Now that is a politically sensitive issue except in Vermont and California.

On what grounds?

If (for example) you were an English company (or the customer who ordered them was English) then they have no right (and the same is true for most countries) - especially as the original is over 20 years old.

It is only possible to copyright works of art (which includes books).
No matter how beautiful a car is, it was built as a car not a work of art so the shape is not copy protected.

Design protection lasts a limited period of time and is really to cover full size copies (e.g. replacement components).
Anything over 20 years old has no design protection, so you can model away.

Logos and trademarks are heavily protected, and this lasts for a long time - if you were to copy the Ferrari badge or lettering on your model then they can sue you for reproducing that, but not the rest of the model.

You can check this with the UK patent office who are responsible for such things.
http://www.patent.gov.uk/

We discussed this with them when someone suggested that because he was the son of a team founder he had the exclusive rights to anything his Dad's company had built.
The only thing they could do was question the badge on the car (which he doesn't own the rights to anyway), but if you buy a badge from them then there is no problem with that either...........

Of course Mattel's lawyer's might threaten you (like they can threaten anyone) - but no one is going to listen to a case when they don't have one (excuse me judge we mistakenly paid a fortune for something isn't going to get a court appointment), and they are in great danger of undermining their licensing business by publicising the fact that (at least) the historic side is bogus.

And a final thought.
If you wanted to cover yourself you could ask the car's current owner for permission, I doubt that Mattel have been asking owner's permission for all the licenses they have been selling.

Peter,
Indeed you are correct, and there should be an entire freedom for anyone to make replicas or representations, images, models of a vehicle that I feel as you do, should be in the public domain. Unfortunately, if you need $200K to prove it in court, it becomes a nasty proposition. In this case, Mattel acts as a narrow-minded bully terrorizing the small toy companies out there. Got a few bucks to prove them wrong?
Regards,

T54

I know that legal costs, especially in the US, can be horrendous but you don't have to use a lawyer - as long as you are sure of the law (and in this case you can check with the appropriate authorities easily) you can reply to their lawyers yourself.

Their lawyers have to persuade a judge that they have a valid case before they can take any action, and that will be rather difficult for them to do.

Perhaps the easiest (e.g. cheapest) thing to do is to spread the word about the limits of their licensing, if enough people are aware then they will stop issuing bullying letters (of course if they are really daft they could try to start a huge number of cases, but that will cost them even more for no return).

Mattel have licensed IXO (formerly Vitesse/Onyx/Quartzo) to model many Ferraris in 1:43 diecast. The models are high quality - on par with Minichamps. IXO also have recently ressurected the La Storia series - a lineup of nearly every Ferrari F1 car! The La Storia line was terminated when Mattel acquired the license, but they have now come to agreement. See these links for more info:


http://www.tomotorsports.com/IXO_product.html

http://www.sportcraftcars.com/IXO_Ferrari.htm

With all due respect, many judges (especially in the USA) WILL take frivolous cases in a partnership with their former colleagues, the ambulance-chaser attorneys. This is how MacDonalds had to pay a couple millions to a woman holding her just-purchased hot coffee between her legs while driving. A fair settlement, would you not say? Stupidity rewarded full-tilt.

By the time Mattel would be done with its legal motions, a small firm would be pushed out of business from its own legal fees, before even getting CLOSE to get to trial.
I personally have been there before, so I know the music pretty well by now.


This combined company is a fairly large outfit, where they can afford to pay the huge licensing fees because the product is made in China. Mattel WILL license such outfits. But if you are a small company with 3 employees producing exquisite models (like Ostorero D&G as an example), forget it, they will spit in your face. This is the point I am making: you don't stand a chance against those bullies.
Regards,

T54

I think we have to much Ferrari models for a livetime already!!
If they are so American:
Why do those boys not make something more special like a set of historic American racing or Indy cars:
T the Historic Indy winners, Frontenac, Duesenberg,Millers, Maserati's,a Blue Crown, some Kurtisses, Watson's, Novi's, Belonds and so on..
We already have so much Ferrari models:
You can fill the Atlantic Ocean with them!!!
Paul Hooft

D&G Ostorero are dedicated to make Indy cars only, as slot cars, in the 1/32 scale.
They produced so far five versions of the Watson-Offenhauser, five Maserati 8CTL and are ready to launch five versions of the Lotus 38. No Ferrari is being planned at this time.





