (though you may not have guessed it based on my posts here ), although not in the IP field.

Speaking generally, it's not clear that GD would have copyright in the image of the Stryker and therefore that BFC would have to obtain their consent to include the Stryker in CMSF.

Otherwise, for example, any television or film producer would have to obtain the consent of car manufacturers for every car which appears in their program or film.(gratuitous car analogy )

Even if there was copyright, BFC may still be able to use the image without consent, based on the "fair use" doctrine, which allows the use of the copyrighted work if, generally, it has no negative impact on the owner of the copyright, which it clearly would not (unless GD thinks the Stryker blows up too easily in CMSF, which may scare off potential customers ).

The safest course of action, of course, would be to get GD's consent, but following that logic, you would have to get the consent of the manufacturers of every piece of equipment used in the game, blue or red.

p.s.: what is up with the CHAT?, it's been down for a week.

[akd]

Originally posted by Sumac:

Forgive me if this is simplistic, but we own the Stryker. Paid for with our taxes. Does GD actually own the brand image? Someday, very soon I'm sure, our troops are going to war with Yahoo.com fighting vehicles and Taco Bell rifles.

If the media can use images of the vehicle without worries (for their own profit) why would BFC be held to a different standard? With the flood of crappy games using Strykers in their artwork you'd think this issue would be hashed out already.

Recent experience with the Il-2 series suggests that the big defense contractors don't agree with you.

At an absolute minimum, do not use the name General Dynamics anywhere on your product. I would also hesitate to use the letter/number designation or name "Stryker" in reference to the actual vehicle model in the product packaging/advertising.

Also, what would happen in court is irrelevant, as what would be a trifle expense to GD would bankrupt Battlefront. What the defense companies assert matters more than actual rights. For example, from Lockheed-Martin:

The following is a non-exclusive list of registered trademarks, registered service marks, or trademarks or service marks of Lockheed Martin Corporation or its subsidiaries, in the United States and/or other countries or jurisdictions:

