Jump to content
Sickpup

Licensing of old I.P.

Recommended Posts

In the last few years/decades there have been various Tamiya clones of varying quality. At the moment we are seeing the Bruiser clone and from peoples experience these seem to be good quality.

In the Bruiser clone thread I raised the point that the Car Industry makes more money from parts than they do from car sales, the vintage car industry in the UK for example now has a £5.5bn a year turnover.

Although Tamiya it seems has kept virtually all of its moulds over the years they haven't as far as I know released hard to find parts made from these moulds, they have simply kept them hidden away in a dark basement or something for decades which makes no commercial sense at all. As an example Tamiya could have sold sets of tyres for the HILux/Bruiser/Wild Willy for over £100 for 4 but didn't so someone else had to step in. Think of all the bodies sold through Team BlueGroove or Decals by MCI or parts from Shapeways.

Others have pointed out that the RC as an industry is no longer on a stable financial footing, the Golden years are way gone and things cost a lot more in research and development creating a niche hobby so I struggle to understand why Tamiya either don't release new parts for old kits that are in demand or license someone else to produce the parts for them. It seems to me that they are artificially restricting their own market share and turnover by failing to fully utilise their back catalogue of IP that people are crying out for.

 

So are Tamiya missing a trick here or is there a reason to restrict parts availability that I'm missing?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say they're missing a trick. Good idea, you never know, they may take it up now ;)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What’s interesting about the vintage/collector’s market, for anything, is that it’s a fluke. It’s not supposed to happen; you’re supposed to buy a shiny new thing, use it up, get rid of it, and then buy a new one. A secondhand market for decades-old things, where the values are higher than the original purchase price, doesn’t fit into the traditional capitalist model. General Motors doesn’t want you to restore a 1958 Impala; it doesn’t make them any money. They want you to buy a 2018 Impala. That’s how their business model is set up.

But the fact is, people get nostalgic about things. And a small subset of us express that nostalgia by preserving and restoring items from the past. So a whole cottage industry has sprung up to provide parts and service for those old items. And naturally, some of those items are going to be “knockoffs,” because the original manufacturer doesn’t want to help the suppliers, or doesn’t exist anymore to ask.

Which raises the question I think you’re asking: if a demand for “genuine” parts to restore old machines exists, why on Earth wouldn’t the manufacturer make parts to meet that demand? Well, a lot of them do; I’ve heard that Porsche and Mercedes-Benz are particularly good about it in the full-size car world, and the backwards-compatibility of parts between re-releases and originals of Tamiya (and Kyosho and Associated) RC vehicles kind of fills the same role. They might not make every little piece your collector’s heart desires, but it has never been easier to keep old machines going than it is now.

What I don’t understand is why they would get upset about third-party parts, like bodies and decal sheets, that they don’t make any more and have no plans to re-make. If they’ve stopped making it, and won’t let anyone else make it either, then all they are doing is generating ill will. It’s sort of like a software company who stops supporting an old version of a program, but still keeps up the licensing restrictions. Why? It does them no good, and makes me want to turn to less-than-strictly-legal means to do what I want.

And that circles back around to the Bruiser ripoff: I wold be a lot more inclined to buy one if Tamiya had not re-released the real thing. An abandoned design, I think, should be fair game, with an agreement that if the original manufacturer starts churning them out again, the ripoffs have to stop.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very well put.  I don't mind buying stickers from MCI that are no longer made, but I go to the OEM every time for when they are.  This is my problem with the Bruiser clone, for example.

Tamiya are right up at the top when it comes to product innovation, but we all know they normally fail when it comes to maintaining that position with further developments.  They should take the lead again, like the full size car industry is starting to.  Release old parts under a 'heritage' or similar program.  Make them stand out as different from the parts for new machines.  I also think they could do well by adopting a licencing model for the design files themselves.  How about I buy a heritage gearbox case for my Avante for £10, or I can get the CAD model licenced for my own use for £15?  Printing or machining your own spares, or licencing another company to do it on your behalf, might be quite a lucrative model.  After all, a lot of the cost of running molded parts when the molds already exist is the setting up, for most likely a short run of parts.  Maybe that's why they don't do it, the volumes may not justify the logistics.

Imagine a situation where a local hobby shop (yes - some are still here) could get a year long Tamiya licence for all of the CAD models in the heritage range for £1500.  They could print on demand what their local customer base needs - potentially even on demand at events.  No stock inventory, no risk in holding stuff for ever without selling it, but no counterfeiting either.  And Tamiya would make some money out of it without any effort in manufacturing whatsoever.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nissan are currently re-releasing parts for the 1989 R32 GTR and Mazda are doing the same for the original MX5/Miata (as far as I know it is only in Japan).  It's not exactly a perfect comparison but if full-size car companies can find a market for those parts, then I can't see Tamiya not being able to sell parts for older models if there's a demand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So this is just my personal thinking, so take it or leave it.

