Just got word from Nassau that the graffiti Genset was canceled due to a licensing issue. What a shame.
Attachments
Images (1)
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
That’s a bummer, that’s the one I ordered, hope I can get in on the early order with another road name. Thank You very much for this information. Happy Railroading
I ordered one also. 
My guess is that UP might have balked at having their engines decorated/displayed like that - for a variety of reasons.
Was looking forward to it!
Darn! Was looking forward to it.
Agreed! I have the Vision UP Genset and was looking to increase the fleet for switching. I wish UP wasn't so high strung.
I also ordered the BNSF Genset, now I'll need to add the other UP offered.
I think Richie nailed it.
My recollection was that after the UP licensing dust-up, UP said no graffiti units. Personally I agree with it; if you want graffiti, there are plenty of decals available for that purpose.
@AGHRMatt posted:........if you want graffiti, there are plenty of decals available for that purpose.
Is a hobbyist allowed to do that? That is decorate a hobby UP rail road item in a manner that UP does not approve. It says on all packaging that the colors logos and such are owned by the Union Pacific Corporation. If Lionel is in violation of UP's trademark policy then by extension the hobbyist that decorates a model train in Union Pacific colors in a manner that UP does not approve would be in violation of that policy. I guess one could argue the sole private use, but once the hobbyist showed their UP graffiti decorated to another human being it would no longer be for private use. Where does it stop?
@WBC posted:Is a hobbits allowed to do that? That is decorate a hobby UP rail road item in a manner that UP does not approve. It says on all packaging that the colors logos and such are owned by the Union Pacific Corporation. If Lionel is in violation of UP's trademark policy then by extension the hobbyist that decorates a model train in Union Pacific colors in a manner that UP does not approve would be in violation of that policy. I guess one could argue the sole private use, but once the hobbyist showed their UP graffiti decorated to another human being it would no longer be for private use. Where does it stop?
The hobbyist has *not* signed a licensing agreement with Union Pacific, therefore the hobbyist is *not* bound by the terms and conditions in any such agreement executed between Lionel and UP.
Stu
@WBC posted:Is a hobbyist allowed to do that? That is decorate a hobby UP rail road item in a manner that UP does not approve. It says on all packaging that the colors logos and such are owned by the Union Pacific Corporation. If Lionel is in violation of UP's trademark policy then by extension the hobbyist that decorates a model train in Union Pacific colors in a manner that UP does not approve would be in violation of that policy. I guess one could argue the sole private use, but once the hobbyist showed their UP graffiti decorated to another human being it would no longer be for private use. Where does it stop?
Private Use, You can do whatever you want with Your train.
@WBC posted:Is a hobbits allowed to do that? That is decorate a hobby UP rail road item in a manner that UP does not approve. It says on all packaging that the colors logos and such are owned by the Union Pacific Corporation. If Lionel is in violation of UP's trademark policy then by extension the hobbyist that decorates a model train in Union Pacific colors in a manner that UP does not approve would be in violation of that policy. I guess one could argue the sole private use, but once the hobbyist showed their UP graffiti decorated to another human being it would no longer be for private use. Where does it stop?
It is very debatable whether a model train manufacturer would really be infringing a railroad's trademark by producing a model in that railroad's livery, since consumers would unlikely to be confused about the source, origin, or sponsorship of the model.
But even assuming that the manufacturer might be infringing a trademark by marketing a model without a license, the hobbyist who decorates a model at home is not using the mark "in commerce", which is a predicate for trademark infringement under the Lanham Act.
You would have thought, whatever the issue is, that Lionel would have cleared it up prior to including it in the catalog.
@Bossman284 posted:You would have thought, whatever the issue is, that Lionel would have cleared it up prior to including it in the catalog.
I agree. However, this isn't the first time. Remember the Arkansas and Missouri SD70ACe Lionel had cataloged? That was cancelled too.
probably couldnt get licensing from all of the "artists" ........
Would UP even allow a unit looking like that to remain in service?
