Newbie Question Regarding the Law

[PHArchivist]

Firstly i may not have made myself clear, i now clearly understand that any reproduction is illegal if it is not licensed. I am not of the mindset you put in bold i just didn't explain myself very well.

Secondly, why does it make you squirm? It's a simple question, it has been answered well and i (and it seems others) have learned something. A simple question asking advice should not make you squirm!

Thanks to everyone who replied, i think i'll skip C3PO as it has been officially licensed i'll no doubt get something through the post, i am sure i can find another project for my first thing to post on the forums

Makes me squirm for a couple reasons...

First, this forum was started by and intended for hobbyists. Sure a lot of us have made some money on the side. But first and last this is (or at least was) a personal hobbyist forum. Your initial foray into the RPF suggests that your primary intent is to capatilize on the industry/hobby.

That's where it becomes a slippery slope, and becomes a bit more dangerous. Those that are focused on making a PROFIT here are those that DRAW the focus of the studios.

Second, anytime we discuss the legality of this hobby, I (amongst others, I'm sure) squirm a bit. Its a reminder that what we do is technically illegal all day.

Its a fact of life we live with but opt not to think about every day.

You know, sort of like death...

 

[PHArchivist]

Add to the fact that we know NOTHING about you. This is your first entry into our forum - asking a risky question / bringing up a sensitive topic. And with no history, introduction, or even aditional elements to your profile.

Makes me go, "Hmmm..."

Sorry if mine is a cold welcome. Consider it from our perspective.

 

[DeepDenizen]

Add to the fact that we know NOTHING about you. This is your first entry into our forum - asking a risky question / bringing up a sensitive topic. And with no history, introduction, or even aditional elements to your profile.

Makes me go, "Hmmm..."

Sorry if mine is a cold welcome. Consider it from our perspective.

I can see it from your perspective, now see it from mine. Some people have been very helpful and kind about my question and you've been very hostile, not simply cold. It was uncalled for.

Sorry to ask a "risky" question but surely it is better to ask and approach things in the correct way than to do something, get in trouble for it and tarnish the reputation of the community.

My primary intent is not to make money, sorry if it seemed that way i was just asking for clarification on a few issues. I asked about selling items because i may have to if i make a few things and then find i have little space for them. I've done that before on non prop related stuff. I get very excited about something, build it and then it gets stuck in the attic or something

 

[PHArchivist]

I can see it from your perspective, now see it from mine. Some people have been very helpful and kind about my question and you've been very hostile, not simply cold. It was uncalled for.

Sorry to ask a "risky" question but surely it is better to ask and approach things in the correct way than to do something, get in trouble for it and tarnish the reputation of the community.

My primary intent is not to make money, sorry if it seemed that way i was just asking for clarification on a few issues. I asked about selling items because i may have to if i make a few things and then find i have little space for them. I've done that before on non prop related stuff. I get very excited about something, build it and then it gets stuck in the attic or something

Interesting... "Hostile"...

"Hostile" is subjective - subject to personal interpretation.

If you feel I've been "hostile" I apologize, but hold that I strongly doubt that the court of public opinion would consider me "hostile". I've found in my life that when someone receives pragmatic or objective feedback that they do not necessarily like, it is typically received as "rude", or "hostile", regardless how it was delivered.

I have no idea what your true intent is. All I/we have to go on is your verbiage. Your first post to the RPF - to paraphrase - asked "Can I make money doing this?"

Hence my verbiage - your initial foray SUGGESTS your primary intent is to make money.


Now I'll concede...

Yes the questions are risky, but not terribly so. "Risky" and "dangerous" are also subjective and relative terms. And yes - better to ask first. Finally, the lack of info in a profile, or the lack of an introduction does not automatically equate to devious or nefarious intent. But nature abhores a vacuum, and imaginations love to fill vacuums!

Anyway, look...

Not looking to bust anyone's balls here - we all have better things to do. I got your PM. Sorry this has spiraled. I think we've both stated our piece/peace, and I hope "No harm, no foul" applies, so...

Moving on...

 

[DeepDenizen]

Hence my verbiage - your initial foray SUGGESTS your primary intent is to make money.

Well to make it absolutely clear. I have a lot of time on my hands due to disability and need something to fill the time.

Anyway, look...

Not looking to bust anyone's balls here - we all have better things to do. I got your PM. Sorry this has spiraled. I think we've both stated our piece/peace, and I hope "No harm, no foul" applies, so...

Moving on...

Yeah no harm no foul, hopefully this hasn't damaged my reputation before i have gained one

 

[PHArchivist]

As i have built furniture before and i love sci-fi i thought model building might be the way to go

And to tie the two together, I had to build a craftsman style table just to house my MR Falcon!

Yeah no harm no foul

Cool - and I returned your PM as well.