Regards,

T54

We laugh at such cases - and the idea that the damage caused to someone increases with the accused's wealth is particularly bizarre - but I would hate to live in such a society, unfortunately my native country looks to be following a similar trend.

But one thing that might have contributed to so many ludicrous cases being dreampt up might have its uses - the no win no fee lawyer.

Given the potentially high profile nature of such a case isn't it possible to find one of these legal heroes prepared to take the case on?
I suspect that you could find plenty of other people (the car owners as well as the model makers) who would join a class action.

A friend who has a patented product admits that patents are very hard to enforce (at least in his field) but says that no win no fee means he can afford to tie up anyone who does try to steal his idea.

Most people will of course decide that it isn't worth the effort, there are plenty of hassle free cars to model. But it is daft that people keep handing over large amounts of money for nothing .

Aother question: anyone interested in this
Huge 70s SCHUCO BRABHAM FORD FORMULA ONE Key Car 1:16?

http://cgi.ebay.com/Huge-70s-SCHUCO-BRABHA...1QQcmdZViewItem OR

http://tinyurl.com/avxcx (same destination)

This fellow comes along every few months and ruins my budget.
Looks like about 200 opportunities.

--
Frank S
"A merry heart doeth good like a medicine:
but a broken spirit drieth the bones."
~Proverbs 17:22~

This is a bit late, Wolf, so you might miss it, but...

I just acquired, via eBay, the Maisto Targa Florio 300slr, and also have the Mille Miglia car, both 1/18th scale. Quality is very good, especially considering the prices one can sometimes find these at on eBay. My only gripe (and I've posted it recently on another thread) is about the steering wheel. All retro models of this car (and you realise the same car, 300slr-004, won both the races as well as the RAC Tourist Trophy at Dundrod) have a four spoke steering wheel, whereas Moss had his own three-spoke wheel, specially made-up for him by Mercedes, which was moved from car to car with him (including the W196 grand prix cars). I've read various theories as to why, including that it allowed him better to see the rev counter, which is top-dead-centre on the dash, and which can be partly obscured by the vertical spoke of a four-spoke wheel but, without wishing to name-drop too ostentatiously, the Man Himself has told me that he asked for it because it better suited the way he liked to hold the wheel, in the famous 'ten-to-two' position.

When the cars were retired from racing, Mercedes asked Moss if there was anything from 004 that he would like as a souvenir before it went into the museum and he asked for the steering wheel, to hang on his office wall. He still has it. They took off the Moss wheel and replaced it with a standard four-spoke wheel, and put the car in the museum. When the model craze took off, all the photos from which the models were made were thus, of course, of the car in the museum.- with an ordinary four-spoke wheel. This is accurate for any models of these cars with anyone other than Moss as the driver.

What happens now is that the manufacturers make one basic model, then 'badge' it with different race numbers and decals for different drivers and races and sell it to us anoraks as a stunning detailed exact replica, which of course it ain't. Maisto are not alone - my Solitair W196 race number 12, supposedly Moss's British Grand Prix-winning car of 1955, not only has a four-spoke wheel but has inboard front brakes, whereas at Aintree (according to DCN's book - I wasn't there myself) Moss used a short-chassis car with outboard brakes. The Targa Florio car is slightly inaccurate in another regard, in that for that race and as can be clearly seen in contemporary photographs, the car had two spotlights set into the nose intake - why I have no idea, since the Targa was an all-daylight race. The Maisto model does not have those. (This is not a problem for me, since what I really would like is a model of the car as raced at Dundrod - and the spotlights were not used for that day.)

