I have a draftsman friend and R/Cer that designs models and sells the plans. One very famous Citabria Pro is amongst his efforts. I'm not talking about the guy that is just drafting for wages. Not that it matters much.
Ed Cregger
Where did you get that erroneous idea? Scalpers sell well above the original ticket price.
Ridiculous! They do not discount them to the scalper.
Or better yet, just let the local, established ticket outlets sell them.
I forgot to mention that scalping is against the law in many states, including Oregon where the laswsuit against eBay was filed.
All this talk about plans has me thinking that I need to publish my bomb-dropper plane on my website and sell the plans for a few bucks as a computer file. It's a really nifty plane. I also have my primary trainer 049 design that almost got published in RCM 13 years ago, and my mini-stick 049 design. I built ten of those and sold them to a local modeler in Kansas City about 9 years ago, and they did mini-stick pylon races for a while.
Hey, Boo, what's with the attitude on Americans? Don't give us any of that "Americans are interested in themselves only" routine. The only thing that does is make you seem like a jaded fool who believes everything he reads. Wherever you are, you have no frigging idea what a typical American believes and what our/my principles are, so get off your high-horse. Don't tell me your own welfare isn't in your top three priorities, because I'm not buying that bullcrap. I don't plan on generalizing about Europeans, so I don't appreciate you generalizing about us.
In your own words, "f*ck you", you obnoxious jerk.
Harlan
?? If we have to explain it...
Precisely.
What he means is that the face value is well below the market rate.
What does that mindless statement mean?
That rather depends on how many get sold at the scalper's price.
Do keep up, Mr. Bowey. See below.
UK. But I believe it is essentially that simple.
copyright is on printed and recorded material. It menas that it shouldn't be reproduced. That's all.
It is a civil, not crimoinal, offence, which means that although technically its an offence in all cases, in practice to bringa successful action wnd gain compensation, you have to priove materi9al damages.
If for examle you have a book and its out of porint and teh original copyright hodler no longer exists, whose to sue? and whose to say that they could have made money?
In practice is a waste of time nd money - the judge would throw the thing out, or simply say, guilty: fine one penny, costs to te plaintiff. And there you go.
So you might have spent $10,000 to lose money, and inflicted a penny fine on someone. Big deal.
I think it is. The 'copy for won use' is a simple acceptancfe oif tthe fact that isince yoi have it already, copying it merely proptects your right to have it in teh future: since no trasaction has taken place, and no potential transaction has been diverted, there is no case to answer.
No they are not. Thats as stupid as saying you can't play from a sheet of music you have bought, again and again. You can.
However if uou do it in public, FOR PROFIT you owe something to teh composer and publisher of course.
Note that in every case this is about commercial gain, noty teh act of copyinh. Its teh act of copying for commercial gain
So if you ytook that plan and copied it and made laser ut kits and sold them for profit..well then there is a possible case, but even that is frauight.
There was a case I came across once - a pivotal case pofr precvedence, in which a photographer went to a particular point where a famous landscape picture had been taken, and using very similar equipment, took it again. Now photographs were held top be copyrigt, but not the view itself.
Likewise Boeing can't stop you selling plans for a model Boeing 707, although they MAY stop you from calling int Boeing, under trademark legislation.
The building of the planes is actually irrelevant to copyright. That refers to the original printed material. If you buy a book on how to plant potatoes, it doesn't come with a license allowing you to only plant one potato.
You are confusing copyright with intellectual property rights. Not the same thing at all. THOSE are protected under patent, or by direct license as a contract.
The basic rules are pretty clearly laid out. There are borderline cases. Like the photographer I described.
I doubt it.
Well that does show that the period of copyright DOES expire, just that the timelines are different..
If you look at the third box down, stuff prior to 1963, expired in 2000 even if registered, and if not has been free for YEARS.
No, its plans published prior to 1964, are free for all. Unless the owner re-applied for copyright. AND the plans say 'copyright' on them.
Now its 70 years only. Then free for all.
You miss the point. They COULD have sold them higher. So its their loss, the scalper and the customers gain.
I am sure it is. So are monopolies and graft.
However its always hard to say when a company is a de facto monopoly, acting in a cartel, or paying a Saudi prince a million bucks of 'commission' to act as 'agent' when selling tanks, is a bribe, corruption, or just 'sound normal business practice'.
No. The market value is whatever you can sell it for. Period.
Not all tickets have the same market value.
How very anti-free market and LIBERAL they are to be sure ;-)
Tsk Tsk How anti free market and LIBERAL that is.
If prices are fixed, you get queues.and a blacvk market. If prices are not fixed you get gouging. When supplies can't meet demand. Take your pick.
Exactly.
Well the speculators are simply - like your garage - stocking up.
Yup.
wrote in :
That is because they are specifically drawn up for individual cases. However I doubt that this is a copyright issue.
Its probably more about an implied contract between the architect, marine or otherwise, and his original client.
And I am not worried about looking very hard, at a pre 1964 set of plans, sometimes with a scanner ;-), and re-drafting the whole thing to use completely different propulsion systems and maybe materials from the originals. ;-)
Publish and be damned.
whingeing Limeys?
Cabbage eaters?
French,
Cheese Eating surrender Monkeys? Dutch,
I doubt many Americans know what country the Dutch live in. In fact most don't know where Des Moines is. Let alone Europe..
General insularity and ignorance. When its true, which it isn't generally.
Well we re VERY aware of what CORPORTATE Anjerucans are klike, because the attitude 'me first, f*ck you' is pretty much smbriodreed on their starched shirt gfronts.
Now you and I know that actually, the average American,. particularly if he doesn't happen to be (quite) white, is a damn fine nice friendly fellow, but we don't see that many over here.
What we get is raving loonies and Arthur Anderesen..whatever happened to THEM? vanished, and no one EVER got taken to court.
No, but we live in a crowded society where what other people think is very relevant to our own status.
There you go, typical. :-)
And how long before that file has been banged across the Internet a million times?
If it was any good, it will be gone..in seconds.
If it wasn't, only a few will ever pay anyway.
I looked at that and gave up. Plans for free, license CUT files to CNC or laser cutters, and get royalties..that works.
The rest doesn't.
Lifes too short.
It's a really nifty plane. I also have my primary
Publish it for free and invite donations.
Do what ? European ? I'm British, man !
The French are never called "cheese eating surrender-monkeys" by the Yanks then ?
No, I was kidding anyway :-)
Actually, copyright exists for 3-d forms as well, including things like car pistons, sculptures, model aeroplanes etc. When you buy a plan you buy the right to use the plan for your own use and to build as many copies of the plane as the copyright holder licences you to. You are also granted "fair use" rights to make copies for our own personal use. These fair use rights vary from country to country.
In the case of model aeroplanes there is no generally accepted standard for how many planes you may build, but for boats, buildings etc the plans would generally only be licenced for one copy of the end product. Further builds would require additional payment.
Copyright infringement is now a criminal offence in some cases in the UK. In particular, if you go on general sale by way of business with a product that infringes someone else's copyright then that is a criminal offence.
Actually, offhand, I don't know where Des Moines is either ?
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.