---PCJ
@RailRide posted:Would UP even allow a unit looking like that to remain in service?
---PCJ
At 1:49...
Rusty
@RailRide posted:Would UP even allow a unit looking like that to remain in service?
---PCJ
It happens: https://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=598243
But no more than 3 at a time: https://www.railpictures.net/v...id=571383&nseq=1
What if the importer was to simply eliminate UPY, the shield, and call this by another roadname? i.e., BNSF, CSX, Graffiti, NS, UP...
Steve
My first impression was that Lionel overdid it on the graffiti, jeez, after seeing those units they weren't even close!
@L & N posted:What if the importer was to simply eliminate UPY, the shield, and call this by another roadname? i.e., BNSF, CSX, Graffiti, NS, UP...
Steve
1) The underlying paint would be wrong in the first place.
2) Why chance incurring UP's wrath (like cancelling the license agreement) by keeping the paint and eliminating the logo's and lettering. Also, BNSF, CSX, NS, might not be too happy with their logo's on UP yellow and gray.
Rusty
@Rusty Traque posted:2) Why chance incurring UP's wrath (like cancelling the license agreement) by keeping the paint and eliminating the logo's and lettering. Also, BNSF, CSX, NS, might not be too happy with their logo's on UP yellow and gray.
Rusty
Why would you put BNSF CSX or another railroads logos on it? Simply do not put any reporting marks on it, call it what you want graffiti, leased engine, retired engine, whatever, don't list it as UP. The BNSF, CSX etc were just the other railroads listed as being produced. I did NOT say put those logos on the locomotive, I said to remove the UP ones.
Steve
@AGHRMatt posted:My recollection was that after the UP licensing dust-up, UP said no graffiti units. Personally I agree with it; if you want graffiti, there are plenty of decals available for that purpose.
Well putt Matt.
@RickO posted:It happens: https://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=598243
But no more than 3 at a time: https://www.railpictures.net/v...id=571383&nseq=1
Thats interesting. My grandson and I watch UP engines and trains almost every evening. I've never seen graffiti on any of the engines. The consist is usually plastered but never seen it on an engine
How come the Tagger missed the trucks, windows and headlights? Here in Germany, complete sides of passenger cars have been covered with "Artwork" for the entire world to admire. On the other hand, it's not too swift for the passenger who had planned to admire the beautiful green German countryside passing by, through the painted over window on the train he or she paid to ride on of course!
In the event the UPY switcher is produced, and you just gotta get one, go for it! You have my blessing, because it's your $$$, not mine!
However, I fully understand why Union Pacific wouldn't approve this project. Afterall, spraying graffiti is still against the law, right? For UP to OK such a project would be sending the wrong message, saying in effect, that the railroad approves of trespassers who deface their private property, which includes the locomotive and freight car fleet.
Item: Why not hire a Graffiti artist to beautify the exterior of your house? It will surely become the talk of the town and most likely make Breaking News at the same time! WOW, just think, you'll make YouTube!
So UP management actually thumbs through the Lionel catalog 
It would be interesting to know how many Union Pacific employees (both management and operating) are model railroaders and perhaps also subscribe to O Gauge Railroading!
During the years I was employed with both Cotton Belt and the AT&SF (1967-1976) I knew several co-workers who maintained a very low profile if they were a model railroader or railfan too for that matter. Not so here in Germany. I was employed with DB from 1979 until my 2010 retirement and became friends with a good number of fellow employees (management and operating) who were indeed model railroaders and railfans alike!
@EMD posted:So UP management actually thumbs through the Lionel catalog
My guess is someone clued them in or Lionel is obligated to send a catalog preview to them per their agreement. It's a bummer. I get it from Union Pacific's perspective though. At the same time, how does Lionel selling a graffitied model train really hurt UP and their bottom line?
@hirailsteve posted:My guess is someone clued them in or Lionel is obligated to send a catalog preview to them per their agreement. It's a bummer. I get it from Union Pacific's perspective though. At the same time, how does Lionel selling a graffitied model train really hurt UP and their bottom line?