But it goes like this...

  1. Right now, I buy original vintage parts. I get by far the most fun, having original vintage parts. ^_^
  2. To date, I have never come across an original vintage Tamiya part that could not be found, or restored, with some patience.
  3. Tamiya's remake parts/cars are great for runners. And I would always prefer to buy parts from Tamiya themselves (such as remake parts), than buy unauthorized reproductions.
  4. I have never bought reproduction stuff. And I can't even think of a situation where I would buy repro, where Tamiya is concerned. Repro is IP theft in Tamiya's case, because Tamiya still exists. They designed and paid for their products, and they have legal ownership over the use of their designs and products. This may upset some, but it's the law talking. If you want to overturn the fundamentals of I.P. law, go to law school ;)

I also say this stuff, under the proviso that I personally do not feel "entitled" to own every car I want... To explain: I own what I am lucky enough to own. There's a ton of rare cars out there. And I don't expect Tamiya to reproduce everything I want, just because it's rare, and I "want" it.

Therefore...

  • I feel there is sometimes a broad sense of modern entitlement in the Tamiya community.... Regarding the Bruiser - I am not entitled to own a Tamiya Bruiser. And just because I can't afford a Tamiya Bruiser, that doesn't make it ethical for me to buy a Gueng Zhong Bruiser from a company in China that commits IP theft, almost definitely pays slave wages to get the deed done at an outsource factory, and manages to somehow undercut the cost of the Tamiya product.
  • Similarly, I don't feel entitled to endless brand-new-spare-parts support from Tamiya. If Tamiya wants to manufacture old parts for centuries to come - great! They have every right to do so. If not, that's their choice also. Their old cars will become rare and challenging to restore. And if I can't restore them, well - I am not entitled to own, restore and run every vintage rare car they ever made, am I? Just because I want it? There are literally millions of other R/C cars in the world (and thousands from Tamiya) that I could buy and enjoy instead.
  • I don't think we can really accuse Tamiya of "hiding away" molds, when probably 75% of their most popular R/C cars have now undergone remakes. What other company has reproduced a larger proportion of it's greatest hits? They might have done none of this. Fans are very fortunate.

And finally... Perhaps a controversial view, but...

  • I think Tamiya have every right to protect their intellectual property, for as long as they want, and as long as Tamiya Corporation exists and has legal rights - regardless of whether they are manufacturing those items or not. Just because JRR Tolkien is no longer alive, that doesn't mean that I (some dude) can start publishing books about the further adventures of Frodo Baggins...

...Or can I?

Quote

Frodo: "Gandalf! My Blazer needs new tyres...is there not a wizard's spell that can help?"

Gandalf: "My dear Frodo. If such tyres exist in Middle Earth, perhaps they'd want to be found?"

...

Gollum (deep in a cave, caressing tyre): "Preciousssss"  etc etc

 

H.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Hibernaculum said:

Just because JRR Tolkien is no longer alive, that doesn't mean that I (some dude) can start publishing books about the further adventures of Frodo Baggins...

Once they enter the public domain you are entitled to do just that.  The time it takes to enter the public domain keeps getting extended though (we'll all be dead and buried before LoTR enters public domain) and there's way too much involved to cover here.  I do agree with your points, but intellectual property rights isn't an absolute.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hibernaculum

I think you misunderstand what I am asking. Tamiya has a huge collection of IP which I believe is theirs and theirs alone. I am not suggesting people should have a right to Tamiya's IP I am not suggesting that people should get everything they want BUT and it is a big but if the hobby as a whole is suffering financially then why don't Tamiya use their IP to gain financially for themselves and to encourage collectors to rebuild, apart from the financial gain which is potentially huge, bigger even than the sales of new models it would be a green way of doing things.

Yes it would require short runs but we are a worldwide market, a short run of body kits for lets say the Falcon, a very popular car in its time could be as high as 10,000 units to satisfy the market for the next 5 years. These would be very easy to store, they stack inside one another, very cheap to ship as they are light and stack inside each other and could be packaged at destination saving again due to volumetric shipping costs and these body kits would sell for around £50 a shot.

It should be pretty easy for Tamiya to work out what parts are suited for small batch production runs, a quick look at what sold and how quickly and prices on Ebay would give a very good indication of what is needed and what would sell at a profit.

To give an indication of just how profitable this market is Land Rover have recently bought back Series 1's from as far afield as Australia and have rebuilt them in the Land Rover factory for sale at prices between £60,000 and £80,000 for a basic vehicle. Keep in mind these are 1050's vehicles.