The engine detailing on the cars is very good, the driver's door opens the correct way (.ie. hinged at the front and opening upwards, not outwards) and there are even two spare wheels in the boot.

All-in-all I would say that these Maisto models are as good as you are likely to get: I saw on eBay just a month ago a Brumm (I think it was) 1/43rd scale supposeldy of the Mille Miglia car that even had a full-width wrap-around windscreen, for Heaven's sake!

Of course, if one were a real model maker, it would be possible to take such a model and modify it to be 100% accurate.

I hope this is helpful.

I'm a bit puzzled here, Mal. What sort of windscreen SHOULD it have?

It is a wrap-around windscreen, but the model isn't exactly right...yet what do you expect for a $20 model?

http://www.pistonheads.com/pics/news/11094...n_300_SLR-L.jpg

Yes, its difficult to beleive how wrong some manufacturers get it. Take Brumm for instance. They initially produced a fairly decent model of the Ferrari 126C2 (San Marino GP version). They then decided to cash in and produce the Long Beach version with the famous double rear wing. Good idea. But they shot themselves in the foot when they put the left side of the wing in front of the right. How is it possible to make such a mistake?

The model:
http://ewacars.com/md/bru272.jpg

The real car:
http://members.aol.com/moetdsn/126c.jpg

Model companies don't put anywhere near the time they should on reserach, especially on obscure cars.

big model companies aren't interested in obscure cars.....

It should have a full-width flat windscreen, set vertically, and not wrapping at all at the sides. According to one of my books (can't remember if it is Doug Nye's book, or Jenk's own book, and am too lazy to go and dig it out, but I shall if you wish) they experimented with various shapes and this was the one that afforded least buffeting and wind-swirl in the cockpit.

It is actually rather old fashioned looking, especially when compared with what Jaguar were doing with their windscreens that season. For Le Mans Malcolm Sayer put an almost enclosed wrap-around windshield on the D-type, the rear part of which faired into the very top of the finned headrest fairing (which was also redesigned for '55, to make it more streamlined still and looking less like a conventional fairing with a fin on the top). This reputedly gave an extra 4-5 mph on the Mulsane straight - the fact that the extra speed was attributable to the windscreen alone being demonstrated by Tony Rolt and Duncan Hamilton who insisted on cutting two inches off their screen, so that they could see over the top if it rained. Quoting Norman Dewis (who partnered Don Beauman) in his book Jaguar - The Sporting Heritage Paul Skilleter records that the Dewis/ Beauman car got 192mph on the straight, Rolt/ Hamilton could manage only 187-188mph. ('Only...' - don'tcha love it?)

To keep with the model thread, Quarto faithfully record this change of windscreen in their two versions of Le Mans D-types, their Hawthorn/ Bueb 744RW 1955 car having both the correct windscreen and number plate, their Moss/ Walker 1954 version having the correct, smaller, 1954 windscreen, race number (12) and number plate (OKV 2). Unfortunately they then rather spoil the effect by using the same (1955) llong-nose body and fairing for both models (the 1954 car - still extant - is a short-nose D-type with hump-back fin). They also use a three-spoke wheel in the Hawthorn model, whereas JMH had his own four-spoke fitted when he drove the Jag.

Didn't they cut it to the final shape Moss required at a Hockenheim test? By having the diagonal cut on the drivers side of the car it allowed some air round to cool Moss but still prevented buffeting.

David

That sounds right. It still looks odd though, compared with other sports - and indeed grand prix - cars of the period. Such a streamlined body, and then this WW1 fighter plane windscreen. The usual (single seat) screen on the slr was tiny. BTW, did you know that on the grand prix cars, after a stone broke Moss's windscreen at one race, they fitted a spare windscreen, folded flat out of the way, so that if such a thing ever happened again the driver could, by twisting a knob (or maybe it was pulling a little lever) stow the broken screen flat and raise the replacement, all without coming into the pits?

