I think you’re all missing something here. Boeing has every right to expunge the MDC name from the designs they’ve inherited. However, the two aeroplanes in question are NOT Boeing owned, so Boeing have NO rights to insist how they are painted. But (big but!) the McDonnell Douglas name is now a trademark of the Boeing Corporation, and as such Boeing do have rights to dictate how that trademark is used – note, I’m talking trademark and NOT copyright as inferred by Sandy.
Now the conjecture, because NONE of us really know why those two airplanes have Boeing on them. However, possibilities that come to mind are:
1. Given that Boeing can now dictate how the McDonnell Douglas trademark is used, it is not beyond the realms of possibility that Boeing are nolonger allowing the MDC trademark to be painted on aeroplanes
2. Boeing is a far better known name than MDC. As it is now valid to regard the MD-82 and MD-90 as “Boeings” the airlines concerned may have decided to paint the Boeing name on their aircraft rather than MDC as a reassurance to lay-passengers
As to whether DC-3s will now start to appear with Boeing on them… In the worse case (1) above, any owner unhappy with having to paint the name Boeing on their [M]DC aircraft could just omit the designation totally – again, Boeing have no rights to dictate that the aircraft type has to be painted on the aircraft.
Andy
Sign In
