Breisch Olds 1/2 scale engine drawings

[Mike Henry]

Unless the holder has formally relinquished the copyright, it is certainly still in effect (and will be for very many more years). Hopefully someone knows more of the story of these plans.

Agreed that the copyright is still in effect unless the author has moved it to public domain. I'm just exploring that possibility here, or that someone may know of a way to contact the current copyright holder.

 

[Gordon]

Just for information and amazement: My dad bought the Olds engine kit with drawings from Paul Breisch in 1979 for $114. I bought the same kit in 1985 for $120.

 

[redryder]

A little common sense goes a long way here.
If the owner of the copyright for plans offers or intends to offer them for sale, and has not placed them in the public domain....
If you have a feeling you are about to violate someone's copyright, you are likely considering exactly that.

 

[cbwho]

If you purchased a physical paper book, you can sell the book even after reading the book.

If you have a set of physical paper plans, you can sell those paper plans after building said item. You cannot keep a copy. (*Update: unless there is a license restriction on the plan but that would have to be printed on the plan imho.)

If all of this is digital, then all common sense bets are off. In many ways you don't own anything digital in the first place.

 

[littlelocos]

If you have a set of physical paper plans, you can sell those paper plans after building said item. You cannot keep a copy.

Dead wrong on that one. The plans are for construction of one item, not to be sold unless that one licensed use is still available.
Same on the digital content. (Go check out Model Engine Builder magazine on that one.)
This topic has gone down far enough and should be closed.
Todd.

 

[cbwho]

Well... For the 1976 plans: "Before 1989, United States law required the use of a copyright notice, consisting of the copyright symbol ([emoji2398], the letter C inside a circle), the abbreviation "Copr.", or the word "Copyright", followed by the year of the first publication of the work and the name of the copyright holder." The USA adopted the Berne Convention later which doesn't require a notice. I am not sure if the USA adoption of the Berne Convention is retroactive.

If those purchasing of those plans had additional license restrictions then what you say is true. But if there were no published in writing license restrictions for that item then what you say does not apply to that item. For the plans that do not have the words copyright on them that is clearly the case.

 

[Cogsy]

Well... For the 1976 plans: "Before 1989, United States law required the use of a copyright notice, consisting of the copyright symbol ([emoji2398], the letter C inside a circle), the abbreviation "Copr.", or the word "Copyright", followed by the year of the first publication of the work and the name of the copyright holder." The USA adopted the Berne Convention later which doesn't require a notice. I am not sure if the USA adoption of the Berne Convention is retroactive.

If those purchasing of those plans had additional license restrictions then what you say is true. But if there were no published in writing license restrictions for that item then what you say does not apply to that item. For the plans that do not have the words copyright on them that is clearly the case.

Not sure where you got this from but the Copyright Act of 1976 declared that "original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression" were automatically covered by copyright without the need for registration. Also, I have never heard a declaration of copyright on a song played on the radio, even those made before 1989, yet they were also protected by copyright without such notice.