At Dundrod, for some reason that I have never heard explained, the D-type raced with the driver's side windscreen panel missing. I have no idea why. Maybe it broke, and there was no time to replace it (they had a spare car - in fact, they raced the spare car, and did not use 774RW because of handling problems).
I do not know if the car started with a full screen and then was damaged, or if it was intended to be like that.

mal.

Thanks for the respones, Mal- very informative. I'll keep that in mind, but for now the kid got a Bburago Williams look-alike, 'Formula Atlantic' or something, (poor lad had to go to hospital- it is to remind him he was a big boy about it, and wasn't whining like the bloke who drove that car)... If I was a proper god-father, I'd have made him a set of Camel decals they didn't put on the car too.

Just an fyi....IXO are producing (IIRC) all of the Le Mans winners in 1/43. I have a few in my ever growing collection, and though not a rivet counter I'm fairly well pleased with what I have purchased so far. The 51/53 Jaguars are particulary nice IMHO.

The problem is not only with big model companies. There is a company in Italy called History 43 that makes hand mades that cost about 80 Euros each of some obscure "etceterinis", but they are very crude and not very accurate. If they were of good quality, and accurate, even at 80 Euros, I would buy most everything they make!

How may one find out more about History 43?

Barry:

It's a small company that does mainly "etceterinis", but also has done some odd street cars, such as special bodied Fiat 1400 ambulances. GPM in England has some. Here is a link. Scroll down the new releases. You can also type in Stanguellini in their search engine and find a few others. They are even more expensive than I though! The kits are about 40 pounds and the "factory-built ups" are almost 90 pounds. Look for the prefix HIS in their stocks list Generally, they are found only at Italian model and toy swap meets, or the model shops in Italy such as Tron or Zepplin. No one in the US stocks them and I doubt if any of the model shops down under do either. They are rather difficult to find. By the way, do you remember the hand-carved "stylized" 1/43rd models made by Daffure under the names RD Marmande or RD Manou? They ony were 7 FrF at a stand at LeMans in the early to mid 1960s, and now command around $200 each!!!


http://www.grandprixmodels.co.uk/index.html

bump

This is a common strategy with model builders. Introduce the less popular option first and the collectors who can't wait will buy it. Then intorduce the more popular option (or driver) later and the collectors will buy it too. Results in two sales rather then one.

Barry:

Here is a link to the History models available through GPM. 4 pages...but it is not complete. They made other models that are not on GPMs list..


http://www.grandprixmodels.co.uk/shop/resu...&t=None&c=&#res

Thanks for that, dretceterini.

I quite fancy a Stanguellini, but it would have to be kit - made up are too expensive. (The kits aren't cheap, either.)

The problem with Grand Prix Models is that they are inclined to advertise a lot of things that the cannot actually get. They kept me waiting months and months for a Costin Maserati 450, only to tell me, eventually, that it wasn't available. (I still haven't got one!)

Don't know when this was released but Brumm have now produced a 1/43 of the Ferrari 126 CK and it looks absolutley spot on.

So that's the 126CK and C2 out of the way, just waiting for them to complete the 1980's Ferrari line up and i'll be content.

They need to do the 126 C4 again though, the existing model is seriously out of proportion.

I'm glad this thread has re-opened, as I am having a week of leave from work before going hill-sliding in Canada, the weather is foul and I can't work on either the boat or the garden. So I'm wasting my time and the housekeeping money buying 1/43rds on eBay - and it ain't easy getting accurate pre-55 D-types (I'm not actually a rivet-counter - what a lovely phrase - but I do think somebody should be doing short-nose bodies with and without fins: I don't think I've ever seen a model of OKV2 (Moss, Le Mans and Dundrod 1954 with fin, Berry and Sanderson, entered by Broadhead, 1955 without fin, but Berry put it into a ditchon lap 2). Thanks (to whomever it was put it up) for the link to the Historics, and the Stanguellini. Just bought the IXO Swaters/ Claes D-type that was 3rd Le Mans 55 and found from the same seller, quite by accident, the Swaters/ Claes Ferrari 750 Monza from Nuremburg. A quick change of number, and I have the Swaters/ Claes Monza that I saw in 55 at Dundrod (they came 7th), for which much negelected race I have set myself the pointless task of collecting a representative selection of models. If anyone knows of not-to-expensive sources for a Fraser-Nash Le Mans and a '55 Maserati 300s, I should be grateful.

