Copyright and Orbiter

[Bj]

Just don't sell them.

If you try to sell your product, thats called propitiatory, if you try to sell others company's products that's called stealing.

We should share our knowledge and technology and stop trying to make a profit out of it.

and that is called open source :thumbup:


Honestly, I don't really care, and I doubt they would either. If they do the first thing they would do is just ask to remove it from OH or wherever posted. Its the second warning that gets you in trouble...

 

[T.Neo]

We should share our knowledge and technology and stop trying to make a profit out of it.

Forget it.

If I create something, I want to profit out of it, not someone else who I do not even know.

Although I agree, going after a model company for making a modelof your aircraft or such is overkill.

 

[Arrowstar]

Forget it.

If I create something, I want to profit out of it, not someone else who I do not even know.

Well, I think in theory Open Source suggests that the information is non-profitable: no one can make a profit. Thus, the only reason to actually produce the information is A) for one's own enjoyment, or B) to further humanity or a subset of humanity. Of course, A and B go together many times (such as in the case of Orbiter add-ons).

My knowledge of open source licensing isn't complete by any means, however, so correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[ex-orbinaut]

Just curious and interested in this subject...

Has anyone on OF ever had a copyright problem yet? I mean, based on making Star Trek, Star Wars, etcetera, vessels from films? How about record labels? Or other, old and defunct games, like Elite? Ar81 introduced us to Oolite, which is basically Elite. Does anyone know if the Oolite crew had any problems with Firebird Software?

Does the clever old Japanese solution still apply? Ie: make it ALMOST identical?

 

[Face]

Has anyone on OF ever had a copyright problem yet?

Yes.
wehaveaproblem got a C&D letter from Rocket Racing League complaining about using the trademark in derived form for Orbiter Rocket Racing League. He had to rename it to Orbiter Racing League.

Pretty minor, but a copyright problem nevertheless.

regards,
Face

 

[Eagle]

There were some problems with the Firefly addon. It was mostly from using a logo for the fictional Blue Sun company that exists in the series.

I'm not sure about the grey-goose rename though.:shrug:

 

[Turbinator]

As a side note, why don't they remove every 2001: Space Odyssey add-on from OH?

 

[Ark]

Fight the power!

 

[combrown]

It about harm and Loss

I deal alot in law these days and people are still confused that there is actually a difference between something that is legal and something that is truth in Law.

Lawful and legal are two totally different things.

We recently had legal matters which I will not go into detail on, but basically it has been thrown out and all charges have been dropped as the claimant has not been able to produce a simple fairly straight forward document called a:.....

'Contract'

Do you have a contract with any of the parties involved.
No..... if you accept that you have an obligation then they have you because you consented.

eg. When I sign anything now.

I sign like By: <Name> , Principal
All Rights Reserved

Eg. By: John-Henry: Of the Doe Family
All Rights Reserved

So lets just say that you build the Vakyrie Shuttle and start making it open to people on the orbiter forum/hangar freely to use in orbiter.

The Big JC finds out about this and decided to make a claim against the 'person' who made it from scratch and put it in the hangar.

The Big JC would have to show proof upon which relief can be granted.

In other words he has to show where he has suffered a loss because of it.
Where has he suffered harm and loss?
Of course this is just a theory and not taking into consideration how corrupt the courts are these days and the fact that they will probably rule in JCs favour as that is where the money is, but hey they can't squeeze blood from a stone.

If it was me that built the shuttle which I am seriously considering and they wanted to take me to court I would say sure lets go to court and bring fourth my 12 apostle in proper court de jure and bring out the contracts.
Lets see who is acting honourably.

This legalese really needs to be put aside, lets build the damn ships they look cool.

Love yas all sweet hearts.

---------- Post added at 01:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:39 PM ----------

If you try to sell your product, thats called propitiatory, if you try to sell others company's products that's called stealing.



and that is called open source :thumbup:


Honestly, I don't really care, and I doubt they would either. If they do the first thing they would do is just ask to remove it from OH or wherever posted. Its the second warning that gets you in trouble...

Exactly, if they don't give you a chance to fix things and they just want to start trouble then they are just being arrogant.
I just hope we build these ships they are a good appealing design.
Makes sense why they got in the movie.

 

[ex-orbinaut]

Fight the power!

