RMweb Gold chris p bacon Posted November 3, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 3, 2017 Just a thought but, would be feasible to have the sprues from all the wagon kits 3D scaned, to preserve the range digitally at least for the time being? Jonathan I'm not sure if you're moving into the area of copyright and intellectual property. The items aren't yours to copy and produce. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cctransuk Posted November 3, 2017 Share Posted November 3, 2017 I'm not sure if you're moving into the area of copyright and intellectual property. The items aren't yours to copy and produce. No mention of reproducing in Gt. Shefford's post. 3D scanning is no different from taking a photo - it simply records what the object looked like, but in rather more detail. IF the moulding tools deteriorate or are destroyed, and the intellectual property was transferred to another party, then an existing 3D scan of the original product could make it easier to reproduce the kit - IF it was deemed desirable so to do. Regards, John Isherwood. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold chris p bacon Posted November 3, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 3, 2017 No mention of reproducing in Gt. Shefford's post. 3D scanning is no different from taking a photo - it simply records what the object looked like, but in rather more detail. IF the moulding tools deteriorate or are destroyed, and the intellectual property was transferred to another party, then an existing 3D scan of the original product could make it easier to reproduce the kit - IF it was deemed desirable so to do. Regards, John Isherwood. A lot of 'ifs' there. But missing the vital point that Dunn has no intention of selling or passing on the ranges, I tried to contact a couple of years ago to that end and got nowhere. I see why now, he makes money by doing nothing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Wellyboots Posted November 3, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 3, 2017 (edited) Isn't a 3D scan just an image in the same way a photo is an image of an object? Copyright and intellectual property rights would then only come into play if the image was used to recreate the object that had been scanned? Edited November 3, 2017 by Wellyboots Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Bucoops Posted November 3, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 3, 2017 No mention of reproducing in Gt. Shefford's post. 3D scanning is no different from taking a photo - it simply records what the object looked like, but in rather more detail. IF the moulding tools deteriorate or are destroyed, and the intellectual property was transferred to another party, then an existing 3D scan of the original product could make it easier to reproduce the kit - IF it was deemed desirable so to do. Regards, John Isherwood. Taking a photo of a copyrighted item can be deemed breach of copyright as well. As facebook might say, it's complicated! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hayfield Posted November 3, 2017 Share Posted November 3, 2017 Isn't a 3D scan just an image in the same way a photo is an image of an object? Copyright and intellectual property rights would then only come into play if the image was used to recreate the object that had been scanned? Are not the Great British Loco's scanned from actual models ? Seems to be no real copyright issues there 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwealleans Posted November 3, 2017 Share Posted November 3, 2017 What country makes the Great British Locos? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold chris p bacon Posted November 3, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 3, 2017 (edited) In the UK an item that has copyright extends to any images taken of it**, therefore if you take an image of an item which is owned by CC with the purpose of recording that item then the copyright belongs to CC. As a group we're having to research Copyright and how it extends to items that have been gifted to us, it's a minefield. Quite simply put, the fact that in the first post there was a suggestion to scan a companies products so that they would not be lost for future production mean that the intention is there to infringe upon a companies products. If CC wanted to burn the lot on the 5th of November then he's at liberty to do so, and if he wanted to he could pursue anyone who had copied his products. Regarding the GBL, how do we know there wasn't an agreement or payment in place ? ** completely different in the USA, there an image taken, has it's own copyright different to that of the subject. Edited November 3, 2017 by chris p bacon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Wellyboots Posted November 3, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 3, 2017 Are not the Great British Loco's scanned from actual models ? Seems to be no real copyright issues there There won't be an issue if permission to do so has been granted by the copyright holder, which may involve a fee to obtain the licence to make copies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Compound2632 Posted November 3, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 3, 2017 (edited) Far better to start again from contemporary drawings of the prototype, supplemented by photographs. Issues of intellectual property and copyright do not then arise, at least for the pre-grouping and grouping era prototypes represented by the ranges in the Coopercraft stable. Edited November 3, 2017 by Compound2632 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cctransuk Posted November 3, 2017 Share Posted November 3, 2017 .... the fact that in the first post there was a suggestion to scan a companies products so that they would not be lost for future production ..... Please re-read the first post in this sub-thread - #1126 - nowhere is there any suggestion that the 3D scans would be used by third parties for production purposes. The suggestion was that there should be a record of what the product range comprised of, via the most accurate digital process currently available. How that digital record might be subsequently used, or by whom, was not mentioned. It would save a great deal of debate if people actually read what a post says, rather than what they think might be implied. The volume of argument that bloats this forum, relating to things that weren't actually posted in the first place, is incredible. Regards, John Isherwood. