Jump to content

USMC uniforms discontinued by ATF


Recommended Posts

Hi everyone,

 

Just heard a sad new on ATF website today, they stop production of their great quality reproduction of ww2 USMC uniforms, due to some juridical problems.

In fact, Marine corps require a special agreement for to be authorized to reproduce EGA symbol on items not ordered by Marine Corps himself. ATF staff explain all in details on the website, in USMC Utility uniform rubric.

So it's a dead end for us to search excellent quality reproductions on ATF about USMC uniforms. But they still have in production, usmc fieldgear and helmet covers

 

BTW, you can find on the website, a closeout sale for last exemplars of P42 uniforms, but sizing choice is reduce ( only size 40 for jacket, and some decent sizes for trousers). Jump on it if you planed to build up a camo marine reenactment uniform ;)

 

Thierry

Link to post
Share on other sites

This makes as much sense to me as the recent decision by the British RAF to copyright all of their inginia. I can't see how something in common useage for this many decades can not be copywritten. Especially in the US where artistic use can overide copyrights in some cases... :thumbdown:

Link to post
Share on other sites

There must be some other reason in addition to this why they are discontinuing the line. They simply could sell the shirts without the EGA and let the reenactment groups deal with it....

 

-Ski

Link to post
Share on other sites
There must be some other reason in addition to this why they are discontinuing the line. They simply could sell the shirts without the EGA and let the reenactment groups deal with it....

 

-Ski

 

 

Marine Corps uniforms have been discontinued and will not be restocked in the forseeable future.

Why Mister, why?

As of 2009 the Marine Corps requires a special licensing agreement to use the eagle/globe/anchor symbol on new production. This is a 30 page application, requiring a 6-9 month wait, demands we purchase a trademark and product insurance policy, install special holographic USMC labels on everything, and submit every product to them for approval.

 

So, as it stands, if I ever get in the mood to go through all the hoops, we are still talking 1-2 years. From the day we send in the application, to get the agreement finalized, have labels made, each product approved, then have them made and shipped- over a year. And I'm not inclined to mess with it this year (2012). We are backed up with products that sell far better- like Army gear and German stuff. 

We will answer no more questions about these. This IS your detailed answer.

It's a dead issue. 

In other words, if you are still not comprehending this, here it is:

 

WE WILL NOT HAVE MORE P41'S.  

 

We are not interested in helpful hints (make them without EGA's and let people use iron-ons; etc, etc) and if you call to whine or tell lies about your unit ordering thousands, you'll just piss me off and the chance of us screwing with them will go from slim to absolute zero. Customer pressure will not get the results you want.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for forum support for cut-paste of complete explanation of Atf.

Btw, completly agree with usmc decision about ega emblem, it's absolutly legit for them to control for what and on what ega is use

 

Ski, if i read well between lines, other reason that us Army and german works better than usmc, as says their explanation. So....

 

Thierry

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for forum support for cut-paste of complete explanation of Atf.

Btw, completly agree with usmc decision about ega emblem, it's absolutly legit for them to control for what and on what ega is use

 

Ski, if i read well between lines, other reason that us Army and german works better than usmc, as says their explanation. So....

 

Thierry

 

 

Yea, great guy. I'm not impressed with his "go to hell" attitude.

 

-Ski

Link to post
Share on other sites
Lucky 7th Armored
Yea, great guy. I'm not impressed with his "go to hell" attitude.

 

-Ski

 

I agree, what a professional. :thumbdown: Even if their products are quality, one should not act so unprofessional.

 

Haydn

Link to post
Share on other sites
Btw, completly agree with usmc decision about ega emblem, it's absolutly legit for them to control for what and on what ega is use

 

I'm on the opposite side: I'm against government copywriting or trademarking anything produced with taxpayers dollars - it is all public property.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Corpl. Cleaver
I agree, what a professional. :thumbdown: Even if their products are quality, one should not act so unprofessional.

 

Haydn

 

 

I go on the ATF site just to read his rants sometimes. I'm not so sure it's being unprofessional, or just fed up with the crap some reenactors give him.

 

TYler

Link to post
Share on other sites
I go on the ATF site just to read his rants sometimes. I'm not so sure it's being unprofessional, or just fed up with the crap some reenactors give him.