Seconded. Why I asked originally. Almost all the simultaneous projects I am working on are from some series or media otherwise...

Electric Light Orchestra Out of the Blue.
(ELO) Space Shuttle.
Cowboy Bebop (Manga series) Swordfish.
Elite inspired Super Python.

I really do not see why not. We're giving fans of the movies the chance to strap on their favorite craft, and fly it around a bit. A little over 25 years ago there was not this opportunity, and as kids we had to use cardboard boxes and imagination. Now there is even an educational aspect to it, in this sense, which has got to be a good thing (at least with Orbiter).

I agree, it is publicity for nothing, so long as your doc mentions the source of inspiration. I believe what they are scared of is us making a few cents off their productions. At any rate, here, I do not think their is a worry about THAT. I really feel this should be conclusively addressed and resolved on the community before this sort of encroaching bureaucracy completely stunts the possibilities for potential Orbiter Develeopers...

Or are there things I am not considering?

 

[combrown]

Seconded. Why I asked originally. Almost all the simultaneous projects I am working on are from some series or media otherwise...

Electric Light Orchestra Out of the Blue.
(ELO) Space Shuttle.
Cowboy Bebop (Manga series) Swordfish.
Elite inspired Super Python.

I really do not see why not. We're giving fans of the movies the chance to strap on their favorite craft, and fly it around a bit. A little over 25 years ago there was not this opportunity, and as kids we had to use cardboard boxes and imagination. Now there is even an educational aspect to it, in this sense, which has got to be a good thing (at least with Orbiter).

I agree, it is publicity for nothing, so long as your doc mentions the source of inspiration. I believe what they are scared of is us making a few cents off their productions. At any rate, here, I do not think their is a worry about THAT. I really feel this should be conclusively addressed and resolved on the community before this sort of encroaching bureaucracy completely stunts the possibilities for potential Orbiter Develeopers...

Or are there things I am not considering?

No you are right on track, ideas come from our imagination, i am totally with you, when I was a kid I did the same thing,

All lego and cardboard imagination, and like you said now we have something more useful to use these ideas in.

And it is certainly more stylish and immersing, besides I am too old to still be playing with lego and out of cardboard boxes, my missus would get worried.
So if orbiter is the only thing we can do it in now maturely, then if they take that away from us, who is causing the harm and loss then.

We have every right as long as we keep the peace.

Thats all.

 

[Ark]

Not to derail the thread, but I have a question on combrown's post:

Does that only apply to content you generate yourself, or is that general copyright law? That makes it sound like you can't be legally prosecuted for downloading a movie because there's no concrete evidence you would have brought a copy otherwise, therefore causing them the loss of one copy.

 

[combrown]

Copying

Yeh it is a tough issue isn't it.
I am about to head out so I will get back to you some more on this.

But lets make it ambiguous for a second.

Lets just say I am listening to the radio and I like a track that comes on.
Say my brain is pretty good at remembering the tune and I can hear the tune really well in my head.

Haven't I just copied it?

Speak more soon.

 

[Ark]

Are cover bands who get paid for their gigs breaking the law by copying music for personal profit?

When I hand my little brother the game controller, am I breaking the law by letting him play instead of making him buy another copy?

The RIAA has tried to claim that even transferring music from a CD to your PC is making an illegal copy and denying them the sale. WTF?

Even the "lost money" figures are questionable because they always assume 1 copy = 1 lost sale or 1 shoplifted DVD. How can that be when not everyone would have bought it otherwise, and making a copy is not actually robbing them of a physical copy they paid to produce?

This is just begging for it's own thread...

 

[Urwumpe]

Are cover bands who get paid for their gigs breaking the law by copying music for personal profit?

No, because they have to pay, not for the concerts usually, but when they release a CD. Live performances are different to for example a DJ, who only plays the music. The DJ has to pay to the original artist, usually this is done by the owner of the club.

 

[jedidia]

No, because they have to pay, not for the concerts usually, but when they release a CD.

They pay for the concerts too. In theory, for any cover that a band plays at a concert it has to pay a fee to the copyright holder. Which is a most unpractical arrangement, bringing in mafia-like organisations (like in Switzerland the SUISA), that want to make it "easier" for the artists to get their money, so they set up shop, establish themselfes in the legal system, and you have to pay all fees to them, which they will pass on to the copyright holder... for a price of course.