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted November 3, 2017 Share Posted November 3, 2017 ....It would save a great deal of debate if people actually read what a post says, rather than what they think might be implied. The volume of argument that bloats this forum, relating to things that weren't actually posted in the first place, is incredible. That's because people are more willing to read between the lines and look for ulterior motives. You can hardly blame them in today's climate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG John Posted November 3, 2017 Share Posted November 3, 2017 Far better to start again from contemporary drawings of the prototype, supplemented by photographs. Issues of intellectual property and copyright do not then arise, at least for the pre-grouping and grouping era prototypes represented by the ranges in the Coopercraft stable. I think it's been suggested that that could be risky for a business, while a potentially competing product still exists. Coopercraft might suddenly spring back into life and flood the market with a lower price product. Probably unlikely, but it's a possible risk. How about designing a new version for producing most or all parts on something like a Silhouette cutter, and making the files available as a free open source product. There are people around with the skills to do it, and who design such things for their own use, so there would be little or no development cost. Anyone could then cut parts for themselves, or could turn the parts into a kit or RTR product to sell, with any enhancements they might like to do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cctransuk Posted November 3, 2017 Share Posted November 3, 2017 That's because people are more willing to read between the lines and look for ulterior motives. You can hardly blame them in today's climate. I do blame them - unless there is strong evidence to the contrary, take what is posted at face value. Don't look for an ulterior motive when there isn't the slightest evidence that such exists. #1126 is an eminently sensible suggestion to preserve in digital detail something that could well be neglected / deliberately destroyed. That is why historical records are maintained in digital format - one can never totally guarantee the continued existence of the physical artifact. It is a shame when it is not possible to put forward a perfectly sensible suggestion without the usual suspects relaunching the interminable circular argument concerning copyright. Regards, John Isherwood. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted November 3, 2017 Share Posted November 3, 2017 ....Don't look for an ulterior motive when there isn't the slightest evidence that such exists. Mmmm. It's when people are convinced of the essential infallibility of their view that I tend to fear they might come a cropper. At the end of the day, you cannot read people's minds, so how can you say there isn't the slightest evidence? "False face must hide what the false heart doth know." 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold chris p bacon Posted November 3, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 3, 2017 (edited) Just a thought but, would be feasible to have the sprues from all the wagon kits 3D scaned, to preserve the range digitally at least for the time being? Jonathan Please re-read the first post in this sub-thread - #1126 - nowhere is there any suggestion that the 3D scans would be used by third parties for production purposes. The suggestion was that there should be a record of what the product range comprised of, via the most accurate digital process currently available. How that digital record might be subsequently used, or by whom, was not mentioned. It would save a great deal of debate if people actually read what a post says, rather than what they think might be implied. The volume of argument that bloats this forum, relating to things that weren't actually posted in the first place, is incredible. Regards, John Isherwood. I often wonder if you could start an argument with yourself in a toilet. I DID read the post and because it used the phrase "for the time being" it opens the door for someone to suggest copying, before that came up I suggested that it was not a good idea and that much as some might not like CC or its owner, it is his property and any images created of copyrighted items belong with the copyrighted item. If you'd like to invest in some very expensive scans of plastic sprues that you can do nothing with, then no ones stopping you. It would be easier to just buy a kit though. . .oh hang on. . you can't It is a shame when it is not possible to put forward a perfectly sensible suggestion without the usual suspects relaunching the interminable circular argument concerning copyright. For my own use I'm doing some graphics to produce some GN wagon transfers, I could easily extend the range by copying some existing ones of yours, as you're obviously not bothered by copyright of others work I assume it applies to yours. Edited November 3, 2017 by chris p bacon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cctransuk Posted November 3, 2017 Share Posted November 3, 2017 (edited) I often wonder if you could start an argument with yourself in a toilet. I DID read the post and because it used the phrase "for the time being" it opens the door for someone to suggest copying, before that came up I suggested that it was not a good idea and that much as some might not like CC or its owner, it is his property and any images created of copyrighted items belong with the copyrighted item. If you'd like to invest in some very expensive scans of plastic sprues that you can do nothing with, then no ones stopping you. It would be easier to just buy a kit though. . .oh hang on. . you can't For my own use I'm doing some graphics to produce some GN wagon transfers, I could easily extend the range by copying some existing ones of yours, as you're obviously