If anyone can tell me how to do it, I shall put up a picture of an absolutely gorgeous 55 T39 Cooper Bobtail I've just acquired. I've already bored Barry rigid about, and do not feel it fair that he should suffer alone.

Here is a location that has everything for a motorsports collector.

www.motorsportcollector.com

Hello,

here are some very exotic models like Lotus BRM H16, Ferrari 312 1967/1968,
Eagle Weslake and the STP Turbine, all in scale 1/12th.


http://www.john-w.de/models/

Surely it's 'ROSEMEYER'? That's the way it is spelt on his headstone.

John,

What a nice collection and a very nice website too.

Ferrari, by US Law, does have a "monopoly" on the designs of their cars, should they choose to protect those designs. And, by this right, Ferrari (or any other manufacturer or owner of what are called in this country "intellectual properties", has an absolute power to assign those rights to a 3rd party (in this question, Mattel).

Now, if Mattel wants to entertain licensing from very smal producers, they can do that, and should they not care to do so, that is their right as well, under the law. Like it or not, Mattel, or any company acting in the role of licensing agent (try Beanstalk Group-Ford's agent, or Equity Management--licensing agent for all of General Motors, on for size sometime), is under no requirement to be altruistic, a very small license can cost them nearly as much to process as a large one, so it's in their interest to go where the money is. Sure, that limits the possibilities of what model car builders, miniature car collectors, and slot racers get to have, but that is the way of it, at least in the US.

Dennis Doty, then the editor of Model Car Journal Magazine, about 1994, went into quite a fray over licensing of model car kits. That lead to a front page story in the Wall Street Journal, a report on TV news, and some rather lukewarm notice in the US Congress--in short, nothing came of it.

I must confess to knowing rather little about the slot car business and its aftermarket, but if the model car aftermarket is any indicator--licensing agreements there are virtually non-existent. The model car aftermarket (resin bodies and transkits, photo-etched details including badges and scripts, engines, wheels, tires and decal sheets) products regularly get produced, just "under the radar screen", and nobody says much about it, if anything.

Art

It is true that Mattel is not pursuing every and all cottage industries producing models of Ferrari cars, but they could...

This is in direct conflict with international licencing laws. A holder of a licence may or may not grant a sub-licence, but has to establish good reasons for doing so either way. Mattel failed to perform by simply refusing any sub-licencing and threatening the inquiring companies, and that is in direct violation of international trade laws.

All in all, the company that suffered the most damage in this is... Ferrari. Many will no longer touch a Ferrari model and are upset at the company and its policies, and this is not a good way to attract a new generation of customers for their products.
Also Mattel may have to explain to their stockholders why they paid so much money for that licence while the product sales for their own line are to say the least, mediocre.
They nearly went belly-up already 3 times in the past 35 years... by making the same mistakes over and again.

There really aren't any true international licensing laws, laws that are applicable in every country universally. Each country has their own body of intellectual property law, or the lack thereof. Also, I am not altogether certain as to whether Mattel has licensing powers outside the US, or just in the US, but I suspect the latter is correct.

Were there truly international conventions covering intellectual property, do you think there would be all the stink about what gets pirated in countries such as China?

