mould making....
- Thread starter mmts
- Start date
ntpntpntp
Registered
Strictly speaking I would imagine that's still a breach of copyright, but who's gonna chase it?
I remember being at an exhibition with a mate a few years ago and we were looking at some N gauge cast white metal cars that were on sale, thinking "these look rather familiar". Closer examination revealed one even had the original manufacturer's name cast into the bottom! We bought the pack and handed it to the importer of the original models, as this was clearly naughty, and this wasn't a small local show either - Aly Paly I think it was. Never did find out if any follow up was ever carried out against the producer of the copies.
I remember being at an exhibition with a mate a few years ago and we were looking at some N gauge cast white metal cars that were on sale, thinking "these look rather familiar". Closer examination revealed one even had the original manufacturer's name cast into the bottom! We bought the pack and handed it to the importer of the original models, as this was clearly naughty, and this wasn't a small local show either - Aly Paly I think it was. Never did find out if any follow up was ever carried out against the producer of the copies.
steven large
USA G SCALES OF 30 TO 50S THEMES.ASLO KIT BASHING
my mate do tht on model kits....
Vanessa has a point, if you change something - even slightly - then it isn't a straight copy. A slightly irrelevant instance in my trade is I buy out-of-the-pack cheeseburgers, put on extra cheese and ketchup and can legitametely sell it as home made. Just don't shout about it. Oops 8|
I had a friend who was in the 'reproduction' business. The old yardstick was to modify the original by 10% to circumvent copyright laws, being very careful to fully remove any existing trademark.
I recently considered infringing copyright, when I costed out putting air brake hoses on my Thomas rolling stock. To purchase the I.P. versions would have set me back several hundred dolars/pounds. Of cause the RTV rubber for the mould and the metal spinning/casting tools would not make it cost effective, unless one had access to such equipment.
I recently considered infringing copyright, when I costed out putting air brake hoses on my Thomas rolling stock. To purchase the I.P. versions would have set me back several hundred dolars/pounds. Of cause the RTV rubber for the mould and the metal spinning/casting tools would not make it cost effective, unless one had access to such equipment.
maxi-model
UK/US/ROW steam narrow gauge railways 1:1
mmts said:
I think you need to be more specific as to what you are going to "back-mold" from and how many.
Long out of production, unobtainable and mass produced probably not too much of a moral issue but would it be economically viable? Just so long as you did not give into the temptation to "pass-off" at a later date your copy or any others made because a mate said "Cor, the're nice!" and you said, "yes you can have one (two, three...........) as I got the molds
Hard to get, low production that a small artisan maker has spent a lot of time/money/sweat/blood on the origination - a big no no with the little guys making them if you put it around you had done it and made a few more because a mate said............... The dealers would not like you too much too. I know as I was in the latter camp producing my own range of limited production models for a few years making my living that way. Nobody (still living) knowingly did that to me thankfully.
Just remember that for all the new stuff to be produced, that we so love, there has to be the market for it and a possible subsequent sell on market with a good perceived value to encourage those sales that then leads to the creation of more new product. Once someone, at any level, starts doing knock offs then that little equation risks going out the window and so do the makers and the new product that most poeple so desire. All you have left is a load of rehashes floating around. Slippery slopes and tips of icebergs.
Economicaly one off knock offs don't stack up either way. Unless what you want is very rare and desirable and came from the latter group of makers. So it's back to the original question what is it you want to copy and how many ?
Max.
Ed you cant make a direct copy of something even if it is for your own use.. and to make it worse if you change or remove a makers name that is an additional offence... you could model your own version if its something that excists in the real world eg "An Engine shed" because the modeler that gave you the idea borrowed that idea from someone else but copying say an LGB coupling you cant
There are or can be exceptions eg ripping music to your PC or iphone for your own use while its stricky not allowed because so many people did it the law made an exception
Vanessa has tried to be Controversial again and hinted on the chinness copy subject which is where you can get away with making a copy because china hasnt signed up to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works....
There are or can be exceptions eg ripping music to your PC or iphone for your own use while its stricky not allowed because so many people did it the law made an exception
Vanessa has tried to be Controversial again and hinted on the chinness copy subject which is where you can get away with making a copy because china hasnt signed up to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works....
vasim said:
Now what would be intresting if someone bought one of the aformentioned "copys" and made a better quality copy of it.... As the maker of the copy of the copy of the real thing isnt likly to take you to court could you get away with it. ????????????? but then the maker of the original copy would get upset because you were selling something better than they make at a more realistic price..
Tony
trammayo
Interested in vintage commercial vehicle, trams, t
mmts said:
Given all that has been said, if you are going to buy a[style="color: #000000;"] proprietary model and want to replicate it, then it stands out (to me) that, in real life, the original on which the model was based was not unique - is that right?
There is nothing to stop YOU making a master of the prototype and then moulding it to cast more of the same providing the owner of the original (if that is the situation) hasn't licensed a manufacturer to mass produce models/representations of the original for their own mutual benefit/gain.
Without stirring up a hornet's nest, the Chinese are great at making imitations (and downright wrong in making folk believe they are somebody elses' original quality and creation) but as a represenative model/s of railway rolling stock they are nothing more than models of prototypes (accurate or otherwise).
Copying is a fact of life - we wouldn't have moved on from Cro-magnon man if somebody hadn't thought "thats clever, I'll do that or make one of them". It's how you use or project your copy that can harm intellectual property or copyright owners.
