Somebody on facebook -- no, NOT me -- has posted a reprint of an old MR article. Does MR care? I don't want to get anybody in trouble, but I also respect copyright.
Disclaimer: This post may contain humor, sarcasm, and/or flatulence.
Michael Mornard
Bringing the North Woods to South Dakota!
how old an article? year
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
Copyright lasts for "a work made for hire" 95 years. It is probably illegal and unethical. I don't know if MR has the resources to file for damages or if it has to prove there are actual damages.
We had a local restaurant named Sony's, the owner was a Phillipino American named Sony and the Sony Corp thought it worthwhile to sue her and maker her change the name of her restaurant. Sony was successful.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
You could email MR editorial wih a link to the facebook page and they might give you a "Finders Fee".
James in Texas
BigDaddy Copyright lasts for "a work made for hire" 95 years. It is probably illegal and unethical. I don't know if MR has the resources to file for damages or if it has to prove there are actual damages. We had a local restaurant named Sony's, the owner was a Phillipino American named Sony and the Sony Corp thought it worthwhile to sue her and maker her change the name of her restaurant. Sony was successful.
Interesting on that, since there are multiple factors there - first, no one is legitimately going to confuse a restaurant for consumer electronics, and two, it's their actual family name - Sony the electronics company is a made up name. More likely as a small family owned restaurant they just didn't have the resources for fight it and had no choice. Completely wrong if a court ruled that.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Sony has to challenge everyone, large and small. If you let anyone get awat with it, you weaken your overall case.
Rich
Alton Junction
richhotrainSony has to challenge everyone, large and small. If you let anyone get awat with it, you weaken your overall case.
Johnson & Johnson didn't feel the need to go after Johnsons' Lumber or Johnson's Menswear in my town. Nobody goes to either to buy bandaids and baby powder.
But, maybe if an accounting firm, or a law firm started up with the name Johnson & Johnson, Johnson & Johnson just might take action against that.
Mike.
My You Tube
We are confusing "trademark"- the legal protection for names, logos and symbols associated with particular goods or services (such as "Sony" or the McDonalds arches), with "copyright" which protects original works of writing, music, art and photography and such, for example an article in MR or a Ted Rose painting or Phil Hastings photograph. This can be a fine line: Disney owns the trademark in Mickey Mouse's image, but also a copyright in images taken from a Mickey Mouse cartoon film or book.
With rare exceptions MR/Kalmbach owns the copyright in its articles, whether staff written or outside author (from time to time over the years I have seen the copyright symbol (C) next to an author's name on an MR article). I believe they and Trains magazine are reasonably liberal about giving permission for copying, but most places that permit ask for a phrase such as "used by permission" or something along those lines. I have seen handouts at clinics that were permitted copies of articles.
Indeed Kalmbach freely gives permission to copy their scale drawings provided you make the copy for yourself and your own purposes and do not distribute or share the copy/copies with others.
Without knowing what agreement Kalmbach enters into with its authors, sometimes the original actual author, even if they have been paid for their work, is permitted to make further use of their article. BUT even then, Kalmbach always adds original work of its own to every article: not just the editing, but the graphic design, organization, photos and drawings, etc. They retain the exclusive copyright in that original work. The original author might be able to make use of his words, but not the actual version printed in MR because that contains original work that was not his (or hers).
One test for copyright violations is, did it deprive the copyright holder of the value it could have received had they been properly paid for their work - and usually the answer is, sure it did. Some copyright holders, including some famously reclusive writers, have used copyright as a shield to prevent or at least inhibit scholarly discussion of their work.
But there are exceptions to copyright, such as "fair use" which is a very much debated issue. There are tests for what constitutes fair use, with such factors as the nature and extent of the copying, what is the copying for, and so on. University professors and other teachers rely very heavily on that fair use doctrine and some of them really push it too far.
One challenge Kalmbach would face is that once the magazine is published and sold, you can give your copy to whomever you want. For free. Go to a big train show and you might easily get for free a dozen versions of the same issue of MR. Tear out the article and give it to a dozen friends. Perfectly legal, you owned the magazine. Take one copy to Kinkos and make color copies? Violation. Practical distinction? None. Other than saving that bother of wandering the aisles of a train show looking for the December 2012 issue of MR.
My hunch is that Kalmbach, like other firms that hold fairly vast troves of copyrighted material, picks what battles it wants to fight over the copyright. For example, is it being sold or given away? I think they'd properly go ballistic if someone just ripped off the great David P Morgan essays in a book being sold. Someone posting an isolated article on Facebook, or a copy of a map that was in the April 1948 issue of Trains? An intellectual property lawyer would be happy to review the matter. The best of them charge $1000 an hour. The bargain basement ones charge perhaps $300 an hour. Oh and by the way, ten to fifteen minutes of work qualifies as an "hour." For that the client gets a nice "cease and desist" letter (most of which was already on the word processing system) on crisp white bond paper sent to the violator.
I wrote my share of such letters before I retired.
Dave Nelson