To say that the re-re's have satisfied the market for vintage parts would be misleading and would ignore the 20 odd years between issues. There should be no need for unlicensed thrid parties to step in and use/abuse Tamiyas IP, Tamiya should be using it themselves and profiting from it so that the buyer can maintain their vehicles with genuine parts rather than having to write off vehicles until such time as they can find the used parts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All good points, and I do understand your opinion here. It's also interesting to hear about Land Rover. Maybe they are buying back the old Landies, because those were the only reliable cars they ever manufactured ;) (low-blow, I'm sorry)

I'm a bit unsure of this bit though...

On 8/16/2018 at 7:39 AM, Sickpup said:

To say that the re-re's have satisfied the market for vintage parts would be misleading and would ignore the 20 odd years between issues.

So, a couple of points I'd make here...

IMHO, the re-re parts are generally distinguishable (and therefore different), so I don't personally buy them for vintage restorations. I may use the tyres for runners, but that's about it. I'm a bit of a purist, and prefer my new builds or restorations to be 100% original though (I'm not alone in this).

That aside...

I also recognize that Tamiya is never, ever going to remake all vintage parts exactly the same as they originally were in 1980s. So for all the cars Tamiya have remade so far since 2004, those new spares are the only new spares Tamiya will ever make to fit those vintage cars. And so far, most of the most popular cars they ever made have now undergone this "remake" style treatment. So as far as those cars are concerned, this is as good as it's ever gonna get. And I don't think there can be any doubt that the remake kits and parts which Tamiya have put out since ~2004 have satisfied the market for those particular cars. (They didn't satisfy me, but as I said, I am a bit of a purist for original issue).

What Tamiya haven't done, is put out a remake kit of every popular car of the past. Yet.

You mentioned the Falcon. That's one of the very few popular buggy kits left in the first-100/Golden Era, that has not had a remake version released. I suspect it's only a matter of time, before you will probably get one. But I don't know.

As for the economics of whether it's cheap to produce old parts again - I couldn't say. As to whether the parts would be big profitable sellers - Tamiya is primarily driven by the Japanese market, not us. If the Falcon is not a popular buggy in Japan, they won't do it (you might also ask yourself why they did remake something like the Fire Dragon - it's because it was obviously popular enough in Japan, even if the rest of the world considered it something of an oddball).

Stepping back a bit though... yes, Tamiya could in theory pump out parts batches for every car they've ever made. But is there a manufacturer on Earth who maintains a parts line for every 30+ year old product they ever made? A fridge maker, vehicle maker, phone maker, computer maker? In the grand scheme of things, Tamiya have done more than most companies to resupply the market with runnable spare parts for significant number of their old products.

Regarding the 20 year gap... actually, many of the original issue parts of the 1980s were still listed on spare parts inventories and ordering lists at Hobby stores, well into the 1990s - longer than some people realize. In the mid 1990s, I was buying (ordering from factory) original issue Hotshot bumper sets for example. There was also quite a lot of old stock just lying around in parts bins, and old boxes, due to the massive boom of R/C in the 1980s and the fact there was obviously an oversupply of stock.

I do agree with you though, that I would rather have Tamiya push out batches of parts, than have any sort of repro or IP theft operation filling the void.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some good points in your post thank you.

If Tamiya is led simply by the Japanese market then they either need to change or they will die.

With the opening of borders to both people, sales and information due to the internet the world needs to be treated as Tamiya's market, not an artificially restricted region. We have enough members here who buy from other countries, I recently inported a new Fighting buggy from the US as it wasn't available in the UK. I would be more than happy to buy new vintage parts direct from a spares Dept in Japan for parts that weren't in shops ready packaging.

There is a white goods manufacturer who retains parts for 30+ year old items, not certain but might be Miele.

As said by others more Car manufacturers supply Heritage parts, Harley Davidson, Suzuki, Land Rover to name a few. It is as I have explained in the clone Bruiser thread more profitable to supply parts than it is to supply whole vehicles. As an example how many sets of tyres would fit in one Tamiya box? Using Car manufacturers as an example isn't a particularly good one as amay parts are made by others. In the case of Historic Land Rover many parts were made by Unipart in the UK and these parts have never really ceased production in the decades since they were first made.

 

I think Tamiya need to change or they will die to be replaced by companies who are ready and able to take advantage of a changing world.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Hibernaculum said:

But is there a manufacturer on Earth who maintains a parts line for every 30+ year old product they ever made? A fridge maker, vehicle maker, phone maker, computer maker?

Morgan. But they're a very special case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Yalson said:

Morgan. But they're a very special case.

Never had any issues getting parts for '50s Mercs, including trim-clips and the like.

