DCC Concepts Trademark Confusion

This section allows guests to comment or ask questions. Posts from guests require explicit approval (which generally takes a day or so), before they appear, so that we can prevent unwanted spam.
Proto87Stores

DCC Concepts Trademark Confusion

Postby Proto87Stores » Mon Feb 21, 2022 6:05 pm

Further to Martins "Quirk" post. Please note that DCC Concepts is now repeatedly using the Proto:87 Stores range of "Ultimate" track component trademarks for it's own later but non-P4 compatible products. All the Proto:87 Stores Utimate track parts are of course P4 compliant.

e.g. The latest .
So - we are delighted to introduce you to the Ultimate Track Pin (part of the Working Point Rodding range that also won Hornby Magazine's "Innovation of the Year")!


The "Ultimate" range has also been recognised and registered by an NMRA product approval warrant, so is well known and established internationally for for over a decade. Obviously it's a very attractive Trademark to take advantage of.

e.g. Image

Apart from using almost identical pins in out own point rodding angle crank, I also supply Ultimate Track spikes which, being true scale and chemically milled from stainless steel, require no exotic plating of any kind to make them fully useful.

Andy

User avatar
grovenor-2685
Forum Team
Posts: 3922
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 8:02 pm

Re: DCC Concepts Trademark Confusion

Postby grovenor-2685 » Mon Feb 21, 2022 9:07 pm

Have you registered your "trademark" in the UK?
An NMRA conformance warrant has no connection with trademarks.
I am very dubious that the use of 'ultimate' as an adjective for products is registerable, its hardly distinctive.
Regards
Keith
Grovenor Sidings

bécasse
Posts: 377
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2018 8:26 am

Re: DCC Concepts Trademark Confusion

Postby bécasse » Mon Feb 21, 2022 10:18 pm

grovenor-2685 wrote:Have you registered your "trademark" in the UK?
An NMRA conformance warrant has no connection with trademarks.
I am very dubious that the use of 'ultimate' as an adjective for products is registerable, its hardly distinctive.


I agree totally with Keith. There is no way that 'Ultimate' is registrable as a Trade Mark, if it was, someone would have done so years ago. You might, just, persuade the registrar if the word was combined with an appropriate geometric shape, say the outline of a flat-bottom rail end with ULTIMATE across the foot in a distinctive type-face, but even then it would be the totality of the device that was the Trade Mark, not the word itself, so another producer would still be able to describe their product as ultimate.

User avatar
jim s-w
Posts: 2189
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 5:56 pm

Re: DCC Concepts Trademark Confusion

Postby jim s-w » Tue Feb 22, 2022 7:11 pm

I question what benefit and relevance this thread has to the p4 society and it’s members?
Jim Smith-Wright

http://www.p4newstreet.com

Over thinking often leads to under doing!

Proto87Stores

Re: DCC Concepts Trademark Confusion

Postby Proto87Stores » Tue Feb 22, 2022 7:56 pm

JIm,

My post was stimulated by the member post referring to a recent DCC concept "quirk" of suddenly naming their Ultimate track pins the same advertised track product range name as the popular Ultimate track spikes, et al, from the Proto:87 Stores.

Since the Proto:87 Stores "Ultimate" pre-formed common crossings and inset track (girder rail) systems, are all made specifically to meet P4 standards, using the same advertising name may well confuse those searching for P4 parts into contacting the wrong supplier and being told they are not available.

That seems to me to be worth informing the Soc membership, as it otherwise potentially reduces the supply options of P4 modellers.

Andy

User avatar
grovenor-2685
Forum Team
Posts: 3922
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 8:02 pm

Re: DCC Concepts Trademark Confusion

Postby grovenor-2685 » Tue Feb 22, 2022 9:16 pm

Really Andy,
No P4 modeller is likely to be confused by DCC Concepts quirky offerings that have little relevance to P4, especially golden track pins considering track pins are not really a P4 thing.

If you want to attract P4 modellers to your offerings you need to do a lot more explaining how items built to P87 standards can simultaneously be built to P4 standards when the standards are not the same. And equally why models of American parts to 1:87 scale should be suitable to model UK prototypes to 1:76.
Regards
Keith
Grovenor Sidings

bobwallison
Posts: 131
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: DCC Concepts Trademark Confusion

Postby bobwallison » Wed Feb 23, 2022 11:35 am

Completely agree about the crucial difference between a trademark and an NMRA conformance certificate. But it all seems to be a red herring - I have looked at the listing on DCC Concepts website and studied the packaging and cannot see the word "Ultimate" anywhere.

Actually, I'm quite taken with the idea of hardened steel pins that won't bend as soon as you breathe on them, but gold plating?? How long before that peels off, taking all soldered attachments with it?

User avatar
Martin Wynne
Posts: 1172
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 4:27 pm

Re: DCC Concepts Trademark Confusion

Postby Martin Wynne » Wed Feb 23, 2022 3:23 pm

bobwallison wrote:Actually, I'm quite taken with the idea of hardened steel pins that won't bend as soon as you breathe on them, but gold plating?? How long before that peels off, taking all soldered attachments with it?

See:

https://www.watdon.co.uk/acatalog/insec ... ories.html

https://www.watdon.co.uk/acatalog/E6961-Lill-pins.html

Martin.
40+ years developing Templot. Enjoy using Templot? Join Templot Club. Be a Templot supporter.

bobwallison
Posts: 131
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: DCC Concepts Trademark Confusion

Postby bobwallison » Wed Feb 23, 2022 3:29 pm

Thanks for the link Martin.


Return to “Guest Book”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ClaudeBot and 1 guest