Small Scale Military Headquarters

have been talking with some of my distributors and some interesting scuttlebutt has come up. It seems that several estores have been sent letters from 21C about using there name in conjuction with JSI. They (21C) are demanding thru legal means that adds not include the words 21st century or ultimate soldier. Although 21C has gone under they still own the rights to thier company name and product logos.
I have also heard they are attempting to stop any left over product in China from being sold here in North America. Since it has there company name and logos. I have verified this from other sources. Almost creating a black market type import to the U.S.A.
I find this very interesting!
Could this mean 21C plans a comeback and some new products in the future?
for those of us who miss them i sure hope so!

Great news.

I wouldn't put alot into their comeback.

All JSI has to do is take off the 21st Century logo on the molds. From what I understand, 21st doesn't own the molds so I don't see how they can stop the product flow if it doesn't have their logo. Especially if they still owe JSI (who owns the manufacturing facilities that produced 21st's products) all the money they do.

could just be spitting up from the grave. If 21c comes back they'll be starting from scratch. They may just be sour about others profiting from their old product lines.

I think Aferg nailed it. They've got to be upset that JSI took the molds, charged much more and appear to be doing OK.

although i do agree with aferg
i believe they are keeping the door open. protecting your name is the first step. they cant do anything to the Chinese (JSI). heck the U.S. government cant get them to stop pirating dvds and other items.
i wasnt making a statement more possing a question. I dont think 21C would take the time to try a stop estores from using thier name it wouldnt be worth the trouble for no reason

If I were them I would be looking at PWP. They are making a repro 21st century ME109 and even selling it in a 21st century BOX!!!! That seems insane to me.

Hmm, well if they do return, hopefully the ambitious releases they announce will make it to fruition this time around, and the quality control is superb. I did prefer BBI's models, but 21st is still sorely missed.

AMERICAN_GRENADIER wrote:although i do agree with aferg
i believe they are keeping the door open. protecting your name is the first step.
i wasnt making a statement more possing a question. I dont think 21C would take the time to try a stop estores from using thier name it wouldnt be worth the trouble for no reason

AMERICAN_GRENADIER wrote:although i do agree with aferg
i believe they are keeping the door open. protecting your name is the first step. they cant do anything to the Chinese (JSI). heck the U.S. government cant get them to stop pirating dvds and other items.
i wasnt making a statement more possing a question. I dont think 21C would take the time to try a stop estores from using thier name it wouldnt be worth the trouble for no reason

To the contrary, 21st is legally obligated to protect the sale of their models here in the US. Their licensing agreements have a clause that says they, as licensee, will take legal action against any third party that attempts the importation or sale of any product protected by trade market and licensing rights of the licensor. For example The Boeing Company may take legal action against 21st if 21st does not take action to prevent the sale or importation of their products. We have the same clause in our agreements. This is why both of our companies forbid Air Strike Toys (name?) from using our models in their repaints. We were legally obligated to look like the bad guys. To my knowledge 21st has not filed for an official dissolution of their company; therefore, they must still perform.

This is just my two cents. I hope they are going to make a comeback. That means the market is getting better.

I will talk about Admiral Toys and what I have been up to in another post.

Warmest regards,
Jason

Jason of Admiral Toys wrote: To the contrary, 21st is legally obligated to protect the sale of their models here in the US. Their licensing agreements have a clause that says they, as licensee, will take legal action against any third party that attempts the importation or sale of any product protected by trade market and licensing rights of the licensor.

Jason, my understand was that several years ago Congress passed a law that prohibited government contractors from licensing for profit any product that were made using government funds, presumably this includes military armor and aircraft and the like? However, would licensing even be an issue for WW2-era models? I have a feeling that there is more to this than just adhering to licensing contracts. 21st, or what is left of it, may be taking the first steps to prevent the importation of JSI product. Of course, if JSI seized 21st tooling because they were owed sum of money and were not being paid then I think that 21st may be limited as to what they can do. Obviously this is all speculation on my part.

coreystinson wrote:

Jason of Admiral Toys wrote: To the contrary, 21st is legally obligated to protect the sale of their models here in the US. Their licensing agreements have a clause that says they, as licensee, will take legal action against any third party that attempts the importation or sale of any product protected by trade market and licensing rights of the licensor.

Jason, my understand was that several years ago Congress passed a law that prohibited government contractors from licensing for profit any product that were made using government funds, presumably this includes military armor and aircraft and the like? However, would licensing even be an issue for WW2-era models? I have a feeling that there is more to this than just adhering to licensing contracts. 21st, or what is left of it, may be taking the first steps to prevent the importation of JSI product. Of course, if JSI seized 21st tooling because they were owed sum of money and were not being paid then I think that 21st may be limited as to what they can do. Obviously this is all speculation on my part.