 

TYler

 

I think part of it is an act: it's gotten him lots of attention on this and other forums over the years and I know I have often linked to his "khaki" rant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe at this time its a little of both, I have them on my FB page and you wouldn't believe some of the out and out crazy things people ask for and do. It's insane! Those rants are usually directed towards the insane in our hobby and are also quite entertaining to those who understand reality and want to get a good laugh.

 

All I know is when I order from them, they have great courtesy towards me, I get my items from them at a reasonable time and they are always top quality products.

 

I agree, this EGA shouldn't be some trademarked item...I believe the Army was suppose to start doing this as well...

 

A local model kit company made a Glamorous Glennis X-1 and the family was going to sue if they didn't take the name off the model kit! Wow, you get to graffiti our plane then sue if anybody tries to use the logo....silly the USA as just become one huge lawsuit in waiting....

 

Leonardo

Link to post
Share on other sites
Corpl. Cleaver
All I know is when I order from them, they have great courtesy towards me, I get my items from them at a reasonable time and they are always top quality products.

 

 

I have bought stuff from them in person, and they are great. Very polite and helpfull, never had a problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm on the opposite side: I'm against government copywriting or trademarking anything produced with taxpayers dollars - it is all public property.
I agree fully. I asked a friend who is a copyright attorney who deals with infringements outside the US and he said it is perfectly legal to trademark a government trademark or logo, even one that hasn’t been copy written for many years. You can see where this could eventually go: Someone wants to make a movie about the Corps that isn’t exactly flattering and the USMC says, “Fine, but you can’t use the insignia or the name, ‘Marine Corps’!”
Link to post
Share on other sites

Color me confused.

 

Is this the ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives) sticking its nose into yet another area outside its purview?

 

 

Or is this a different ATF?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Color me confused.

 

Is this the ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives) sticking its nose into yet another area outside its purview?

Or is this a different ATF?

 

 

No we are referring to a dealer manufactures WWII reproductions called At The Front...ATF for short:

 

http://www.atthefront.com/

 

Leonardo

Link to post
Share on other sites
Color me confused.

 

Is this the ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives) sticking its nose into yet another area outside its purview?

Or is this a different ATF?

 

 

Yep...soon with the IRS managing your health care, the ATF has gotten into the reproduction uniform market. Everyone's trying to make a buck these days...

 

:lol:;)

 

(Sorry, just had to add that in there) ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree fully. I asked a friend who is a copyright attorney who deals with infringements outside the US and he said it is perfectly legal to trademark a government trademark or logo, even one that hasn’t been copy written for many years. You can see where this could eventually go: Someone wants to make a movie about the Corps that isn’t exactly flattering and the USMC says, “Fine, but you can’t use the insignia or the name, ‘Marine Corps’!”

 

Actually, I don't think that would work. I think that would fall under the fair-use doctrine.

 

I suspect it's aimed at the sweatshirt-bumpersticker-etc. market.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Armed 2 tha Teeth

It's not about copyright, it's about trademarks. They are different areas of intellectual property law, and "fair use" has a different meaning within each context.

 

I spoke to one of my law professors about this last semester and what the US Armed Forces is doing is totally within their powers. It sucks for us, but they hold the trademarks (or the Federal Government does) and they can protect their mark from dilution (other people using it) or infringement (copying it).

 

I think this probably originated as a way to cut down on people going to Cafe Press and making a ton of unlicensed merchandise for profit using the EGA/USMC or the innumerable other sites that sell things like sweatshirts to thongs with similar marks on them but to the Armed Forces this could potentially be a money maker. From their standpoint, the worst that happens is that they have a firmer grip on who uses their mark and if people want to buy things with their emblems on them they will most likely either have to buy them from the branch specifically, or dealers authorized to use the mark (who I'd imagine would pay a licensing fee).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Corpsmancollector
Yea, great guy. I'm not impressed with his "go to hell" attitude.

 

-Ski

 

I’m with Ski on this one; never have been impressed with his attitude and consequently have never ordered from him. I can be doing without all the arrogance, so I go elsewhere. But, I’m sure he’s a nice bloke in real life and every bit catering towards customer’s needs as expressed in some of the posts above. I just don’t think it’s necessary to put it all over your webpages. Anyway, I digress.

 

With regards camo P42s…Go to Juan at WWII Impressions. In my opinion, WWII Imp’s camos have been the best on the market for a long time (just my $0.02). I can’t believe the legal hoops the Marine Corps is imposing with reproducing the EGA, seems crazy. But why if this has been active since 2009 has ATF only just stopped doing USMC uniforms? And does this have implications for other uniform manufacturers? Are we not going to be able to buy repro dungarees from anyone with an EGA soon enough?