Also no issues with parts for oil-cooled Porsches, as long as the parts are actually made by Porsche. So no luck with a new Bosch distributor and the like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with the licensed IP model which LongRat suggested above is that it would not stop the copying of Tamiya parts by Chinese rip-off merchants. Rather, it would cause this secondary market to explode and destroy Tamiya's business altogether. The reason is that the whole secondary market for replacement parts – be they vintage, original parts, identical parts from re-re versions or third-party replacements – is based on scarcity. Tamiya deliberately starve the market in some areas in order to create a demand that they can only fulfil themselves, as they own the IP to recreate and sell those parts. Economies hate a vacuum, though, and if Tamiya are not supplying the market at a price people are willing to pay, then someone else will. To a certain extent this is OK, as long as Tamiya can enforce their exclusive rights to their IP and the secondary market for copied parts does not exceed a certain level.

This IP can, to an extent, be recreated by third parties – as with companies who make repro shells, decals and parts for popular models, or make new/improved/different/cheaper parts to fill the same gaps, like Parma and others used to. This is not a lossless process, though. Repro shells are not as good as original Tamiya shells, as third parties do not have access to Tamiya's jigs, moulds and may not use materials of a similar quality for reasons of cost or access. This is fine as far as it goes – I am currently rebuilding a couple of 1980s models for which original shells are not available, but they are going to be backyard bashers and the slight quality difference makes no difference to me. There are others (such as Hibernaculum) for whom originality is more important than availability, and who will not even countenance re-re parts. And that's fine too, if that's your thing. Even Chinese copies of Tamiya originals will be just that – copies. Like a photocopy, they're usable but not as good as the original.

The problem with LongRat's licensed IP model is that this process upsets the idea that only Tamiya can supply you with true versions of the original parts. If the model involves people effectively leasing access to digital files of Tamiya's original parts, how long would it be before a copy of the files fell into the hands of the Chinese rip-off merchants, thereby allowing them to make perfect, lossless reproductions of Tamiya parts. At that point there is no scarcity and Tamiya's business model collapses entirely. Any future reissues or manunfacturing of replacement parts becomes economically unviable, as Chinese factories – as we have seen – can copy and produce items quicker and cheaper than Tamiya can and the speed at which they would be able to flood the market would swamp Tamiya's efforts to stop them, efforts which are compromised by the Chinese government's indifferent attitude to foreign IP in any case.

Anyone who doubts that this would be the way such a business model turn out should look at the music industry. There was always an issue with bootleg copies in the music industry, but the fact that the manufacturing process for vinyl was specialised and expensive (and mostly under the ownership of the record companies anyway), and that there were inherent quality losses involved with home taping and copying meant that it was a drop in the ocean of the industry's profits, no matter what the BPI and similar bodies might say. However, the industry signed its own death warrant by introducing the CD, a digital medium. They were introduced as a premium audio product, explicitly to try and persuade music fans to repurchase titles they already owned on a format allowing higher reproduction quality and higher purchase prices, but which was cheaper to manufacture. So far, so typically venal for the industry. The audiophiles get their longer, sharper-sounding discs, the industry rakes in billions of pounds in profit for IP it already owned and barely had to pay any extra for. Everyone's a winner.

Unfortunately, nobody in the industry was seemingly looking further than ten years ahead. Beyond that, the purchase cost of CDs and CD players dropped, the number of tiles available on the format had increased exponentially until it became the industry standard, and most importantly, virtually everybody gained the ability to reproduce the IP at home. Suddenly, the industry was fighting a battle it could never, ever hope to win. If your IP becomes available for free (or a very reduced cost) then it becomes valueless and the incentives to create more simply disappear. If Tamiya were to license their IP, this is exactly what would happen to them. Their IP would become ubiquitous and therefore worthless.

Of course, there would still be people who would only want Tamiya original products, whether for reasons of purism or morality. There are people who will only buy original music on whatever format, and will not countenance copies. I am one of those people, but it is not enough to sustain the industry and it never will be.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yalson

The problem here is that Tamiya isn't capitalising on their old IP, they are pretty much ignoring it except for the re-re's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, what can you do? It is their IP to do with as they please. The one undeniable fact is that if they were to release it in a digital format to third parties then it would become effectively worthless, as it could and would be copied. As it is, if they retain that IP it continues to have value, even if they don't use it. Although they are not using it to make money from sales of kits and parts, they retain the ability to do, as well as the ability to sell the IP on to another buyer in the future if they so desire (as I believe Kyosho did recently with theirs when the business was sold). For a company like Tamiya, which has a massive and much-loved back catalogue of products, IP and brand constitute a large percentage of the entire worth of the company, so they can't let it out of their sight, even if there would be a short-term financial gain in doing so.

As for re-res, that IS Tamiya capitalising on its old IP. For any products which they haven't yet reissued, they will either have plans to do so in the future or have decided for whatever reason that it isn't worth their while. Even if it isn't, though, it makes sense to retain it as the more IP they exclusively hold the more this can be leveraged as part of the company's total worth to obtain credit. If they release it, it loses all value.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...