QUOTE: Originally posted by LongIslandTom Therein lies the debate. How do you define a "copy?" How rigorous should the definition be? How rigorous is going too far? I think everyone can agree that when you make a 1:1 reproduction of a Jeep that has the same intended functionality (i.e. you can put 1:1 gasoline in it and drive it down the 1:1 road just like the original), it would be a copy. But a 1:87 object which has no functionality or commonality at all with the original, except the shape, can we actually call it a "copy?" I don't think you can put gasoline in that 1:87 object and drive it down the 1:1 road like the original is intended. It doesn't replicate any of the proprietary mechanical parts in function that were developed by the 1:1 Jeep's design teams. The 1:1 Jeep has an internal combustion engine, a transmission, suspension, power distribution system, etc.. The 1:87 object is a blob of plastic with none of those things. So is that 1:87 object a "copy"? It's very debatable I think. Though lately it seems those who favor definitions so rigorous that it transcends ridiculousness are gaining the upper hand. My view is that sometimes it is ridiculous, such as UP forcing Testors to pay a licensing fee to make a shade of paint similar to their "armor yellow" (which isn't always the same shade anyway, as evident by the different shades that you see from locomotives emerging from paint shops at various locations in the UP system). Just my $0.02.
QUOTE: Originally posted by davekelly Actually, I believe that Boeing actually designed the B-17 on their own dime and the government then purchased them, so if this is true, then Boeing arguably does own the design of the B-17, just like Ford owns the design of every Explorer puchased by the government. In fact, other aircraft manufacturers had to receive a license from Boeing to produce the B-17 during WWII. Whether or not these guys paid money to Boeing, I don't know. I'm still trying to figure out how this is all the fault of attorneys. Last time I checked the right to vote lawmakers into and out of office was not limited to attorneys and jury summons are mailed not to just attorneys. I know I'll get flamed on this, but it is one of my favorite soapboxes.
QUOTE: Originally posted by LongIslandTom QUOTE: Originally posted by jeffers_mz I own a jeep, but not the design of a jeep. I can drive my car any way I like, but I can't copy it, not at 1:1, not at 1:87. Not quite... When you make a 1:87 model of a Jeep, you are not making a fully-functional copy of the real thing. You are only making a likeness of its shape, and if that's illegal, every child who draws the shape of a jeep on a sheet of paper would have ended up in jail. I don't think the spirit of the law intends for things to go that dogmatic.
QUOTE: Originally posted by jeffers_mz I own a jeep, but not the design of a jeep. I can drive my car any way I like, but I can't copy it, not at 1:1, not at 1:87.
Ray Breyer
Modeling the NKP's Peoria Division, circa 1943