"David CL Francis" wrote in message
...
[...]
I am probably wrong but this sounds a bit weird to me. Is there any
attempt to change the design of an aircraft to make it more attractive to
model manufacturers? I think not.

As someone else already pointed out, there is inherent value in the original
design. Value that copyright law grants to the original designer (the
aircraft manufacturer). The original designer did not have to design to the
model aircraft market for that value to be there. The model has value
*because* it's like something in real life.

The making of an effigy cannot really be stealing the fruits of the
manufacturers labour? Would it apply to the manufacturer of model
buildings? There is a better case there because architects are trying to
make a building visually attractive.

Aircraft certainly are designed to "look good", as well as perform well,
though that question isn't relevant to the inherent value of the copyrighted
design.

While I don't know for a fact, I suspect that anyone trying to sell models
of the Seattle Space Needle, or the Empire State Building, or the Chrysler
Building, etc. would also be required to pay royalties to the owners or
architects of those buildings.

Pete