not bothered by copyright of others work I assume it applies to yours. The actual phrase was ".... to preserve the range digitally at least for the time being ...."; what in that opens the door to anything contrary to copyright law? It indicates concern that the physical means of producing more kits are not secure, and that a digital record might (or might not) be a sensible precaution. No mention of legal ownership of that record, or to what purpose that record might (or might not) be used for; any suggestion of misuse of that record comes from subsequent posters' speculation, including your own. I wouldn't try reproducing my transfer designs if I were you - though it has been known; all of my output is clearly marked as my copyright. Any suggestion that I'm ".... not bothered by copyright of others work ...." is, once again, your own invention - where have I given the slightest suggestion that could lead you to speculate to that effect? Regards, John Isherwood. Edited November 3, 2017 by cctransuk 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mod4 Posted November 3, 2017 Share Posted November 3, 2017 Gents This is not the first time or thread in which you have differences of opinion and tone which has not gone unnoticed by other members. Please preserve what little strength I have in my left diodes by ceasing such perceived argumentative behaviour. Thank you 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold chris p bacon Posted November 3, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 3, 2017 Gents This is not the first time or thread in which you have differences of opinion and tone which has not gone unnoticed by other members. Please preserve what little strength I have in my left diodes by ceasing such perceived argumentative behaviour. Thank you I think you're right there. I'll find the ignore button for my own sanity & blood pressure. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gt.Shefford Posted November 3, 2017 Share Posted November 3, 2017 With the benefit of hindsight, having read through the responses to my earlier post I'll freely concede the the suggestion doesn't stand up to any level of scrutiny, and the phraseology created an unintended level of ambiguity and on these points I'll apologise. The suggestion of scanning the kits was only intended as a throwaway idea. Jonathan 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold chris p bacon Posted November 3, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 3, 2017 (edited) With the benefit of hindsight, having read through the responses to my earlier post I'll freely concede the the suggestion doesn't stand up to any level of scrutiny, and the phraseology created an unintended level of ambiguity and on these points I'll apologise. The suggestion of scanning the kits was only intended as a throwaway idea. Jonathan You have no need to apologise. We all make statements and posts that initiate other discussion and this was one. Everyone has different opinions, just depends how open you are to them, or not. I've said before that the ranges have effectively gone, you can't purchase a lot of them and no doubt the moulds are beyond recovery for those not used for some years, if they've not been stored correctly. Better to look to other suppliers or make your own/get together with others. Apologies to those members who didn't want to read the exchanges above. Edited November 3, 2017 by chris p bacon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cctransuk Posted November 3, 2017 Share Posted November 3, 2017 Gents This is not the first time or thread in which you have differences of opinion and tone which has not gone unnoticed by other members. Please preserve what little strength I have in my left diodes by ceasing such perceived argumentative behaviour. Thank you With the benefit of hindsight, I can see that when postings become a discussion between two members, it might be best to transfer to PMs. Regards, John Isherwood. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Clive Mortimore Posted November 3, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 3, 2017 In the middle of all this we have some modellers who are morning the potential or is it real demise of this range. Now what I find strange is there seems to be a market out there for kits like these, so why hasn't someone else jumped in and started to make new GWR wagons? LNER coaches? This post does not take away the other very serious theme running through this thread of those who have been left out of pocket due to the reported lack of action by the owner of Coppercraft when he receives money from our fellow modellers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Compound2632 Posted November 3, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 3, 2017 In the middle of all this we have some modellers who are morning the potential or is it real demise of this range. Now what I find strange is there seems to be a market out there for kits like these, so why hasn't someone else jumped in and started to make new GWR wagons? LNER coaches? This post does not take away the other very serious theme running through this thread of those who have been left out of pocket due to the reported lack of action by the owner of Coppercraft when he receives money from our fellow modellers. Well, we have discussed the new technologies that make feasible the production of small batches or print-on-demand kits for the more esoteric subjects. (Such as GW wagons and LNE coaches?) Much of what Coopercraft holds was developed many, many years ago using techniques that are now obsolete or uneconomic (hand-drawn etch artwork, injection moulding) and at a time when less prototype information was accessible. Sorry, I'm just repeating myself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Bucoops Posted November 3, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 3, 2017 (edited) Setup costs, especially for long items such as coach sides and roofs are huge. I've heard £50k mentioned for a coach kit - not sure how true that is though. edit: sorry this was in response to Clive's post. I'm not familiar with modern techniques. Edited November 3, 2017 by Bucoops Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts