Wanted - Long EZ and Q2 plans

In article ,
(Corrie) writes:


Unless the family continues to re-register them (as I believe the
Pietenpols have done) Bower's plans will pass into the public domain
under US copyright law in April 2073. We'll all have flown west by
then, I suspect.



I can't wait and will start building promptly of the first of May, 2073.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

"Whatever" wrote in message ...

If the design is not protected against copying by IP laws,
the contract would have to specify not only that the
original purchaser can't build two, but that he can't sell
the plans. Does it include stuff like that? Anyone have
any actual language in e-format they can post?
Todd Pattist

OK. I have a set of drawings for the Dyke Delta JD2. I did
not buy these plans, they were handed to me after the
purchaser died. Since I have no contract with the designer,
are you saying that I am free to copy and sell as many
prints as I feel like?

It's not a contractural issue. Can you say COPYRIGHT? I knew
you could. Copyright forbids you from copying the plans without
permission of the owner. Copyright also prevents you from making
derivative works (that is, building an airplane from those plans) without
such permission as well. Lots of case law on this with regard to architectural
plans.

Rick

What you mention should be on the CD from Dick Rutan. I have a set of
"Long" plans, but no serial number and no templates. Effective as an
"assembly manual" though.

Have you guy's heard that Muhlbauer has a certified 3 blade constant speed
prop for "Longs" ? Apparently they ran the prop on a Swiss Long to achieve
the certification. It shortens both the takeoff and rollout dramatically,
which must be a pretty big factor in a mountainous country like Switzerland.
Meanwhile it's been around the world twice !! You can read about the plane,
the pilot and his round the world trip he
http://www.experimental.ch/SwissMade...ht/default.htm

Keith

"Rick Pellicciotti" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:3f46709c$1@ham...

I have a set of E-Racer plans and I have flown the prototype with Shirl.
It
is an awesome airplane. I would not attempt to build an E-Racer without
having a copy of the Long-EZ plans around though. There are a lot of
little
details and how-to's on the Long-EZ plans that are directly applicable to
the E-Racer.

Rick

"Frederick Wilson" wrote in message news:_yn1b.223504$Ho3.28382@sccrnsc03...
Excuse me for being stupid, but why keeps a person from selling a set of
plans they bought and built with?

Fred

Risk of bad karma.

In article , writes:


OK. I have a set of drawings for the Dyke Delta JD2. I did
not buy these plans, they were handed to me after the
purchaser died. Since I have no contract with the designer,
are you saying that I am free to copy and sell as many
prints as I feel like?

Scott McQ



I have a book that I bought second hand, do I have the right to publish the
book because I didn't buy it from the original publisher? NO, you don't
own
the rights to publish the boook or the plans, contract or no contract.

PS: I talked with John Dyke at Oshkosh a couple of weeks back and I suspect
he
would take a real dim view of your efforts as well.

Legally he could refer to the Delta plans and build his own airplane that
looks
exactly like a Delta in every way down to the last rivet, then write his own
plans about how to build an airplane just like his, so long as he didn't use
anything from the Delta plans. It wouldn't be an ethical thing to do, but it
would be legal.

Copyright doesn't protect an idea, it protects the expression of that idea
set
down in tangible form. It's a thin, blurry line.



When you finish that knock off plane you have just crossed the thin blurry line
since it is now in tangible form. Then again, that was not the question. The
question was would he be free to copy and sell the plans. The answer remains
NO.

Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

(Jay) wrote:

I think the Japanese have it figured out, they never try to license
any ideas, they just adopt other peoples, make incremental
improvements and sell goods. You want to get the technology, you're
going to have to try to reverse engineer it. Sure they get US
patents, but there are lots or ways to circumvent the disclosure
requirement without breaking the letter of the law.

I think your world is more like the Chinese software model. When I
lived there in the early 90's, it became VERY obvious that there was
virtually NO software industry in China. The software they did have
was hopelessly clunky and dated.

Why? Because anyone stupid enough to spend time developing it knew
they's sell about one copy of it before it ended up on every computer
in China. So why bother? They lived in your "perfect world", and the
end result was really, really bad software. Almost no one in a
country of over a billion people made their living writing software.

Mark Hickey

Yes, that was my point. The CD's are invaluble while building any canard
pusher whether it is a Long or not. Interesting reading about the varible
pitch prop. The reason more of them have not been used on these planes is
the weight. You really cannot afford the extra weight of a normal constant
speed prop that far aft. Of course if you built the plane knowing you were
going to use a heavier prop you could compensate for it with battery
location and other changes.

