Very well put Mr. Hees.

Since what I said earlier seems to have been misunderstood by a few people let me restate it. Without getting into the question of what rights Mr. Harper does or does not have, or whether the quoted price is extortionate, we have to remember that somebody does own the rights to that name.

If I were to acquire a wheezy little 0-6-0T somewhere, couple it to a flat car with benches and offer rides with a sign on it saying " ROSS ROWLAND'S SUPERPOWER STEAM" (see note) and I did this without first making a deal to use the name I would almost certainly hear from one of my brother barristers requesting that I remove the sign and/or pay up forthwith.

Since my purpose in running the trips is to raise funds to make my wheezy little 0-6-0 somewhat less wheezy the question I have to ask is this: Which way do I have more money left when its over?

Let's say I change my sign to say: "GEORGE'S LITTLE TRAIN", I do not have to pay Ross the ransom money and after all of the other bills are paid I have $50.00 (Fifty Dollars) left.

Now let's say I stay with the original sign and after I have paid all of the bills including the ransom I have $75 (Seventy-Five Dollars) left. Which way is my project better off? If I had not agreed to pay the ransom I would not have made the additional money. While I might have the ransom money as cash because I didn't spend it remember that the additional $25.00 (Twenty-Five Dollars) is after I made back the ransom so I still have it.

I doubt that “Polar Express” will have the staying power of Thomas. The movie will be a major draw for maybe another season or two and is really limited to a month a year. One cannot walk through a shopping mall, turn on PBS during the day, or go into a children’s bookstore without a reference to Thomas or a Thomas clone. Thomas has been around longer than my eldest daughter, and her eldest is (finally!) a practising attorney.

As to the comment about business acumen. Branded excursions are a profit-making business venture for whoever holds the brand. If a non-profit presevation group is running a branded excursion at a negative net then the membership needs to ask the board and the board needs to ask the business manager, "Why are we doing this?".

GME

Note: I am not picking on Brother Rowland here. Change the fact set to a hay burning 0-2-2-0 and the sign to "RANDY'S SUPER RAILROAD - NEW ENGLAND COAST DIVISION" and I could expect the same result. For that matter change the name I am using to one which appears to be any museum or preservation group.

Hi
You could always make it the "RYPN Express". I dont think Hume would mind. LOL
Doowoppie

Mr.Hees,Mr.Larson and Trainlawyer all make good points. I would agree that the high probability is that Polar will not have the "legs" of Thomas-thanks mostly to Thomas reappearing on PBS and Polar depending on whatever repeat studio hype there is to push sales of the DVD. It would appear that the vast majority of those running this year simply changed the name and did away with the story reading to avoid paying the ransom, and they report excellent results. One in fact told me that it was a very difficult story as written to read on the train and the overall experience benefits from its not being read. I have no quarrel with Copyrights and protecting those rights-what I find so distasteful here is what I percieve as naked opportunism on the part of Harper&Co. against a struggling industry that needs all the help it can get. Does anyone really think Harper&Co. did this to protect Paramounts good name???
As for the little engine concept, I had 2 close freinds attend the event on the Smoky Mtn. RR and they reported to me that it was a total flop with abysmal attendance. Again,it doesn't have the magic of constant TV exposure to make it a "must do" for the kids. Until and unless it becomes a regularly broadcast TV offering it'll not amount to much.
I guess the good news here is that there were a lot of full trains run with lots of happy kids and that some of those youngsters will be tomorrows steam torch bearers!
Ross Rowland

Guys, I'm sick that none of you noted the perfect answer to this problem !

All we have to do is restore a couple hundred miles of electrified overhead in the northwest, rescue a certain electric locomotive from the museum in Saint Louis,, and there you have it -

The Bi-Polar Express !

Of course there are many in the audience that will say this is a crazy idea, but how appropriate !!

All nonsense aside, it's very much a sign of the times, today's entrepreneur is more likely to be someone who jumped up and licensed
an idea or product as opposed to being the someone who actually invented it. Mr Harper already has missed out on a vital marketing piece of this day and age, PolarExpress.com is already taken by the movie.

I think this will all pretty much fade away, Thomas has a tangible "something" to bring to the table, while Polar Express is mostly an idea, a name,, easily ammended to today's short attention span public. Call it the Santa, Reindeer, even North Pole Express,, no one will notice the difference.