 

[cgraham]

Its ONLY "illegal" if a court determines it to be illegal.
U.S. copyright law allows for reproduction of materials protected under copyright as long as said reproduction falls within the boundaries of “fair use.” Fair use is determined by evaluation of:
1. Purpose and character
2. Nature of the copied work
3. Amount and substantiality
4. Effect upon work's value
Under the law, burden of proof rests on the defendant for commercial uses, and on the copyright owner for noncommercial uses. If one reproduces a copyrighted work for non-commercial purposes, and the copyright holder can’t prove that an individual’s scratch-building a replica or model of the original work harms the copyright holder, it is Fair Use and not illegal.

 

[MooCriket]

^Wow...talk about raising the dead....thread

 

[cgraham]

^Wow...talk about raising the dead....thread

Chariots of the Gods, man. They practically own South America

 

[MooCriket]

^Just busting your chops, Brotha

 

[exoray]

Its ONLY "illegal" if a court determines it to be illegal.

Yeah that stupid and annoying logic, and murder is only illegal if you get caught and convicted right?

Truth is it is illegal and the court will determine if you have a valid excuse to violate said copyright based on 4 factors... You are still violating copyright under fair use but it's a non actionable violation...

Under the law, burden of proof rests on the defendant for commercial uses, and on the copyright owner for noncommercial uses.

Commercial or noncommercial use is irrelevant, all 4 factors have to be weighed in, and just because 1 or 2 or even 3 of the factors weight in one direction doesn't necessitate that a court will rule that way... The law simply says those four factors will be considered, not that there will be some kind of majority wins check mark applied to them...

Please review copyright case law, it's a mess and it literally can go either direction, it's well beyond black and white... After a review of big copyright law cases you will clearly see how twisted the weighing in of those four factors can be in the real courts...

If one reproduces a copyrighted work for non-commercial purposes, and the copyright holder can’t prove that an individual’s scratch-building a replica or model of the original work harms the copyright holder, it is Fair Use and not illegal.

False, non-commercial use is not a disqualifier, no where in the law does it state how the answer to any of the 4 factors is factored in, in fact the law is very clear in that is states that those 4 factors will simply be used in determining, but it fails to say how or what rules should be applied in that determination... There is no black and white answer, implied or written in the law, its up to the Judge or Jury to pull an answer out of the air after reviewing those factors based on their opinions...

And as I always say, yes the law says that they have to prove their side to get a judgment, BUT the cold hard truth is that if they take it to court YOU HAVE TO DEFEND YOURSELF against all their claims or you will lose by default or be walked all over... And at the Federal level you will gobble up $1000s of dollars in legal fees before you even get your first day in court, and you will likely need to mortgage your house if you want to take it all the way to trial...

Forget about win or lose on trial day as that is just bragging rights, you already lost once they sue you...

And the chance of getting any attorneys fees back even if you win are slim to none, weighing heavily in favor of none to zero...

 

[dbalschi]

Looks like he never made anything(Or if he did he didn't post it here)

I think you guys scared him off:unsure

 

[Jaruemalak]

Yeah that stupid and annoying logic, and murder is only illegal if you get caught and convicted right?

Ok, that is hardly a fair comparison. Murder has already been determined to be illegal by the court. He didn't say that anything is legal until you get caught and convicted.

 

[exoray]

Murder has already been determined to be illegal by the court.

And copyright infringement has been determined illegal by the courts as well...

It's equivalent to asking if murder is illegal in self defense? That all depends on the circumstances, exactly the way Fair Use depends on the circumstances...

Until ruled upon both acts are illegal, not much difference...

Fair Use is a defense that can be invoked to remove liability for your infringement(s) if you are pursued... People need to understand that... Fair Use in itself is not an automatic legality, it doesn't instantly make, define or designate any type of infringement legal on the surface in fact it's clearly written that any infringement that 'might' fall under Fair Use will be determined on a case by case decision based on four factors (and possibly others)... Until your specific case is ruled upon by a court the act of infringement is still very much illegal... Just because you, I or the next guy feels his infringement falls under Fair Use doesn't make it so, you can still be sued by the other party that disagrees, and it doesn't mean the court will side with you or them, that will be determined in the end...

Case Law will give you some guidance, but it's really Apples to Oranges as every case is unique, and Case Law will clearly show that it's far from a black and white answer...

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

Notice that nowhere does it state how those factors will be considered or give any clarification as to what weight they have in the determination... It's truly a case by case decision by the courts...

 

[Jaruemalak]

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you about copyright law. I've been an illustrator for over 15 years - I know a LOT about copyright law and how people try to skirt around it. There are a ton of strange beliefs about copyright; a common one being that if you change something by at least 10 percent, it is yours. (No, it isn't.) One guy once even told me, "Copyright laws vary from state to state." (No, copyright laws are federal laws.)

I was saying that Cgraham didn't imply that "Anything is legal until you get caught." That's all.