Many Edgar J. Westbury plans available

[Cogsy]

I want to respond to a couple of inquiries but can I private message a member and if I can how ?

If you click on a members name or avatar on one of their posts it opens up a box with a 'Start a Conversation' button. Hit that button and type your message into the text box that opens up, then hit the 'Start a Conversation' button on the bottom of that text box o send your message.

 

[Charles Lamont]

Surely no-one would argue that buying one set of plans off a designer and then sharing them among an entire club of people to build many engines is hurting the business of the copyright holder?

That is an interesting one. You can pass a newspaper, periodical, or book round the club, or leave it in the dentist's waiting room. If there is no specific licence agreement, I don't really see what is different different about a copyrighted set of plans.

Also, just because a licence agreement says something, it does not necessarily mean it has legal force, even if you have 'agreed' to the terms by making a purchase. It may be invalidated, for example, by consumer protection legislation.

Licence agreements and copyright are quite different animals, and conflating them only serves to confuse.

IANAL, but I suspect that a licence that claims you have to buy another set if you balls-up the job at the first try would be unenforceable as unfair or unreasonable.

 

[BaronJ]

Hi Al, Guys,

Interesting - how does that go for things like a copy of an operating system for instance? You pay for a license and you're allowed to use it exactly once (for a normal stand-alone license). The registration of that operating system is keyed into the specific hardware configuration of you machine and you can't purchase a new machine and transfer over the license from your old system.

The operating system and the hardware have nothing to do with each other, they are two independent entities. Microsoft would like you to believe that this is not the case and they would have you believe as you seem to, that you cannot transfer your operating system to another machine. Just because they make a point of locking their software to your hardware by means of fingerprinting your machine and tying it to their license key, doesn't stop you from making that transfer. The fact that you have to go to them and explain why you are transferring their software/operating system. Is their way of trying to own your property.

Edit: I see the word 'tangible' in your description but not that long ago software came on tangible CD-ROMs, with the access key printed right on them, but still you couldn't deactivate your system and reactivate it on another one.

I very much doubt that this is correct ! I agree that locking a license by requiring that the CD is in the drive of the machine that its being used with doesn't stop you from using that CD in another machine.
The software simply will not run unless the CD is in the drive of that machine.

 

[Cogsy]

I very much doubt that this is correct ! I agree that locking a license by requiring that the CD is in the drive of the machine that its being used with doesn't stop you from using that CD in another machine.
The software simply will not run unless the CD is in the drive of that machine.

I meant with the disc itself as a physical activation code. I'm not sure I've seen one actually printed on the disc itself. I think I might have confused my Windows versions though as I think 95 was easily transferable between machines.

 

[Cogsy]

That is an interesting one. You can pass a newspaper, periodical, or book round the club, or leave it in the dentist's waiting room. If there is no specific licence agreement, I don't really see what is different different about a copyrighted set of plans.

As below, it is likely a license condition rather than copyright, but there is also the 'spirit' or ethical issue here. Let's say there's 25 of us on the forum that want to build a fancy new design published by Joe Bloggs. Conveniently, there are 50 sheets in the plan set and the whole set is only $10. So we each chip in $0.40 and we each take 2 plan sheets. As we finish the parts on our respective sheets we exchange them until we've all completed our entire engine and we then sell on our plan set for $5 to the next interested group. Now the designer has made a total of $10 for his efforts and we're only out 20 cents each. It's likely that Joe Bloggs will likely never bother to go to the trouble of creating another design for sale but hey, at least it only cost us $0.20 for this wonderful new design.

If we just take the 'normal' scenario where we buy a set of plans for ourselves, build an engine and then sell the plans on then what is really happening here? We have taken a customer away from the plan seller/producer (who we sell the plans to) and we are basically saying that we do not want to support the plan seller at all (as in we don't want to pay for plans - we get our money back when we sell them). This is likely to be a controversial opinion but I would suggest that even without such a license condition that we are discussing, we should treat all plans as 'single build' so as to support the designers and copyright holders.

Also, just because a licence agreement says something, it does not necessarily mean it has legal force, even if you have 'agreed' to the terms by making a purchase. It may be invalidated, for example, by consumer protection legislation.

Licence agreements and copyright are quite different animals, and conflating them only serves to confuse.

Exactly, this would all be covered by a license - which is why my original comment at the beginning of this discussion was "Unless their license specifies one build per plan purchase and a build has been attempted or completed."

IANAL, but I suspect that a licence that claims you have to buy another set if you balls-up the job at the first try would be unenforceable as unfair or unreasonable.