 

[Ghostrider]

The problem with those mafia-like organisation (like SUISA) is that you can't deal with them the Mob way, like putting their head in a vise or something.

 

[ex-orbinaut]

I am just going to go to the absurd...

This sort of thing reminds me of the Wright brothers legal battle against Glen Curtis based on a patent they took out on the effects of air around a body (ie: aerodynamic control). When Curtis thought of ailerons to get around the Wright brother's wing warping method, they claimed it was the physical effect they had patented. Ummm. Didn't that belong to Pterodactyls? Or Dragonflies? In a very ridiculous broad sense, everything that can possibly be invented (or thought of) has already existed, and is merely "discovered" by putting the components in the "right" combination and sequence. So it is discoveries that are copywrighted .

Back on topic...

Noted in a post above, yes, they have to prove evidence of the magic word in order to sue... "DAMAGES". If a film producer company has not made an "official" computer "game" that features the craft in their film...

...based on what could they claim damages to a home made, scratch built and programmed model that is distributed to no profit or gain on a free, no profit distribution platform like Orbiter?

Intellectual property, perhaps??? That's a BIG gray area, interpreted differently in every country. What's its stand internationally? How do you prove damage to "intellectual property"? I ask, and not rhetorically...

That they "could" have made the computer game, but didn't, and you are usurping their merchandise potential? That's even more ridiculous.

In a sense I really feel we need not worry, and are getting a bit paranoid. Or is the worry that OHM and OF might get into trouble for "passively" promoting or being "party" to this distribution?

I think, if I am not mistaken, it was the uploading to OHM of some tracks off a Vangellis album that started the spark for this sort of "awareness". It is a shame. I was never on M6, but looking back into the history, no one seemed worried about the hobby aspect of enthusiastically creating a vessel from a film, which is quite a different kettle of fish from ripping and uploading tracks from an artist.

I have a bit more on this, but the post is long enough already. I place the ideas here for feedback to my own edification, as well as others' consideration. I am no lawyer...

Bye for now, gotta get back to work right now...

 

[Tommy]

Are cover bands who get paid for their gigs breaking the law by copying music for personal profit?

Yes, even if they get don't get paid. Any public perforance is covered. They may even owe more than one person/group. Any time you perform a song you owe the person/persons who own the copyright for the SONG, and if you are doing a more or less "note for note" cover, you also owe the holder of the copyright for the performance (which is seperate). For instance, if you do a cover of Jimi Hendrix's version of "All Along the Watchtower" you could owe Jimi's estate (if the cover is fairly accurate and not changed in any significant way) but you will also owe Bob Dylan, the original songwriter. This is usually hard to enforce, since the cover bands performance is rarely "spot on". Also, I suspect the labels aren't quite ready to alienate artists by charging the low paid end of the cover band industry. Most artists got their start by doing covers, and have sympathy. The big earners like Dark Star Orchestra (a Grateful Dead cover band that bring in around $10,000,000 a year) pays royalties. They are a specialized cover band, who only covers one artist (they don't just play Grateful Dead songs, they copy whole shows. They will reproduce a specific show, third night at Alpine Valley in 1991 for example, and will do it note for note, mistakes and all. The corner bar band that covers a bit of everybody is to small to worry about, and is often considered "free advertising". As the industry shift more to the kind of pre-packaged acts like Britney Spears or Boys II Men (and the labels get more desparate) I suspect this will change. they'll charge everybody for every penny they can get. Right now they are to busy trying to stop file sharing, not to mention that it's hard to make the "lost sale" argument over a local band covering a song in a bar.

And while the band doing the cover may not be getting paid, it's likely that the venue (bar or theatre) where the band is playing is benefitting financially from having them play. However, usually this is ignored since the record labels don't care about the artist who owns the song rights since they usually don't get a cut of that. They do get a cut of the "performance" rights - which includes recordings. That's why BMI and ASCAP (here in the States) go around to bars and charge them a fee for having a jukebox. The new internet jukeboxes track which songs are actually played, and largely automates the process of determining which artist get's how much. On older jukeboxes, they simply make a list of what songs are on the box when they check it (bar owners are supposed to update the list when they make changes) and split the money based on relative popularity (according to Billboard or some other tracking system).

