Interesting arguments on both sides of this discussion. Remember, this is about BRANDS not lawyers. Consumers are more likely to purchase something that immediately invokes a cool, nostalgic image in their mind. That's why model manufacturers select these scale subjects.
Anything that bears the Cessna silhouette, brand name, or model designation is going to somehow have an impact on the company's reputation if it does not perform to expectations. A lot of this is about image. Union Pacific expects the manufacturers who use their logos and designs to put out a product of good quality, quality which enhances the image of the company being modeled. Cessna is no exception. I bought a Great Planes Cessna 182. Sure, Great Planes made the ARF. But it still
looks like a Cessna,
taxis like a Cessna,
flies like a Cessna,
lands like a Cessna. For those reasons, the design of the craft is going to be seen as Cessna's intellectual property, which will be protected no differently than an IBM software application. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck, and it's duck season.....
NorfolkSouthern