One last statement from me as well.  I agree with the licensing fees for use of such items in movies as it makes sense.  Studios may invest millions but they expect to make millions in profits - lawyers and licensing aren't exactly detrimental here.  But we're talking about someone making a few hundred dollars on the off chance of a sale.  Going a bit further though, it is possible that a CG studio guy might purchase said item for use in a movie - but then I'd think that the lawyers would show up anyway doing their lawyer things.
Here's a hint to the people making these 3D 'knockoff' models: introduce slight variances as well as similar (but not exact) names and logos.  Note the variances for your legal defense.  Why?  Because if it isn't the same you can make proprietary claims and avoid legal issues.  I mention this because I play guitar.  Guitars are 'copied' quite often - especially in Japan where you can get something like a Fenda Stratacasta which looks almost identical to the Fender Stratocaster except in the name and slight design variances.  This is considered legal as it is not an exact duplicate and the makers do not make claims to be the original.  Of course, laws vary from nation to nation so how far this can be taken and to what extent the variances are must be considered. :)

phaneuf's enough,
Robert

C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot. C++ makes it harder, but when you do, you blow your whole leg off.

 -- Bjarne Stroustrup

Contact Me | Kuroyume's DevelopmentZone