Cease and Desist, Copyrights - What do you want to know? (updated!)

One of my friends who works in a copyright related company told me that there is an official system of copyrights. This system allows you to upload your work and get an instant official time mark on the work. This time mark is internationally recognized.

Details?

Hi Guys,

This issue has been brewing for a while so I'd like to put together a Copyright 101 guide (as per my blog post https://www.shapeways.com/blog/archives/1872-Copyright-101-Wh at-do-you-want-to-know.html)

As the field of 3D printing grows, we're starting to see more and more cases of copyright infringement, creative sharing, collaboration, and general discussion happening around what is "allowed", what is possible, and what is protected.

To address this, we want to put together a 3D Printing Copyrights 101 guide in the next few weeks, with the help of Michael Weinberg who wrote the awesome whitepaper "It will be awesome if they don't screw it up"

We've done a few blog posts covering the debate over the last two years, and now we want to consolidate new information and answer your questions.

The list so far includes:

101 to copyrights law: the difference between copyright, patents, trademarks and creative commons
What's the DMCA?
Common cases in 3D printing
Creative innovation
What else do you want to know?

List your questions here and we'll incorporate them into the guide!


This is the official Shapeways stance on content and copyrights: https://www.shapeways.com/legal/content_policy

Ideally the Copyright 101 guide would go into more details

PLease tell me what you want to know and I'll make sure it gets covered!

Thank you,
Natalia

It was, that with $10 you could file a copy with Library Of Congress
of any work and receive the stamped copy by return. For software
it was the first 10 pages of the listing - how it would work with a 3D
graphics file I do not know.

- I see the fees now range from $35 to $65!

DMCA - what territories does your version cover?
An example, GoDaddy insist that their version complies with US law, however US law does not apply to the UK and UK precedent legislation states that an electronic signature can be limited to just the name of the person making the claim typed in an email at the time of the claim and not the US DMCA version of a digital copy of the actual pen-signed-on-paper signed signature. (yes, I've been there and shown them understanding that versions of an 'electonic signature' differ)

Anyone who is stupid enough to think that they can copy someone's or a company's work whether formally registered through whatever system or published, really deserves the pile of poo that will land on their head and all of the consequences that go with that pile of poo.

So, my 'copy/design/patent' design/rights 101 is "Carry on, rip someone off, do what you do and expect to get your ass sued coz you're a chuffin' numpty!" simples, all it is is a little bit of respect and appreiciation for the work of others.

And before you go, tap in Lego to Shapeways search, anything that has LEGO/lego/Lego in the title or a represenation of a LEGO minifigure is breaching The Lego Group's IP rights! Also have a look at how Apple define how their name can be used in relation to 3rd party/aftermarket products - it is different to how TLG chose to let their name be used

FFS, it ain't rocket science to do a bit of research so that one knows that the 'right thing' is donen or is it just that people are so greedy/stupid/DGaS that they just don't care?

I already suggested a long time ago that a simple lookup for word in the title of a model page should be compared against a table of KNOWN registered tradenames and the model uploader informed of their choice of model title.

Paul
[hr]

stop4stuff Modeller for hireShapeways Shop - Controller PendantTwitterYouTube​

[hr]

Paul, while I'm not going address all your issues mentioned here I will tackle one, that of the Lego example. I think quite obviously Lego doesn't really g.a.s. about the modelers here creating and selling something that can be added in to the Lego universe. My feeling is their opinion is probably based on the fact that as long as something doesn't cut into their profits then they will gain a large amount of free advertising and product placement. Now, if a large factory in, ahem, China, was to start pumping out counterfeit Lego blocks that would be a different story. If some maker is producing items that Lego doesn't because there simply isn't a large enough market then how are they losing?

I liken it to the after-market auto parts industry - if someone wants to make a wicked rear light to trick out their 1995 Honda then what the heck does Honda care? They certainly wouldn't make any money by fitting out a factory and tooling molds to make the light for a virtually non-existent market.

Glenn

The difference being that OOP car parts do come under 'fair use' laws, the USA in particular a has more relaxed stance on this compared to EU laws, however The Lego Group has a published 'Fair Play' policy (google Lego Fair Play) and the same as Apple, they have published usage on their IP rights.

I've been ripped off in the past by numpties who think that anything on the internet is fair game, yet on the internet it takes just as much time as it does to find something to rip off/ripped off as it does to ask for useage rights - greedy/stupid/DGaS ppls deserve whatever comes their way when they chose to ignore/not bother/think they're above the law (obviously, that is just my very biased yet totally true and law abiding opinion)

But, hey, each to their own.

Paul

How do the titles of the models and the models themselves here fare under international IP rights?
(just askin' coz I can't be bothered to go lookin)

Paul

As far copyright is concerned, in the UK,the lamborghinis are OK, but the SciFi stuff clearly infringes copyright, since only 'artistic' works can be copyrighted. However car manufacturers for the last 20-30 years have been registering their designs so it is likely that these model will infringe the design registration. Whether this matters depends on whether Lamborghini's policy for licensing their designs to model makers.

