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.