A (& DESIGN), A2100, ABOVE AND BEYOND, ACP, ACTRAVIS, AEGIS, AEROCRAFT, AEROCRAFT (& DESIGN), AEROSPACEWARRIOR, AIMPOINT (Stylized), AIR EXPRESS, ALAM, ALERT, ALTAIR, AMERICA'S SILENT HERO, AN/APG-67, AN/APS-145, ANALYTYX, ARGMatch, ARMY TACTICAL MISSILE SYSTEM, ARQUEST, ARQUEST (& DESIGN), ARROWHEAD, ATACMS, ATHENA, ATLAS, ATLAS (& DESIGN), ATLAS A (& DESIGN), ATLAS III, ATLAS V, AUP, AUTOGRAPHICS, B-24, BLACKBIRD, BLU-109, BLU-116, BSY-2, C-130, C-141, C-5, CASS, CAVP, CBREWS, CENTAUR, CHALLENGER MARINE, CHAPARRAL, CKEM, CODE ONE, COMPU-SCENE, COMSAT, COMSAT (& Design), COMSAT (DESIGN ONLY), COMSAT STAR, CONSTELLATION, CONSTITUTION, CSC SATELLITE (DESIGN ONLY), DEFINING MOMENTS, DFT, DISPLAY BROKER, DSMAC, EAGLE (DESIGN ONLY), EagleSpeed, EASISTAR, EDGE FACTORY, ELECTRA, EMBRACE SPACE, EMBRACE SPACE (& DESIGN), ERR, ESAR, ESTARS, E-SATCENTRAL, ETOC, eTOC (STYLIZED), ETRACK IT, EXAMINER 3DX, EXPLORER, F/A-22, F/A-22 RAPTOR, F-104, F-117, F-16, F-16 (Configuration), F-16 FIGHTING FALCON, F-22, F-35, F-35 JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER (Design Only), F-80, F-94, FalconSAR, FAST HULL, FASTRAK, FIGHTER ENTERPRISE (& DESIGN), FIGHTING FALCON, FIRST LOOK, FIRST SHOT, FIRST KILL, FLIGHT DECK, FORMTEK, FORMTEK ORION, FROM THE DEPTHS OF THE OCEANS TO THE FAR REACHES OF SPACE, FUTUREPOINT, GALAXY, GLOBAL 21, GLOBAL ACCESS (& DESIGN), GLOBAL BUSINESS SOLUTIONS,GLOBAL SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT LMAP COUNCIL etc. (& DESIGN), GMLRS, HAVE LITE, HAWKEYE, HAWKEYE XR, HELLFIRE, HELLFIRE II, HERCULES, HI, HI GAIN, HI GAIN (& DESIGN), HI SEAS, HIGH MOBILITY ARTILLERY ROCKET SYSTEM, HIGH TIDE, HIMARS, HUDSON, IDAS/MATT, IEP-CAM, ILS, ILS (& DESIGN), ImageCoder, IMAGER, INTELLIGENT LIBRARY SYSTEM, INTERNATIONAL LAUNCH SERVICES, Inc., INVENTIT, INVENTIT (& Design), JASSM, JETSTAR, JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER, JSF, KELLY AVIATION CENTER, KELLY AVIATION CENTER, A LOCKHEED MARTIN AFFILIATE (& Design), L-1011, LANTIRN, LASER UT, LIBERATOR, LIGHT MOVER, LINCOCITY, LINE-OF-SIGHT ANTITANK, LINE-OF-SIGHT ANTITANK (STYLIZED), LINKOSITY, LINKOSITY (& DESIGN), LINKOSITY (DESIGN ONLY), LM PEOPLE, LMC, LMCO, LMC PROPERTIES, LM-STAR, LM-XPRESS, LOCAAS, LOCKHEED, LOCKHEED (& DESIGN), LOCKHEED MARTIN, LOCKHEED MARTIN (& DESIGN), LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION, LOCKHEED MARTIN STAR (DESIGN ONLY), Lockheed Martin STARS Institute, Lockheed Martin STARS Institute (& Design), LODESTAR, LONGBOW, LONGBOW HELLFIRE, LOSAT, LUNAR PROSPECTOR, MA-25, MAIL CART SYSTEMS, mARS, MARS FLYING BOAT, MARTIN, MAXIPLAN, MAXIPURGE, MAXISORT, MAXISTAR, MAXISTAR ONSCHEDULE, METEOSTAR, METRIXWORKS METRICS MADE EASY (& DESIGN), METROGUARD, MEWSS PIP, MH-60R, MI-15, MICAD, MILLENNIUM DRIVER TRAINER SYSTEM, MILSTAR, MISSION SUCCESS, MISSION SYSTEMS, MLRS, MMSR, MOMENT OF TRUTH, MSTAR, MSTAR TECHNOLOGY, MTOC, MULTIPLE LAUNCH ROCKET SYSTEM, MULTIPLE LAUNCH ROCKET SYSTEM (STYLIZED), NEPTUNE, NETFIRES, NEW MEXICO CAPITAL NETWORK, NIGHTHAWK, NITE Hawk, NO HIGHER STANDARD, OCEAN 21, OMNISTAR, ORION, ORLANDO CENTRAL PARK, OUT HERE THERE ARE NO STOP SIGNS, P-2V, P-3, P-3 Orion, P-38 LIGHTNING, P-38J LIGHTNING, P-80, PAC-3, PAL (& DESIGN), PANTERA, PARTNERSHIPS MAKE A WORLD OF DIFFERENCE, PATHMAKER, PERFORMANCE BY THE HOUR, PGMM, PIBOX, PIRA, PLUG AND FIGHT, POLAR, POSTAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC., PREDATOR, PS-59, PSTAR, PTC, P-TEN, PTI, RADIANT MERCURY, RADIANT MERCURY (& Design), RADIANT TRUST, RADIANT TRUST (& DESIGN), RAINBOW, RAPTOR, RATE, RRPR, S-3, S-3B, SAFE, SATCENTER, SATELLITE CONTROL SYSTEM 21, SATS, SATURN, SEA SENTINEL, SEA TALON, SEASTAR, SENTRY OWL, SHIELD, SHOOTING STAR, SILENT KEYER, SILENT SENTRY, SIRIUS, SKUNK (DESIGN ONLY), SKUNK WORKS, SKYLINE, SKYTRACKER, SLICE, SMARTBRIDGE, SNAKE EYES, SnifferSTAR, SNIPER, SNIPER XR, SOE INSTITUTE, SOLUTION 21, SPACE BOY (DESIGN ONLY), SPEAR, SR-71, ST3000, STABILITE, STABILITE STAR (DESIGN ONLY), STARFIGHTER, STARFIRE, STARLIFTER, SttL, SUPER CONSTELLATION, SYNCHRONETICS, TACMS, TADS/PNVS, TALARIA, TBMCS, TEAM WIN-T, THAAD, THE FIGHTER ENTERPRISE (& DESIGN), THE FIGHTER ENTERPRISE (DESIGN ONLY), THE POWER TO LIFT A NATION, THE POWER TO LIFT THE WORLD, TITAN, TOPSCENE, TOUCH N' GO CALIBRATION,TPP (& Design), TRIDENT, U-2, UNITED SPACE ALLIANCE, UNITED WE SERVE, URET CCLD, USA (& DESIGN), V2 (squared-STYLIZED), VALIANT, VALIDIAN, VALIDIAN (& Design), VEGA HARPOON, VEGA VENTURA, VENTURE VISION, VENTURESTAR, VENTURESTAR EXPLOSION (DESIGN ONLY), VERS L'UNIVERS, VIEU STAR, VIKING, VISTA, VLA, VOUGHT, VTMIS, WCMD, WE BRING YOU THE WORLD, WE NEVER FORGET WHO WE'RE WORKING FOR, WELDALITE, X-35, XD, XR, ZIP SEAL, ZIP-STRIP

