Something like that, yes.
There is another factor: liability. If some kid chokes on a poorly made B-17 model, Boeing can get sued. Laugh all you want, it already happened. In the sue crazy modern age? Nope. Back in the Fifties. One of the requirements of licensing is for the licensee to have liability insurance to indemnify the licensor.
And a third factor:
IMAGE. Big corporation. Spends a lot on image. They don't want to have their name and likeness on CRAP. Ask how much BMW gets for you to put thier logo on a pen. A lot. And then they pass the pen around at a boardroom meeting...if that's not a BMW-quality pen, something that reflects their quality identity...then no license.

Lawyers make some money off this stuff. Lockheed has a law firm called EMI that does the work for them, they get a piece of whatever they collect. Last I looked, Boeing did it in-house. The monies received by the manufacturers for this stuff are totally inconsequential to a major defense contractor, I don't think it's really about the greed at all.

The bill being talked about is a joke. It's just a bone thrown by a congressman to one of his constiuents, Stevens International, a company that imports plastic models from China. And it only covers airplanes made under future contracts that might be signed. So it really would not matter much anyway, even if it WERE passed.
Know any model airplane companies driven out of business by licensing requirements? Maybe this isin't the falling sky people maintain it is.