What about Chris van Allsberg--you know, the author? The guy who thought the whole thing up? Everyone in our "struggling industry" who did a Polar Express event, tied to his book, without paying him, was exploiting his creation without compensating him. Now, he's sold his rights to someone who cares to enforce them. I say good for him.

Simple truth: the only opportunists in this scenario were the tourist railroads who based events on Mr. Van Allsberg's copyrighted creation without paying him for it. Mind you, very little harm was done, and it was up to Van Allsberg to enforce his rights, but they were ALWAYS his to enforce.

Eric makes a valid point,however those short lines that I'm familiar with all made selling the book both on their trains and in their gift shops(pre-Harper) an integral part of their Polar package-thus materially benefiting the author. Now they'll be calling it something else and obviously not offering the book-so it seems to me that from the perspective of the author he's going to be the loser, not the winner?
And again, while Eric makes a valid point regarding the rr's not paying a direct royalty to the author (or to Paramount for that matter) pre-Harper, that doesn't change the blatant opportunism of Harper&Co.,at least as I see it.
Fortunatly, the industry proved itself to be very quick on its feet and I'm sure that by next season everyone will have figured out how to carry full trains to the North Pole(wonder if that's licenseable??) without paying Harper&Co.'s ransom!!
Ross Rowland

[quote="co614"]I have re-read Daves posting above several times in an unsuccessful attempt to decipher what he's trying to say. I've concluded that it's essentially an apologistic position for Harper&Co.??

Not an apology - I do not represent, nor do I have any interest in Mr Harper or any of his businesses. I simply wish to explain (and I do apoloigise for being unclear - i am not a great communicator) what might in fact be the other side of the equasion. I have believed for a long time that the survival of our industry is dependent on our evolving into a more businesslike, rational, and professional model than the old "hobby club" model, and that we need to compete for the entertainment dollar with other industries.

Appreciating the idealogy of massive corporate bureaucracies to the extent of being able to work with them is just one facet of the transition. If the intercession of an unabashed for profit enterpreneur makes the use of the trademarked brand available to us, and we can profit from it, it isn't evil - just doing business. We can choose whether or not to buy the brand.

dave

I fully agree with Daves point above and have long advocated that we need to do everything possible to make ourselves able competitors for the discretionery tourist dollar. It's my opinion that the majority of the long term tourist shortline railroads have made major progress towards this goal. To be sure there are still some clunkers out there-but they're in the small minority.
I would also agree with Daves point that if a professional outfit brings a business opportunity to the industry that can help further its objectives-great-let's go for it. My disgust with what Harper&Co. tried to pull is that the product was already here,up&running full bore and all they did was show up and demand a shamefull ransom. Therein lies the major difference. Luckily the industry was wise enough to see around them and the damage appears to have been minimal this year and I'm confident will be non-existant next season.
Ross Rowland

I'm pleased to report that I've heard from two usually very reliable sources that thanks to the universally hostile reception from the industry to their 30% "plan", that they're going to go back to the drawing boards and come up with something more "reasonable".
I hope it's true-but feel it's almost academic as it would seem as suggested (and practiced by many this past season) that a simple name change and a few other easy to achieve changes do away with the problem anyway.
I'm confident that they won't be successful in licenseing Santa Clauss or the North Pole!
Ross Rowland

It seems this thread is now in need of a reminder concerning the Interchange terms of service, and indeed perhaps it has for some time. These terms include the following:

"The Interchange's primary purpose is to facilitate the exchange of information, advice, and suggestions, not to serve as a forum for debate.

The Interchange requires all posters to adhere to a high standard of courtesy and civility. Polite, constructive criticism, and polite responses to same, are acceptable. Insulting or inflammatory language; argument and debate for their own sake; and personal attacks on other posters ("flaming") are all prohibited."

This is an issue well worth discussing and many good points have been raised. However, personal attacks and insulting or inflammatory language are out of bounds. I have just deleted one such post, and additional posts in that vein will be deleted on sight. If the thread requires constant policing to prevent further outbreaks of flaming, it will be locked.

To all posters who attempted to observe the Interchange guidelines rather than flout them during this discussion, our apologies for the interruption. To those who brought inflammatory language and personal attacks to this thread, this is your notice to desist here and indeed in any conversations on this board.

Erik Ledbetter
RyPN Board of Directors