There is nothing stopping you from making a model of a real thing unless it has Interlectural Property rights on it ...im not sure but something like Flying Scotsman might have because the owner might have the rights to its image being reproduced but its unlikely that a standard BR MK1 coach would have so you could make your own model of it but that model (or your version) of it would be your property and no one can reproduce it...They can make their own version but it must be slightly different to yourstrammayo said:
Tony
tramcar trev
all manner of mechanical apparatus...
As the two above have said...
Now I got a repremand on here for suggesting that a mould could be taken and something reproduced. That got me googling internatioanl patents laws and other relevant laws and apart from the MORAL issue legally UNLESS the design is registered INTERNATIONALLY then legally no a lot can be done. The other criteria that would maybe applied is if you did this to make money, then you may have to answer. Unfortunatley quite a few manufactures do not register their designs INTERNATIONALLY and little Asian enterpreneurs get hold of one of whatever it is and swamp the market with as the adds for the genuine article will tell you are "cheap copies"........ Unlike this post to which copyright automatically applies my authorship and "ownership"; "Tangible" objects of a 3 dimensional nature do not automatically have copyright instilled on them and the manufacturer has to apply for copyright and design registration or if it has 'novelty' then patent it then his/her work is it would appear to be quite legally Plagerised i.e. copyied.....
In the event that you are copying something that Fred Nurks makes and has his brand on it then unless the design is registered then your only obligation is the moral issue. It costs to register your design and most smaller manufactures simply don't bother and that is to their detriment. You may choose to play by Marquis of Queensbury rules but I persoannly would simply weigh up the moral issue.
Of course the ecconomics of the situation may dictate that making a mold and making reproductions of the original may be more expensive so its cheaper to purchase the originals.
Now I got a repremand on here for suggesting that a mould could be taken and something reproduced. That got me googling internatioanl patents laws and other relevant laws and apart from the MORAL issue legally UNLESS the design is registered INTERNATIONALLY then legally no a lot can be done. The other criteria that would maybe applied is if you did this to make money, then you may have to answer. Unfortunatley quite a few manufactures do not register their designs INTERNATIONALLY and little Asian enterpreneurs get hold of one of whatever it is and swamp the market with as the adds for the genuine article will tell you are "cheap copies"........ Unlike this post to which copyright automatically applies my authorship and "ownership"; "Tangible" objects of a 3 dimensional nature do not automatically have copyright instilled on them and the manufacturer has to apply for copyright and design registration or if it has 'novelty' then patent it then his/her work is it would appear to be quite legally Plagerised i.e. copyied.....
In the event that you are copying something that Fred Nurks makes and has his brand on it then unless the design is registered then your only obligation is the moral issue. It costs to register your design and most smaller manufactures simply don't bother and that is to their detriment. You may choose to play by Marquis of Queensbury rules but I persoannly would simply weigh up the moral issue.
Of course the ecconomics of the situation may dictate that making a mold and making reproductions of the original may be more expensive so its cheaper to purchase the originals.
CoggesRailway
Registered
What if used a 3d printing firm to produce a large version of an 00 model shell for your own use. I was thinking of this. I would buy the model for this purpose . Probably wrong I guess.
ge_rik
British narrow gauge (esp. Southwold and W&LLR)
I'm no expert (at anything really) but it seems to me this contravenes the 1988 Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, Section 230 of which states:
(1)Where a person?
[*](a)has in his possession, custody or control for commercial purposes an infringing article, or [*](b)has in his possession, custody or control anything specifically designed or adapted for making articles to a particular design, knowing or having reason to believe that it has been or is to be used to make an infringing article, the owner of the design right in the design in question may apply to the court for an order that the infringing article or other thing be delivered up to him or to such other person as the court may direct.
Basically if you have a copy of an item which has been designed and made by someone else in your possession - or have the means to make such an item - then you're infringing the Design Rights of the originator.
So, it seems that even if you're making something for your own use, you are still liable. I've not read all the fine print, but if you feel like ploughing through it the relevant Part of the Act is here:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/part/III < Link To http://www.legislation.go../ukpga/1988/48/part/III
Rik
PS - It looks as if Design Right automatically exists once an item has been documented or constructed to that design:
Section 213:
(6)Design right does not subsist unless and until the design has been recorded in a design document or an article has been made to the design.
(1)Where a person?
[*](a)has in his possession, custody or control for commercial purposes an infringing article, or [*](b)has in his possession, custody or control anything specifically designed or adapted for making articles to a particular design, knowing or having reason to believe that it has been or is to be used to make an infringing article, the owner of the design right in the design in question may apply to the court for an order that the infringing article or other thing be delivered up to him or to such other person as the court may direct.
Basically if you have a copy of an item which has been designed and made by someone else in your possession - or have the means to make such an item - then you're infringing the Design Rights of the originator.
So, it seems that even if you're making something for your own use, you are still liable. I've not read all the fine print, but if you feel like ploughing through it the relevant Part of the Act is here:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/part/III < Link To http://www.legislation.go../ukpga/1988/48/part/III
Rik
PS - It looks as if Design Right automatically exists once an item has been documented or constructed to that design:
Section 213:
(6)Design right does not subsist unless and until the design has been recorded in a design document or an article has been made to the design.
ge_rik
British narrow gauge (esp. Southwold and W&LLR)
I may be wrong, but I think this is as up to date as you're likely to get - it's a .gov website and this document includes subsequent amendments. You're right, though, lawyers make their money out of interpreting this sort of burble.ROSS said:
Rik