Art

There are indeed international laws covering licencing and trade. That China turns a blind eye to some of their export hoping that they clear customs in countries of delivery does not mean that they do not exist.
Mattel has world-wide licencing rights for Ferrari including in China, and many toy companies have been licenced outside of the USA: SCX and SuperSlot in Spain, Carrera in Germany and China, Scalextric in the UK and China...
What Mattel is doing with the smaller companies is in direct contradiction with the standards established by the ninternational community and (un)enforced in La Hague. It is more important at this time to comdemn the USA for international terrorism than enforcing the laws in the book, not because of their refusal of licencing (which is their right) but because of their refusal to consider the requests (which is not). They do it because they know that they can crush the little guys under legal costs, so that even if the little guys would win, it is just not worth the expense.

Beautifully photographed, as well. Thank you for the opportunity.

--
Frank S

Sad news for we sports car collectors - as of today the Italian company BANG has ceased all production.

A friend reports from Retromobile that Provence Moulage in its new guise is on the point of closing , when one looks at there range over the past year they have cut back in releases and production figures , obviously not enough . The closure of Bang must be abad omen for the few remaining Euro diecast producers .

At Stoneleigh I noticed some Bang models in their original plastic case, with 'Bang' identificationl still within the box, being sold with an unfamiliar outer sleeve. Has the remaning stock been sold off by a new company?

Possibly , Bang and Best have I think produced specials for shops in Italy in special packaging , BBR also do limited runs of built models for some Italian shops .

Here is the actual statement from Carlo Tamburini, the boss of Bang:

“From 1 January 2006, Bang ceased production but continues to sell models produced to date and in stock in our warehouse. My wish to offer high quality models manufactured entirely in Italy is no longer possible in the current international market, dominated by Chinese models. Thus my decision, though painful, is inevitable. I suppose I could have moved production to China, like most other ranges, but my pride as an Italian is stronger than any possibilities of profit. The past 15 years managing Bang have given me great satisfaction. Everyone who has supported us by buying our models will one day be proud to own an Italian-made Bang model whose technology allowed us accuracy that oriental producers have still not been able to match. Every Bang made up to now will always be identified by Made in Italy on its base.”

Extremely sad. First Bburago has been gone into liquidation, now Bang/Best. Probably the same way is already in writing for Brumm and Rio, as they can't cope with Chinese models for quite a long time already. Unless they move manufacturing to Shenzen as well they won't survive. So, Italian modelca industy finally seems to have same destiny as other, once upon a time noble European ones...

Ahh,

So now an accusation of "terrorism"?? Not even close, friend, not even close. I think that any read of the various Hague Conventions, indeed the rulings of the World Court at the Hague, will show that in commercial and other private-sector matters, the international agreements at the Hague do not supercede the commercial laws of any individual country, INCLUDING the US, as regards matters of intellectual property, within that country. We've already noticed in this thread that some countries choose to be more restrictive, others less. Actually, in the US, it's pretty much in the middle, when compared to the rest of the world.

What Mattel does with licensing doesn't even come close to the edge of anti-trust laws in the US, as these laws do not generally cover licensing arrangements. "Restraint of Trade" laws here cover such outlawed practices as secret (and sometimes not-so-secret) deals between businesses to unreasonably restrict competition (price fixing), or the freezing out of potential competitors by certain exclusive practices. Some countries have more restrictive laws in this regard, others do not. Were the Hague Conventions actually to have precedence in all countries, the laws governing such commercial behavior would not exist--AND such cartels as OPEC would not either.

Bear in mind the real value of protections of intellectual property, in the form of copyrights and patents: They exist for one primary purpose: To encourage innovation in the design and engineering of most of what we, as consumers buy and use (In fact, the preamble to the very first US laws in this regard, the original patent law, enacted at the outset of this republic, states this purpose, and the laws covering trademarks and copyrights do also). No protection of these developments in favor of the developer, no innovation (why bother to create something new, if as soon as it hits the market, anyone can pick it up and copy it????).