You are correct to an extent. The law only affects military products produced from effective date forward.

Companies such as Boeing own the rights to the names such as F-86, North American Aviation, etc. If you put a name that is protected under their licensing rights on your box you have to pay the licensor’s royalties. Look on all F-86 boxes. You will see the Boeing trademark statement. It is required. We pay 6% of each sale to the licensor.

If you notice our sold silver “jets” that we sold for repaint do not have the Boeing licensing statements. This is because we did not use any of the trademarked names stated above on our packaging.

The only aircraft to date that has a copyright and trademark on the appearance of the aircraft is the Boeing 747. If you make something that looks like one you owe Boeing licensing rights. However, any other aircraft you have to look for names and titles such as F-4, McDonald Douglas, Corsair (Vought), ext.

We have a licensing agreement with Boeing that cost thousands of dollars and is over 100 pages long. Licensing is alive and well in this industry.

A fast way to find what is trademarked by Boeing is to go to their site, click products and read the list of products. If it is on the list and you right that word, you owe them money.

I hope this answers your questions.

Regards,
Jason

Hey Jason, how are you? Any updates on the Dauntless model you could share with us? Thanks.

Sabrefan wrote:Hey Jason, how are you? Any updates on the Dauntless model you could share with us? Thanks.

As stated above, I will talk about what is up on another thread. I do not want to hijack this thread.

Simply stated, I do not have the authority to say. I do not work for Admiral Toys in an official capacity anymore. I work for a corporation based in Austin, Texas.

To reflect this change I will edit my name on this site. I am just a fan like you at this point.

Sorry,
Regards,
Jason

great info!
thanks jason

To those of you who have bought the JSI re-releases of the 21st Molds do they still have 21st Century Toys Stamped on them somewhere? Usually its on the bottom of the aircraft.

Jason, so if you don't use the name, aside from that 747, you can make any aircraft and not have to pay the maker as long as you dont put the name? Example, like if I wanted to make a 1:18 Scale F-22 Raptor, but not have to pay Lockheed... as long as it doesn't say F-22 Raptor anywhere and I call it 'Military Fighter Jet' it would be okay?

Jericoeagle1 wrote:To those of you who have bought the JSI re-releases of the 21st Molds do they still have 21st Century Toys Stamped on them somewhere? Usually its on the bottom of the aircraft.

>>> No ... There's a flat square space w/ JSI's logo over which was once emblazoned w/ 21st.'s logo as an indication that something was there that you could tell though.

.......... this I noticed on the bottom of my Tiger I & Panther tanks.


- MG

That's one thing the Chinese have down pat, striking over some other companies name.

p51 wrote:Jason, so if you don't use the name, aside from that 747, you can make any aircraft and not have to pay the maker as long as you dont put the name? Example, like if I wanted to make a 1:18 Scale F-22 Raptor, but not have to pay Lockheed... as long as it doesn't say F-22 Raptor anywhere and I call it 'Military Fighter Jet' it would be okay?

p51,

The short answer is yes. A trademark is any word, name, symbol, or device, or any combination used, or intended to be used, in commerce to identify and distinguish the goods of one manufacturer or seller from goods manufactured or sold by others, and to indicate the source of the goods. In short, a trademark is a brand name, for example North American Aviation F-86, Sabre Jet.

The trademark is not protecting the form of a fighter jet itself, only the words and symbols distinguishing it from other fighter jets i.e. the North American Aviation F-86, Sabre Jet.

I only know about the 747 because of what Gail Roth from Boeing told me. She is in charge of tracking and taking care of the licensees. I am not sure how many aircraft would make the list such as the 747. I have not looked into the licensing side of the industry in several years. I do not know about the Raptor.

Regards,
Jason

Interesting, thanks for the info! I wonder how the 747 then is then classed for trademark, do they consider the 'shape' of the plane a symbol or trademark shape that is copyrightable? I mean, in the case of a F-22 vs F-86, obviously the two aircraft have different shapes... I wonder if there's some technicality that says that the 'shape' can be considered copyright.

I know the castle at Disneyland along with several other buildings in the park are copyrighted to Disney. So I'd assume it's the same type of thing, or similar at the least.

I think you are correct. It probably comes down to the history of the 747 and how nothing looked like it until it came out. That distinguishable hump is iconic. Furthermore, Boeing has taken the steps to protect the form of the 747.

I looked it up on Wikipedia just to see if there was anything http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_747
The funny thing is when the images come up:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Boein ... _Large.jpg
There is a big old COPYRIGHT all over that image. I am sure it is just the image used, but I had to chuckle.

Regards,
Jason