Of course the people who made these models could have permission from the copyright/registration owners to use their designs, but I would expect them to say so on their model page.

Just my two cents in here: if your model is slightly different from the original, and you do NOT claim it as a 'recreation', and instead only say it was 'inspired by' their design, my understanding is that you are within your rights to do so. They'll probably still send you a cease and desist letter if you get too noisy however, and it's probably still easier and cheaper to give in than fight a legal battle.

EDIT: Just as an example using the discussion above, let's look at LEGO. If you post a model and call it 'a LEGO model' or 'a LEGO toy', you are breaching copyright. If however, you say it 'is properly scaled to work with LEGO products', well, that's wholly within your rights. LEGO doesn't have a copyright on that exact scale.

It's not the best example, but it was relevant, so I used it.

That isn't to do with copyright. That is passing off a Trade Mark.

Lamborghini - a few minutes on google reveals http://www.lamborghini.com/en/about/privacy-legal/terms-of-u se/ Whilst that is specifically for usage of itmes from their website, some more digging around also reveals that Automobili Lamborghini S.p.A. are quite hot in protecting their IP rights - specifically if their 'brand' is used in any way without express written consent, expect trouble!

Lego - from http://aboutus.lego.com/en-gb/legal-notice/fair-play/
...However, universal awareness that creative products deserve better protection is fortunately increasing.In the LEGO Group, we believe that any original product design should be protected against copying for as long as it is produced and marketed. And that it should be possible to stop such copying and other infringements easily. We also believe that designs, company names and trademarks should not be used in unrelated settings without the owner's consent. Each year, our legal department handles hundreds of incidents involving infringement of our rights, keeps track of developments worldwide and regularly brings infringers to court, making sure that consumers can have confidence that anything bearing the LEGO Group's trademarks or characteristic product features is a LEGO brand product. This is in the best interest not only of our company but also of consumers, primarily children, all over the world.For that purpose, we have defined attitudes and practices intended to secure fair competition and fair dealing towards consumers. Some of them we can - and do - enforce by legal action. Some of them, we wish could be enforced where breaches occur...

Apple - start here http://www.apple.com/legal/ - they pretty much have everything covered!

It rougly takes about 10 minutes tops to find the correct information needed for any company's IP rights.

And don't forget kiddos, branded products have a brand name to help make them momorable - whilst it may seem that an individual may be paying homage to their favourite product, the IP owner gerenally sees any mis-use as an attempt to use their brand for profit and gets a bit upset.

fwif, I have been involved in a trademark dispute - the trademark owner attempted to claim ownership of a domain name I once owned. I won the case by default after I showed that the trademark owner had registered their trademark after I had purchased the domain name - I even offered to sell the domain name to them for less money than it cost them to instigate proceedings against me but they still pressed ahead. I found the whole episode quite amusing and then rubbed salt in the wound by letting the domain name lapse a few months later. :twisted:

It really is worth spending a few minutes researching to find out what you can get away with or how much hassle to expect when the IP owner kicks off.

Paul

Simply want to know what we could do to protect our copyrights over our own designs.

There are two opposing positions on this:-

If you want to fight to protect your designs you have to be prepared to have shed loads on money in the bank to pay for lawyers and court appearances etc.

Or you can say that the whole system is a scam, treat each design as if it had a limited life and be prepared to move on with a stream of new designs.

The latter is the way that most fashion design works and the former is the corporate approach.

Wow, great discussion guys!

To add some ideas about your questions, here are two blog posts worth a read:

This blog post by Duann has great idea about designers "protecting" themselves in this new rapidly evolving creative economy : https://www.shapeways.com/blog/archives/1202-for-some-designe rs...-protection-may-be-better-achieved-through-instant-prot otyping-and-continuous-product-change-rather-than-intellectu al-property-law.html

and this one details what happens when DMCA's, creative commons and IP all come together in an "open source" environment;
https://www.shapeways.com/blog/archives/747-IP,-3D-Printing-D MCA.html

A lot to ponder over the weekend...

Interesting reading indeed, and certainly food for thought.

Paul
[hr]

stop4stuff Modeller for hireShapeways Shop - Controller PendantTwitterYouTube​

[hr]

Maybe flickr is a good tool to help. You can take photos in several angles of your design, then upload to flickr. There is a mark aside the photo like "This photo was taken on November 19, 2012 using a Sony DSC-H10." could work as a time stamp.

Or change the time in the camera, take the picture and upload...

how about a tweet with the picture ? Twitter records the date of post which is not editable.

Hi guys,

Quick update on this topic.

Carine and Duann are at the US Patent Office in Washington D.C today at their conference on 3D Printing and we are meeting with Michael Weinberg from Public Knowledge next week so the Copyright 101 is coming soon!

Keep the questions coming so I can make sure all bases are covered.

-Natalia