In the US, patents are there to protect the inventor of technology, which in scope becomes broader every day, but are limited to technology. In the US, while originally, a patent was issued for 17 years, renewable one time for an additional 17 years, in most cases now, a US Patent can only last 17 years, after which that technology is available to anyone who wishes to make use of it for their own profit.

All other intellectual properties, in the US, are covered by copyright (and copyrights are addressed by international treaties and even, I believe, the Hague. We all are aware of copyrights: They cover such as works of art, literature, music and so on. They also cover such as what is called, in the US, "Trade Dress", or the "looks" of a product, slogans, and even product names. A third area of protection is the trademark: Trademarks are best known as the various logo's (Chevrolet "Bowtie" emblem , the various names or nicknames that GM wishes to proctect--Chevy, Heartbeat of America, "An American Revolution as it is applied to car advertising, Impala, Corvette, Biscayne, and so on) that companies use on their products, in their advertising, or on the product intself. Again, using GM as an example, With the copyrighting of trade dress, a particular GM car need not be "in commerce", meaning they do not need to actually have a particular car in production in order to protect the "trademarks". All that is needed is for GM to keep renewing those traidemarks.

"Trade Dress", or the look of a car, used to be covered, by the automakers, by their applying for, and receiving a patent for the design, say of a bumper, a taillight, a door handle. In the 1980's, with the influx of so-called "counterfeit" parts, in this case, the sheet metal repair panels for repairing crash damage, the concept of copyrighting the looks and shapes of such visual components began, in order for companies such as GM to have the capability of protecting themselves against potential legal liability for parts they themselves did not actually manufacture (remember, the US is perhaps the most litigious society on the planet!). The United States Supreme Court ruled that in order for any company to protect themselves from lawsuits stemming from any product used as a direct-copy replacement on any of their products, current or past, that company had to establish legal control over the looks and quality of that product, and further, the US Supreme Court ruling is quite broad--such protection must be over all categories of products in which those looks might be used, and that, friend, covers even model cars and toys. In other words, "protect against all comers, or lose the rights for all categories of use". Not only is that ruling applicable to US-based companies, but it also extends to any company from any country, selling their products in the US--there is nothing in that ruling that violates any international agreement in this regard. Also, in US Law, with the exception of certain kinds of products, a company who develops a product, idea, whatever, is under no requirement to do business with anyone, or even all comers--they have the right to pick and choose, and that, my friend covers virtually all businesses, except those covered under public utility laws, subject of course to our national prohibitions against discrimination by reason of race, color, sex, nationality, or previous condition of servitude--try it, and see how fast you land in court!)

Manufacturers doing business in the United States, regardless of their country of origin, have lots of leeway as to how restrictive they choose to be: For example, the famed old French company, Hispano-Suiza, frankly does not entertain new ideas for miniatures of their cars (even though Hisso hasn't produced cars in decades), with only a few exceptions (I participated in the design and development of a mid-1930's Hispano Suiza drophead that was used as a prop in one of the various James Bond movies, only under a license from the movie studio--Hisso has steadfastly refused to even reply to licensing inquiries for this miniature (quite accurately done in 1:64 scale, BTW) when I was working in product development at Playing Mantis, then the maker of Johnny Lightning diecast miniature cars. Volkwagen AG, even though they licensed us to produce a very nice line of VW cars and pickups in this scale, refused for 3 years to approve our manufacture of a Karmann Ghia, and, I believe, has never approved the 1949 VW Beetle which we had tooled and in test shots in early 2004. Additionally, VW insisted that all our miniatures be made to German specs, rather than the US Spec cars most Americans are familiar with. Aston Martin, when we developed the Vanquish in this scale, were extremely demanding, both by Ford Motor Company (who owns Aston Martin) licensing, AND Aston Martin's people in the UK as well. Ford is extremely restrictive as to any miniature or model kit they license--the tooling mockups and the first run test shots often go through grueling reviews, by scale modelers on their payroll, before they are approved--sometimes as many as 6 or 7 reviews before the product is released for production. General Motors is just as restrictive, with certain cars, cars they consider to be "signature products", mainly Corvettes and Cadillacs (those MUST be right, or they simply will tell the toy or model manufacturer to "forget it", or if they do produce the miniature or kit, the royalty rate triples, from 10% to 30% of the wholesale price. Daimler Chrysler is less so: If it "looks" like a Chrysler Product (or any of numerous "ancestors" to the current Chrysler line, such as Willys, Nash, Hudson or AMC), it passes, although Dodge will insist that "Dodge" appear on the model, unless it can be demonstrated that the name Dodge wasn't visible on the real car (such as 1966-67 Charger, on which the only DODGE nameplate is on the dashboard). D-C is much, much more restrictive where Mercedes is concerned though, very much in the same manner as VW.

