Should we be worried about C&D's?

[Millenniumfalsehood]

There has been an utterly massive effort by the studios to heavily enforce copyright laws on resin garage kits lately. One of the best suppliers of Star Wars kits, Fantastic Plastic, was issued one, and another manufacturer of a very large (1:48 I think) Serenity in fiberglass who was also issued one. During the discussion it was said that the issue was not whether or not there was money made on either side, it was the issue of whether the copyrighted image was being reproduced without permission.

Which makes me wonder how long it will take for studios like 20th Century Fox, United Artists, Universal, Paramount, and others to deliver a smackdown on our humble niche of the sci-fi hobby market. Certainly some of the better kits here rival plastic and resin ones in detail, and the fact that they're free on the net makes them popular and prime targets for a smackdown.

[doctormax]

Well you know you answered that yourself, the companies that make money from selling the plastic models will go "We will give you a certain percentage so it be the small guy they will go after and exterminate like a Sci fi movie script. I can see Mattel telling the movie companies to do it and of course McDonalds who have them little things in kids meals. the one thing we know about the Globalisation giants is they will wipe out any chance of someone getting anything for FREE before they go after someone who may pay them a few cents..

[Wyvern]

I read of Fantastic-Plastic's Cease and Desist order, and have also been concerned that the paper modeling community might also be targeted. If so, it might limit us to non-canon vessels and no use of the name of the series they're associated with. Even though F-P marketed their kits by a name other than the one used for them by the series (for instance, "Arrowhead Fighter"), they got hit with the C&D based on, as you say, the image itself. Based on that, would Paramount nail a design because it has a saucer and two nacelles? I don't know; I'm not a lawyer. But it's enough to make a hobbyist fret a little.

Wyvern

[Plastic Bonsai]

And the odd thing is the manufacturers of real vessels, vehicals etc that cost millions and billions to development have no right over their "images" but if you reproduce their corporate logo they may get you on that. Funny old world isn't it?

[Gearz]

Eeeek.. this is cheerful news. Worried? ~ YES..

[Gil]

Avoid the copyright notice. Do Something Original . . . ,

+Gil

[ct ertz]

Some times things just get too complicated to keep up with. It is the Copyright of the studios then they have every right to try and stop what they see as piracy. I am not sure how the laws wok in regards to say...classic cars or well known aircraft. I want to design a GMC DUKW but will I be stepping on Government Motors toes? I don't know, so I make Confederate ships instead. That company went defunct some time ago so I think I am safe.

[SJPONeill]

I think it is more legal departments frying to justify their existence than anything else - if it actually were a corporate strategy, then in the interest of an even healthier bottom line, they would be seeking a licensing agreement and fee - this would mean mor eincome but probably less lawyers...hmmm...is there a bad side to that.

At least CT is pretty safe with his CSS Navy..."Oh, what's this letter from Richmond...?"

[jmcdermott]

I can understand both sides of the issue.

There needs to be a way to pay a royalty and be done with it.

[dansls1]

To take the other side - if you designed a sci-fi ship and they put it in the next Star Trek movie - you would certainly be expecting to be compensated in some way, right?

[redhorse]

I've wondered about this for a while now since all the sci-fi people came here and I started seeing all the Star Trek and Star Wars stuff. With all the talk about piracy on this forum - it seems to go both ways for better or worse. The studios do own the rights to the things and most likely can be sued if junior cuts off his finger while building one of them, even if it's free. There are lawyers, I'm sure who would be looking at that angle. There's a big fiberglass shark mounted on a law office here - it cracks me up every time I go by it.

I do wonder about GM cars now. Didn't McLaren force a free model off the web a while back? To my undersanding, all military equipment can be modeled royalty free since it was paid for with tax dollars. Can this apply now to civil GM vehicles?

[lee4752]

At least CT is pretty safe with his CSS Navy..."Oh, what's this letter from Richmond...?"
If they sue will the judgement be in Confederate currency?

[Stev0]

We have talked about this over and over and over again.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_35kDzNt-gTQ/RpmeXjcag9I/AAAAAAAAACE/Bpo04QrGBvc/s320/dead+horse.gif

[dansls1]

II do wonder about GM cars now. Didn't McLaren force a free model off the web a while back? To my undersanding, all military equipment can be modeled royalty free since it was paid for with tax dollars. Can this apply now to civil GM vehicles?

In fairness, the McLaren was designed for them or a sponsor with information provided, and put up free when they backed out of the deal - so it wasn't just a 'fan-design' situation.

[ARMORMAN]

Nothing personal against anyone, but this has been discussed numerous times in various threads. I say go forth and design/build. ;)