General Discussion

Alltrains · Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2006 2:22 pm

Marc if you go to page two of this thread and read the post that I lodged on 9 Nov you may understand my position and knowledge of the copyright law. The information that I have made available for everyone is both in plain english and in the proper legal format that is in any act of law.
I have also stated that after they read this information and they are in any doubt then have it all explained to them by a solicitor.
I can do no more for them but to advise them that there is a problem that needs attention and give them as much information that I can give them without jepadising my position in the organisation that I work for.
Unfortunately it makes it harder to explain when a person from overseas lodges a post of what things are like over there as the younger ones grad on every word and then they think that is how it works when infact it is quite different between the two countries.
I would have loved nothing better than if this subject did not have to be raised but unfortunately because of some statements made the subject did have to be raised.
I am sorry if it appeared that I may have been abrupt with you but I have another person on about this didn't say this and that didn't say that and you have no proof of this and you only assume that.

qrtrainfan86 · Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2006 6:48 pm

Alltrains · Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2006 10:21 pm

Hi qrtrainfan86 you see with the expiry date of a copyright a problem arose when a large company had its own design dept and employed two or more designers. Because of the difference in the age of the designers the death part could not be used as you might have one designer age 25 and another aged 45 and if they both died at the age of 50 the copyright for the 25 year olds design would be valid for 95 years whereas the design of the 45 year olds would be 75 years, even if the designs were completed in the same year so to fix any imbalance of the life of the copyrights the time for companies is from the time the design is completed
Actually the wording is (or, where duration depends on year of publication, until 70 years after it is first published) what it means is that when a design which (under these circumstances) is a plan then it is when the plan is printed (published)

qrtrainfan86 · Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2006 11:29 pm

Lets say I wrote a book with a 3 year old child (wouldn't be very stimulating, I know!) and we both had equal input into the book. Let's say it was published tomorrow. If I die the day after, and that child lives to be 120, even though I'm dead, that child is still an author, therefore the copyrights expire 70 years after the death of that child.

I'm way too tired to start quoting legislation, but, what the hey!

squeekazoid · Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2006 11:47 pm

Hey lately i have been gettign HATE mail because of steam4me closing adn you know what they all blame me it is not all my F****** Fault OK!!!!.

Nathan Pyle

My Website - http://www.squeeks-imagery.fotopic.net ( Last Updated 18/11/2008 )

MattAustin · Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 12:52 am

Oh Squeekazoid, go to bed! Staying up late should be restricted to those who suffer no ill-effects from such activity.

It rubs the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again.

BuddyALX · Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 7:41 am

Guys, I have found something about a few of the SAR Railcars that were built before 1955.

55 Class SAR Brill Railcars: Built in 1924 by the Brill Car Company, USA.

75 Class SAR Brill Railcars: Built in 1928 by Islington Workshops, SA.

Budd RDC CB1/CB3 Railcars: Built in 1951 by The Budd Car Company, USA.

And these locomotives, below, though not released or made yet for public, are built before 1955.

SAR 350 Class: Built in 1949 by Islington Workshops, SA.

SAR 900 Class: Built between 1951-1953 by Islington Workshops, SA.

CR NSU Class: Only up 20 NSU 56 were built in 1954. The rest of them were built in 1955. Built by the Birmingham Railway Carriage & Waggon Company, England.

CR GM classes GM1-GM11: Built between 1951-1952 by Clyde Engineering, NSW.

CR DE Class: Built in 1943 by General Electric, USA. But introduced into CR service in 1950, before that, it was the NSWGR 79 class.

This means that these locos here, I think had their copyright expired. I hoped this has helped.

Buddy.

Daniel Hall.
MSTS STA Driver,

Alltrains · Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 9:19 am

BuddyALX. Yes you are right that all of the listed items copyrights have expired (unless the co-designer was a three year old) and are therefore free to be used.
But copyright life is not from when it is built but when it is designed.
Example 55 Class SAR Brill Railcars were built in 1924 but to build it you needed the plan of it so the plan of the 55 Class could have been completed in 1920 and with the tooling that is require to build something like that and the actual time taken to build it could take 4 years or more.
This will be the last post that I will make on this subject as I am returning to the investigation and enforcement of copyright laws.
If you have any further enquires about this matter then please post to qrtrainfan86 and I am sure that with the expertise and knowledge that him and his three year old co-author have that they will be able to advise you of what you can use and what you can't use. No doubt I will be meeting a lot of you personally in my role as an investigation and enforcement officer