Configurations and designs of aircraft and spacecraft may also be registered trademarks or are trademarks of Lockheed Martin Corporation, including without limitation, the configuration of certain fighter aircraft such as the configuration of the F-16 FIGHTING FALCON, JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER, F/A-22, and P-38 LIGHTNING aircraft.

To the extent a name, logo or design does not appear on the above list, such lack of appearance does not constitute a waiver of any intellectual property rights that Lockheed Martin Corporation has established in its product or service names or logos, or in product configurations or designs, all of which rights are expressly reserved.

This has, of course, been an ongoing issue with plastic model kit makers and distributers for many years, one in which they have been repeatedly bent over and made to take it.

[ October 11, 2006, 11:08 AM: Message edited by: akd ]

[flamingknives]

I think, to a certain extent, that one of the reasons that corporations like LM use such copyright issues to ensure that models are a fair representation of the real items, and don't reflect badly on the producer.

[Sgt Joch]

Even with my limited knowledge of IP law, I can tell you that Lockheed Martin is stretching the enveloppe and it's doubtful that a court would uphold all of their claims.

AKD brings up an important point however, these companies have the means to aggressively enforce their claims in court. A small company can't afford to contest those lawsuits, even if they win, it will cost them a small fortune in legal fees.

[Sgt Joch]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

I think, to a certain extent, that one of the reasons that corporations like LM use such copyright issues to ensure that models are a fair representation of the real items, and don't reflect badly on the producer.

Under IP law, if you don't enforce a claim, you may be held to have abandoned or waived your right. I would guess the real reason they enforce their rights against model makers is to prevent a legal precedent from being established which could be used against them in a case where real money is involved. It's a standard legal strategy.

[MikeyD]

I suspect this thread may be giving Moon ulsers. Even a 3% chance of litigation would be enough to cause sleepless nights for me. Maybe BFC should try to snag a government contract like they did with Australia and CMAK. Maybe a Pentagon link would 'innoculate' them from any legal harrassment.

[akd]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

I think, to a certain extent, that one of the reasons that corporations like LM use such copyright issues to ensure that models are a fair representation of the real items, and don't reflect badly on the producer.

So that's why Northrop-Grumman went after 1C/Maddox / Ubisoft for Hellcats, Wildcats, Avengers etc. Sure would be bad if a poor representation cut into their TBF Avenger sales...

[flammenwerfer]

But I hear Trumpeter models has come out with a new 1:35 Stryker kit. So maybe General Dynamics isn't a real a hard-ass on the issue, like some companies are these days. [/QB]

Trumpeter is a Chinese company, and probably not concerned with copyright issues.