if you have any issues with this situation, rather than just name-calling rhetoric, persuade the lawmakers in your country to change the laws regarding the licensing of such items--in the US, we call that talking to your congressman or senator.

Art

Sounds so familiar!

There hasn't been a diecast toy or model mass produced in the US, since Ertl, known primarily for their extensive line of farm toys moved their operations wholesale to China, in order to gain a much lower cost of production. Likewise, there is, today, not a single plastic model kit molded in the US--and with plastic model kits, this is pretty much where the industry, and the hobby, began about 1950, and certainly was the largest single market for these kits until the early 1960's. It's not limited to just diecast miniatures, either. Try just about any consumer product out there--chances are it's made in China or some other so-called 3rd World country, or soon will be.

Will this change? Probably so, over time--Japan, once the bastion of cheap production, now sees almost as many Japanese brand automobiles built in other countries as at home, certainly those made specifically for sale in a particular country (All Subaru's, for example, save for the Impreza and Forrester) build all cars sold in the US, right here, in the city in which I live, in Indiana. And, given the extremely fast track that Chinese development is on, it will not be many years out, before their labor and other production costs rise, to the point that they will be saying "we used to make these here, but now we import them".

Art

I am done fighting City Hall. I found the solution to that problem a long time ago, and it is called an asset-less corporation.
As far as Mattel's terrorism, and that is exactly what it is, I have written proof and evidence from their own offices and plan to use it as a prosecution witness the day when someone with some legal muscle will take them to court, if that ever happens.
In the meantime, I can only as well as many do now, just boycott their product and anything with a cavallino rampante on it. I know that they could not care less but I am a person of principles and at least it makes ME feel better.
Besides Porsches are much better cars.

Another dragged up thread - rather than clutter up TNF with another spurious subject.

Thanks to a certain TNF member who shall remain nameless (D-type!) I am now the VERY proud posessor of none other than a Crescent Vanwall. To those of us who collected (or rather, collect) these lovely racing car models from the middle to late 1950s, the Vanwall is the hen's teeth item. This means I now have the full set of 8 - and in fact, am only a Vanwall - - short of a second set. (I don't include the 2 sports cars in the set).

I think that in 8 or 9 years of Ebaying, I have only ever seen 2 Vanwalls come up for sale and they both sold for well over £150. Thanks to the keen eyesight of the aforementioned member, I have managed to obtain one for considerably less than that.

Now, the anomaly.... it arrived yesterday and I was very surprised when I took it out of its wrapping, to find that it was constructed completely differently from every other car in the set.

The driver and wheels give the confirmation that it is indeed a Crescent model (as well as the word CRESCENT on the bottom, of course) but the car is made in two halves, without the cream base plate, and the exhaust appears to be a sparate item.

This tends to make me think that maybe Crescent were planning further models in this series, but of course, that never happened. Chronologically, the real Vanwall that this model depicts was introduced a few years after all the other models in the series, which range from the very early 50s (BRM) up to 1954 (Mercedes) I know that the Maserati 250.F was still around in 1958 or even later, but not with the version of the body shape that Crescent used; (the prettiest version IMHO).

I wonder if anyone on this forum who has an interest in diecasts can shed any light on this situation?