allanl · Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 10:00 am

Squeek
You have finally said something I can agree with - 'it wasn't All your fault'.
Unfortunately, your bad attitude and immaturity don't permit you to recognise that and stand tall like a number of contributors have and apologise for what Was your fault.
Do all of us - and yourself - a favour and sit down with someone who can work a bit of maturity into your attitude. When that happens, not only will you find the strength and understanding to apologise, but more importantly people (and I will certainly put my hand up) will then be prepared to get alongside you and start developing the talent and strengths you do have.
That will be a win-win situation. However, while you continue to rant and blame everyone else, all of those good things ain't gunna happen!
As for the hate mail, whilst I understand your feelings - cut it out - it will not help anyone resolve this situation.
Squeek - grow up and stop blaming everyone else for your wrongs! When you do, PM me and we will work out how we can start developing your obvious talents.
allanl

squeekazoid · ( Last Updated 18/11/2008 )

shrdlu · Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 11:04 am

What a legalistic world we live in! I am amazed that the shape of a well-known building or other structure is copyright. (Is this right? I don't have time right now to read all of the above posts.)

All of our Western freedoms are nearly gone! We all need to wake up and do something. It's like Germany in about 1935.

This problem is similar to the U.K. situation, where the Labor government says you are free to vote for anyone as long as it's them. The only political party here that is different is the British National Party. The government here has just dragged its leader, Nick Griffin, into court for, basically, just daring to state an opinion contrary to Labor's. Fortunately, the jury unanimously voted to acquit. So now the government wants to change to law so that, basically, it would be illegal to say anything that might offend anyone else.

[I'm not a member of the BNP. I'm just alarmed at the steady loss of freedoms to draw a building, or express a view.]

aushuntercoal · Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 4:32 pm

Hate to think of what GoogleEarth had to go through. Confused

[If I've got the general scheme of things here].

Judge: And what Law are you basing this argument on?
Darryl Kerrigan: The Law of bloody common sense!

MikeS · Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 12:42 pm

I have just got around to reading this thread and I have never read so much b**ls**t in my life. While I believe everything Alltrains has said, I really do doubt that there is anyone who would go to the extent of suing anyone for breach of copyright of a home-build model given away as freeware for a computer game.

This is the sort of case where a magistrate would find the person guilty and award 1 cent damages. Or even castigate the person bringing the case for wasting the court's time.

Let us face it, MSTS has been out for over 5 years now and Flight Simulator for more than twice that. As far as I know, there has never ever been a court case in any country of the world over this sort of problem.

Why don't the lawyers just shut up, go and play on their yacht's and leave us to get on with our games.

Frankly this has me completely p****d off, maybe I will take up knitting.

Mike

gallop3 · Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 1:58 pm

While I agree wholeheartedly Mike, we are still going to cover our arses.
Lots of phone calls and emails have got the ball rolling already.
So a message to all , dont panic.
Cheers
Ian

gallop3

Alltrains · Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 2:45 pm

I'm sorry MikeS but it only takes one to proceed with action and the whole thing would have come to a very expensive finish for a lot of people. It is unfortunate that so far there is one route that was cancelled because of threats of legal action and then another Re-Skinner taking the attitude that they can take anyones design and do what they like with it, receiving threats of legal action and all this happening within a couple of months. I personally believe that it is better to take preventative action than to wait until it is to late. As far as people taking action look at McDonalds taking action against the exemployee that opened a restuarant and as part of its name he used half of the twin arches and used the name starting with an A in it and McDonalds took it to court claiming breaches of copyright. Even if the magistrate did only award punitive damages against you, you have still been convicted of the breach and therefore the plaintiff can claim their legal costs against you. I ask you is it worth it or is it better to spend a bit ot time and prevent it happening in the first place.
You say you have never read so much b**ls**t in your life. I wonder how you would feel MikeS if you spent a lot of time and effort and money in developing a product/route/design and/or tradename and someone else came along and used your product/route/design and/or tradename for their benefit and claimed all rights to it. Would you take action against them or would you just roll over with your tail between your legs and let them do what they wanted?