Rick
"Keith Olivier" wrote in message
...
Rick

What you mention should be on the CD from Dick Rutan. I have a set of
"Long" plans, but no serial number and no templates. Effective as an
"assembly manual" though.

Have you guy's heard that Muhlbauer has a certified 3 blade constant speed
prop for "Longs" ? Apparently they ran the prop on a Swiss Long to
achieve
the certification. It shortens both the takeoff and rollout dramatically,
which must be a pretty big factor in a mountainous country like
Switzerland.
Meanwhile it's been around the world twice !! You can read about the
plane,
the pilot and his round the world trip he

http://www.experimental.ch/SwissMade...ht/default.htm

Keith

"Rick Pellicciotti" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:3f46709c$1@ham...

I have a set of E-Racer plans and I have flown the prototype with Shirl.
It
is an awesome airplane. I would not attempt to build an E-Racer without
having a copy of the Long-EZ plans around though. There are a lot of
little
details and how-to's on the Long-EZ plans that are directly applicable
to
the E-Racer.

Rick

In article , wrote:
In article , RobertR237 says...

In article , (Whatever)
writes:


OK. I have a set of drawings for the Dyke Delta JD2. I did
not buy these plans, they were handed to me after the
purchaser died. Since I have no contract with the designer,
are you saying that I am free to copy and sell as many
prints as I feel like?

Scott McQ



I have a book that I bought second hand, do I have the right to publish the
book because I didn't buy it from the original publisher? NO, you don't own
the rights to publish the boook or the plans, contract or no contract.

PS: I talked with John Dyke at Oshkosh a couple of weeks back and I suspect he
would take a real dim view of your efforts as well.

Legally he could refer to the Delta plans and build his own airplane that looks
exactly like a Delta in every way down to the last rivet, then write his own
plans about how to build an airplane just like his, so long as he didn't use
anything from the Delta plans. It wouldn't be an ethical thing to do, but it
would be legal.

*LEGALLY*, if he did what you describe, it would be considered a "derivative
work", and, as such, _would_ require permission from the original copyright
holder.

On the other hand, if it was done _without_ any use of Dyke's plans -- i.e.,
an "independent development" of the same idea, then there would -not- be a
copyright issue. *HOWEVER*, if it can be shown that the 'independent developer'
had *any* access to the original work, there _is_ a "presumption" that the
work _is_ derived from that original. The 'defendant' has to _prove_ that he
"did not use" any 'derived' information. With all the 'usual' difficulties in
'proving a negative'.


Copyright doesn't protect an idea, it protects the expression of that idea set
down in tangible form. It's a thin, blurry line.

Yup. And the swamp gets _especially_ deep when the concept of 'derivative work'
gets involved.

In article ,
(Jay) writes:


We're going through this right now with CDs. There was a time when
people din't have the means to make CD (or records for that matter).
The record company served a usefull purpose- making vinale records,
but now less and less people need that service- so they're going to
the law books to try to extend the life of the buggy whip
manufacturers.



Its not the CD manufacturers who are raising hell, its the publishers and the
recording artists who are being screwed by the illegal copies of CD's. Its one
thing for me to make a copy of my CD for personal use and protecting the
original from damage, its quite another to copy it to give to all my friends or
share the contents with a million other people on the internet for free. That
is denying the rightful proceeds to the creators of the work.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

In article , Todd Pattist
writes:


And "unethical" is certainly debatable. We have a large set
of intellectual property laws that protect "writings" like
the plans (via copyright) and devices, like the aircraft
(via design patents and utility patents, etc.). In order to
use those laws, you need to meet certain criteria. To get a
patent, you need to show that your invention is sufficiently
different from what's already out there that it's worthy. If
the design cannot meet that criteria, or the designer
decides not to make the public disclosure required to obtain
a patent, and no other IP law applies, then the law protects
those who want to copy.

Copying of improvements advances civilization and is
praiseworthy. Patent laws are not there to prevent copying.
They are there to encourage improvements that advance
civilization by granting a limited monopoly in exchange for
disclosure of the improvement to the public and
authorization to use the improvement after the limited
period of protection.
Todd Pattist
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
___
Make a commitment to learn something from every flight.
Share what you learn.



Said the thief as he held the gun to the bankers head.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)