The answer is that it doesn't.
Opel lost a court battle in the EU over this. While I don't think any case has made it to the SCOTUS, I personally believe any case that rose to that level would lose outright, but the problem is that the court and defense costs would probably exceed the ability of a model/toy company to pay. The Class I railroads are considerably larger than the toy companies.
Scale models are a form of art - and I highly doubt anyone would argue against someone making a painting of a UP engine.
The whole thing is silly.
Apparently Union Pacific is going over Lionel's product history. The graffitied 86' High Cube (#1926053) is no longer on their website. I had been on the fence to get one for a long time, pulled the triggered now and bought from a Forum Sponsor.
@rplst8 posted:The answer is that it doesn't.
Opel lost a court battle in the EU over this. While I don't think any case has made it to the SCOTUS, I personally believe any case that rose to that level would lose outright, but the problem is that the court and defense costs would probably exceed the ability of a model/toy company to pay. The Class I railroads are considerably larger than the toy companies.
Scale models are a form of art - and I highly doubt anyone would argue against someone making a painting of a UP engine.
The whole thing is silly.
Thanks for the lead to Opel case - I hadn't seen that one. I'm don't know if there's a comparable case in US law yet; definitely not one at the Supreme Court level.
Hey Steve.
Too bad about the Graffiti UP Gen. If a modeler wants have a little more realism in the layout I would think that the graffiti is appropriate. I have to agree with Matt about the availability of decals for the graffiti though
When changing an engine logo I've often thought that maybe I was infringing on a company's copyright.......but hey....it's for my own personal use right ? That is , until I would maybe sell the engine or car .!!??? Don't know how that plays out.
@hirailsteve posted:Apparently Union Pacific is going over Lionel's product history. The graffitied 86' High Cube (#1926053) is no longer on their website. I had been on the fence to get one for a long time, pulled the triggered now and bought from a Forum Sponsor.
Thanks for the "heads up" Steve.
Donald
@Dallas Joseph posted:Hey Steve.
Too bad about the Graffiti UP Gen. If a modeler wants have a little more realism in the layout I would think that the graffiti is appropriate. I have to agree with Matt about the availability of decals for the graffiti though
When changing an engine logo I've often thought that maybe I was infringing on a company's copyright.......but hey....it's for my own personal use right ? That is , until I would maybe sell the engine or car .!!??? Don't know how that plays out.
Agreed about the decals. I switched my order to UPY 2706, I'll look around for some decals and practice before I receive it. I'll leave it to the lawyers to figure out the agreement and legality of it all. At end of the day it's the UPs call.
@hirailsteve posted:Apparently Union Pacific is going over Lionel's product history. The graffitied 86' High Cube (#1926053) is no longer on their website. I had been on the fence to get one for a long time, pulled the triggered now and bought from a Forum Sponsor.
Hey Steve .......you gotta photo of that High Cube ?
I don't yet have it in hand so I don't have my own pictures. Google Lionel 1926053 and you'll see some Forum Sponsor links. Or you can look in the Lionel 2018 Volume 2 catalog on page 43.
I like that UP is pulling the licensing of these graffiti models. The UP corporation will never condone the spray painting of their equipment. It is illegal. It is pure vandalism and trespassing which then sets them up for litigation when somebody is injured.
Anybody here OK with someone spray painting their car, house, or fence with different colors, figures, and wording? I didn’t think so.
If you like it then go ahead and vandalize your own trains. Become a would be "artist" like all those others out there.
HERE's the reason: I had this happen a while ago. UP like any other corporation where the logos and marks are used to represent the corporation have "people" who are paid to protect the logo from infringement or use in any inappropriate setting that could "besmirch" or hold the company in disrepute.
So one or more of the UP's copyright and trademark police decided that the association of the UP mark with graffiti looked bad. Told Lionel to either remove the graffiti or the UP marks.
It's as simple as that.
