Tedk said
Still believe there’s more to the story, the original owner lived in Milford which is only 10 miles from New Haven
  

Ted,  That may well be so but the odds are we aren't going to ever know unless somebody within Winchester Ammunition still knows.  The Winchester intellectual property belongs to the Olin Corporation [NYSE symbol OLN],  of which Winchester Ammunitiion is one of three operating divsions and reporting segments.  

Somebody authorizes the manufacture of gun socks, carousel gun racks, gun safes, and other items bearing the horse and rider logo. I believe that is the marks owner, Olin Corporation, not Browning Arms Company d/b/a BACO, Inc., which merely licenses the Winchester name and marks and applies them to the firearms it contracts to be built by Miroku Firearms Manufacturing Company, a subsidiary Japanese corporation of its parent,  Miroku Corporation. 

The foregoing might seem tedious but everybody first needs to know the exact names and relationships to decide who to go talk to. In this case, I think there is very likely an intellectual property manager at Winchester Ammunition in East Alton, Illinois, who likely reports to a corporate officer of Olin Corporation, that would know about this stuff, if anybody still does. 

It smells like a very small potatoes deal that didn't make or fell through, although there's the possibility it was a wildcat maker who never got licensed. Speaking only for myself and hypothetically, if I had a shrinkwrapped pallet of these things I'd bought in a rash moment, and now had my WACA pals pestering me to sell them, I would find out who the IP manager was at Winchester Ammunition, explain my tale of woe -- and that there are only 75 pieces in the known Universe-- and ask for his or her help. Emphasizing that all the interested parties are loyal fans and supporters of Winchester brand ammunition and -- if all else fails -- asking whether a small royalty on sales might cut the Gordian knot? 

That would be a lot easier than irritating WA employees who have better things to do than try to research whether some guy in Connecticut got a license these many years ago. 

MidwestCrisis said

Tedk said

MidwestCrisis said
As a mouse walking amongst elephants, I will say.  The OP was from a standing member and said he had 75.  He made it sound like he purchased them, from someone just wanting them out of a garage.  Since none of you Wise old sages had any issues with the logo, and started discussing where they might have came from, I definitely wanted one.   Purchasing and shipping is the conundrum.  
I assumed Buck made two and wanted to see how many he could sell before he made more. 
I stand by my order.  Just need the info.  
  

As a mouse walking among elephants?
  

I respect all you old timers.  These gun racks are really neat.  I knew I didn’t know what I was talking about.  I was more just asking questions with my assumption. I didn’t mean to offend buck if I did. I am definitely buying one if buck offers them for sale.  As I said.  I wouldn’t care if they were new.  That was all I meant. I wonder if he had them made and then Winchesters lawyers had an issue.  
  

Sorry, no you did not offend me. I just wanted to be clear what these were and where I got them from. We have all seen a few scams roll through here so your assumption had a decent chance of being correct but simply wasn’t in my case. No sleight of hand. I really bought them at auction as I stated and do have 75. Heather from WACA did reach back out and says no one can confirm them but Jennifer Goyle stated the WACA logo is old and was used in the 80’s and early 90’s. She believes as did Bert these were never an approved item. Heather has been great and will speak with Vinny tomorrow and gather his thoughts on what  we can do with these. I’ll report back as I learn more. Thanks

TXGunNut said

Zebulon said
Mike, do you seriously think the marks owner is going to sue the guy who has acquired these 75 old racks, to prevent distribution? 
  

Nope, but I have painful memories of being a defendant in a lawsuit I "won", no thanks to estate's attorney. Ironically, estate's attorney is the only one who profited from the suit. I've learned to be careful and I'm only asking that OP consider the issue. 
 
Mike
  

He's obviously already considering it or he wouldn't have asked for advice. 

Rather than going down the rabbit hole of trying to learn if the maker used the marks with permission, the simpler solution is to construct a request that reassures the marks owner it is a de minimus situation and ask its blessing.

 [1] ask Olin whether they have any objection to disposing of the racks to WACA members, whether or not the marks are infringing, [2] making clear the owner, a WACA member, has no intent to manufacture and [3] there are only 75 racks involved. 

That puts the whole thing in proper perspective. Nobody knows if the maker got permission. There are only 75 of the critters. The distribution would be within the family. 

I would suggest going through any friendly Olin/WACA contact rather than cold. 

Zebulon said
Mike, do you seriously think the marks owner is going to sue the guy who has acquired these 75 old racks, to prevent distribution? 
  

Nope, but I have painful memories of being a defendant in a lawsuit I "won", no thanks to estate's attorney. Ironically, estate's attorney is the only one who profited from the suit. I've learned to be careful and I'm only asking that OP consider the issue. 

Mike

Bearing in mind that it's Olin that owns the marks, not FNH, the intelligent thing for the purchaser to do is [1] ask Olin whether they have any objection to disposing of the racks to WACA members, whether or not the marks are infringing, [2] making clear the owner, a WACA member, has no intent to manufacture and [3] there are only 75 racks involved. 

Mike

"7. Equity will not flog a dead horse." 

He scored high enough to pass the exam but was curious to see how the Examiners had scored his answer to that particular question. When the old exam papers became available, he looked his up and saw his Examiner had marked his answer at 100% -- and with a red exclamation point in the margin next to the "7" .

I have a feeling Olin's Assistant General Counsel for litigation, if confronted with the existence of these 75 old racks and whether to seek an injunction and damages, would very likely invoke the Seventh Maxim, particularly since the market for the racks consists of WACA members whom Olin generously favors anyway. And nobody is contemplating futher production without a license. 

TXGunNut said
From what I recall of WACA's dealings (and others) with the modern company often referred to as Winchester I'm thinking it may do to consider if they would approve of the use of their trademark or approved the use of it when these racks or decals were manufactured. They have the right to control the use of their trademarks and apparently they're not afraid to exercise it. 
 
Mike
  

I wonder if this was the original glitch - that was never resolved - which would explain why they just sat in storage status for all these years.

Mike

Surely there are younger members of the Bar who are also WACA members, who would know something about the law of intellectual property. 

Speaking only for myself, I would cheerfully buy one of those racks and pay a reasonable sum for it relying on Rule 101- you can't get blood out of a turnip. 

Zebulon said

oldcrankyyankee said
So, the big question is Buck, are you planning on selling any?
  

New England subtlety.  Tom is a master of it. 
  

Great timing for my lawyer to chime in! Zeb, can you give me a written “Formal Legal” letter of opinion stating that I can legally sell items that were produced using Winchester and WACA’s logo’s without their authorization? Rhetorical I know 😀

Seriously, I am awaiting a reply from Heather as I think it best to let her validate whether these were ever approved or not. If not, I feel WACA itself has to approve the fate of these Gun Racks. I promise I’ll keep you guys updated! 

oldcrankyyankee said
So, the big question is Buck, are you planning on selling any?
  

New England subtlety.  Tom is a master of it.