 

Will

Link to post
Share on other sites
And does this have implications for other uniform manufacturers? Are we not going to be able to buy repro dungarees from anyone with an EGA soon enough?

 

If it happens, repros will become collectables and reach the high prices of genuine camo P42s :blink:

Link to post
Share on other sites
If it happens, repros will become collectables and reach the high prices of genuine camo P42s :blink:

 

I don't think so... Repros will be still produce by others shops thant ATF, like ww2 impressions, Spearhead militaria or other shop. So....

Myself, i never have any problems with ATF, still receive ordered items in time and at my size. Just today, when i receive my P42 camo set, i was disappointed to find inside labels stamped "made in china" but will see very fast on the field if it's quality or not (i'm not very gentle with repro items :lol: :w00t:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suspect that, if the right person were approached, a deal could be cut in the USMC in some historical light, as the policy is to prevent folks from selling Marine "crap," as well as keep the proper USMC uniform fabric (with Logo) from being sold to the general public (think- some small country buys a pile of it to outfit their military and two years later the Marines go in and are wearing the same thing (think woodland cammo all over the world).

 

But it is like any copyright/trademarprotectionon- once you hire lawyers to protect it, they look everywhere for anyone doing anything. That's how they make their money.

 

Like it or don't, copyright/trademark/patent law is a very important thing and needs to be preserved. Unfortunately, in this case, what it probably means is that the uniforms will be made in China and sold on ebay or something, and the Corps will lose out on have decent reproductions thingsgins they want to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got several ball caps with US military patches embroidered on them...AF and Army. I'm pretty sure they weren't sold via the PX, so technically, is this in breach of some kind of copyright? What about flying jackets with repro squadron insignia etc. Theoretically, could all such products require similar licences?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Armed 2 tha Teeth
I've got several ball caps with US military patches embroidered on them...AF and Army. I'm pretty sure they weren't sold via the PX, so technically, is this in breach of some kind of copyright? What about flying jackets with repro squadron insignia etc. Theoretically, could all such products require similar licences?

 

No. Again, this does not appear to be a copyright issue- rather it is a trademark issue. They are different areas of law with differing rights. It seems like the Armed Forces have only recently begun strictly policing the use of their marks and there is a chance that those caps were made under proper licenses.

 

I'd doubt that reproduction squadron patches etc. would fall under this. It appears to me they are more worried about the use of their current marks. While there are differences stylistically between the WWII EGA and the modern version, it is still recognizably the Marine Corps mark.

 

Someone mentioned that Spearhead will still make utilities, which is good for those that need to have utilities but from what I've seen they are poor reproductions. Also being so fair from the U.S., and specifically being in China, makes litigation less likely.

 

I think once the USMC Historical Company needs new uniforms they will be begging WWII Impressions or ATF to make them more uniforms and an agreement could be worked out. Until then though I wouldn't be holding my breath on anymore U.S. made utilities. Even if WWII Impressions was to go through with the production, given the USMC's specifications (as per the ATF statement) they will cost more because producers will have to pass on the cost of the trademark insurance policy and special labels, etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites
No. Again, this does not appear to be a copyright issue- rather it is a trademark issue. They are different areas of law with differing rights. It seems like the Armed Forces have only recently begun strictly policing the use of their marks and there is a chance that those caps were made under proper licenses.

 

I'd doubt that reproduction squadron patches etc. would fall under this. It appears to me they are more worried about the use of their current marks. While there are differences stylistically between the WWII EGA and the modern version, it is still recognizably the Marine Corps mark.

 

Someone mentioned that Spearhead will still make utilities, which is good for those that need to have utilities but from what I've seen they are poor reproductions. Also being so fair from the U.S., and specifically being in China, makes litigation less likely.

 

I think once the USMC Historical Company needs new uniforms they will be begging WWII Impressions or ATF to make them more uniforms and an agreement could be worked out. Until then though I wouldn't be holding my breath on anymore U.S. made utilities. Even if WWII Impressions was to go through with the production, given the USMC's specifications (as per the ATF statement) they will cost more because producers will have to pass on the cost of the trademark insurance policy and special labels, etc.

 

Thanks for the explanation! :thumbsup:

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...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.