In short, a song is typically covered by at least two different copyrights, one for the song itself, and one for each different performance (live or recorded), and these rights may be held by different people. Computer software has only the "writer's" copyright, and not the "performer's" copyright.

 

[combrown]

Who stole my planet.

LOL

How is this thread going hehe. :thumbup:

The silly thing about the music piracy thing is that it has to be converted somewhere along the line back to analogue so one may listen to it.

In my highschool days I had this really good stereo handheld tape recorder.
I was amazed how well I could record straight from speakers with it.

If they decide to crack down on this to a level in a super surveyed society.
It will simply be a form of tyranny, nothing other.
Just because one society decides this is how it's going to be, does not mean another society has to follow suit.
'When justice fails there is only/always force'
Maybe I should pay the poor primate or his descendents a royalty for the invention of fire when I want to be warm.

It's absurd.

We are not in a truthful economy anymore with true value.
Like Avatar I actually watched a crappy copy first and I enjoyed it.
I still went and watched it in 3D and paid my way for it in true quality.
So I was satisfied.
But what if I just go and pay for a movie and I am not satisfied, I can't go and get my money back, or can I.

I should try that next time.

2012 I thought was absolute rubbish and I am glad I didn't go to the cinema for that.
I would rather put that money in my fuel tank and keep the oil barrons happy.
They are probably the same people that have a vested interest in the Film Industry anyway.

So it's win win really.

It's not until you really start rolling in the dollars that you get noticed anyway.

As long as we all stay reasonably poor compared to these money scoundrels things will be fine,,,,, for a while.........
Who knows? <--- Good question to be answered.

So is anyone building these ships or what? :lol:

---------- Post added at 02:31 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:29 AM ----------

I am just going to go to the absurd...

This sort of thing reminds me of the Wright brothers legal battle against Glen Curtis based on a patent they took out on the effects of air around a body (ie: aerodynamic control). When Curtis thought of ailerons to get around the Wright brother's wing warping method, they claimed it was the physical effect they had patented. Ummm. Didn't that belong to Pterodactyls? Or Dragonflies? In a very ridiculous broad sense, everything that can possibly be invented (or thought of) has already existed, and is merely "discovered" by putting the components in the "right" combination and sequence. So it is discoveries that are copywrighted .

Back on topic...

Noted in a post above, yes, they have to prove evidence of the magic word in order to sue... "DAMAGES". If a film producer company has not made an "official" computer "game" that features the craft in their film...

...based on what could they claim damages to a home made, scratch built and programmed model that is distributed to no profit or gain on a free, no profit distribution platform like Orbiter?

Intellectual property, perhaps??? That's a BIG gray area, interpreted differently in every country. What's its stand internationally? How do you prove damage to "intellectual property"? I ask, and not rhetorically...

That they "could" have made the computer game, but didn't, and you are usurping their merchandise potential? That's even more ridiculous.

In a sense I really feel we need not worry, and are getting a bit paranoid. Or is the worry that OHM and OF might get into trouble for "passively" promoting or being "party" to this distribution?

I think, if I am not mistaken, it was the uploading to OHM of some tracks off a Vangellis album that started the spark for this sort of "awareness". It is a shame. I was never on M6, but looking back into the history, no one seemed worried about the hobby aspect of enthusiastically creating a vessel from a film, which is quite a different kettle of fish from ripping and uploading tracks from an artist.

I have a bit more on this, but the post is long enough already. I place the ideas here for feedback to my own edification, as well as others' consideration. I am no lawyer...

Bye for now, gotta get back to work right now...

It is geting long, what fun hey.

---------- Post added at 02:36 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:31 AM ----------

Forget it.

If I create something, I want to profit out of it, not someone else who I do not even know.

Although I agree, going after a model company for making a modelof your aircraft or such is overkill.

The double edged sword.

You make a good model which you copyright and sell to make a profit.
Someone else copies your model and sells it to to make their own profit.

You would be alright with that would you even though you thought of it first and they piggybacked off your idea to make a living or would you leave them be?

Doing what I do I don't charge any extra for wheels that have already been invented, I just charge a rate to people for my time which is my labour.

I am happy to share my knowledge, aren't you?