Sounds reasonable but I would wonder how the licencor would even become aware of the scrapped part even if it were technically enforceable. I don't think anyone is suggesting these types of license mean you only get one shot at building each part, just that a license is granted to produce one complete unit from a plan set. My comment about 'attempted' was meant to suggest basically a finished but unsuccessful build - perhaps I shouldn't have included it but I was thinking along the lines of the difficult engines like the Snow, etc.

Finally (hopefully) I saw just over the last few days that someone had a set of castings but no plans for an engine and put out a request. The person who purchased the patterns and copyright of the plans then offered plans (presumably for sale) to the member in need but they had already 'sourced' a set themselves. Now we have no way of knowing if they received an illegally copied plan set, or a set from an already completed engine (whether allowed by license or not) but we do know that the person who paid for the copyright and patterns, potentially saving them from complete loss to our community, just missed out on a reward for his efforts and outlay. Stuff like this is not supporting our hobby.

 

[Charles Lamont]

I think we have reached a sufficient degree of agreement on what is legal, and a reasonable position on what might be thought ethical.
I suggest that these frequent, lengthy and boring discussions on these matters could be much reduced if the forum moderators could post, as, say, forum topic no 2, permanently right near the top, a clear statement of the forum's position on copright, patents, fair use, and maybe even a vague statement of the forum's position on ethics, that members could be pointed to when they appear to (want to) transgress. This might take a while to get right, but I think it might be worth it.

 

[Cogsy]

Just to be perfectly clear, the opinions I've expressed on ethics, etc. are my personal opinions as a member and not necessarily those of the forum. I can't separate my posts from my mod status but basically 99% of my posts are just me as a member. The mod bit is normally just removing spam, dealing with reported posts and deleting bad links and is rarely done 'in public' as a post.

Also, there has been an official copyright policy as a sticky at the beginning in the 'Plans' thread since 2009 that I suggest everyone reads - LINK

 

[Richard Hed]

there are other issues also. There are some magazines that are so ridiculously old and the mags obviously intended anyone who was interested to build whatever they wanted. These mags were printed before everyone became so contentious.

 

[BaronJ]

Hi Richard, Guys,

The Internet has made global communications much easier and common place. Forty or so years ago few would have known about or being able to obtain all these publications that are so now so freely accessible on the WWW today. Or aware of the "Intellectual Rights" that are considered to be so valuable. Everyone seems to want to commercialise their work, making money is the order of the day now.

 

[goldstar31]

there are other issues also. There are some magazines that are so ridiculously old and the mags obviously intended anyone who was interested to build whatever they wanted. These mags were printed before everyone became so contentious.

Of course, 'N ed' was Editor of Model Engineer and writing under numerous nom de plumes. He, along with the "greats' eked out their pensions getting a few more pence- and enjoying every every minute of retirement. Copyright pr anything nasty was never thought about. We are are now beset with 'little' men who must make coins by fair means or foul. More of the latter, perhaps.

To Richard and John, it all started with the collapse e of Model Engineer.
Years ago, a couple of us felt that 'a lot' of information which would be useful to beginners would be lost- and started to publish in the knowledge that the original writers were DEAD.

We were threatened with Court.

Today, I'm not interested in making money- and have little time for those who engage in what is a hobby with selling themselves- often copied from folks long gone.

My opinion

Laughingly, I'm in 'lockdown- and consequently 'making mooney'

 

[Cogsy]

Years ago, a couple of us felt that 'a lot' of information which would be useful to beginners would be lost- and started to publish in the knowledge that the original writers were DEAD.

We were threatened with Court.

So if the original owner dies the stuff should be free-for-all? So if you were to pass away tomorrow there'd be no issue with everyone in the area turning up to your place and helping themselves to whatever they wish? I think your heirs may have a different view...

 

[Richard Hed]

Well, I personally am not interested in making $$ from other peeps work, however, there are magazine articles from more than 100 years ago that have no relevance to anything today except those drawings. The drawings (particularly for that era) were obviously meant to be available for whomever was interested wheter they boutht the mag or borrowed it from someone or a library or whatever. I AM, however, interested in creating better versions of old technology--meaning STEAM ENGINES!. We have different metals now wiht different expansion rates, different friction rates, different strenghts. I am interested in designing an engine of approx. 8 HP with the best possible use of the metals to make it.

I have two plans: a piston engine with 2 cyls at between 90 and 120 degs., 4" stroke, 2" piston; the other is the radial type which I believe one would not evfen needs castings to build. If I build one of these, I DO expect to be paid for any ENGINES I make and sell. But these are not toys and I don't believe many peeps would be interested in paying for them. The radial type, I expect to cost a LOT less as it is MUCH easer to build by the look of it. These will all be my own design, however, almost any design out there could easily be infringing someone else's patent.Steam is a thing of the past, but I honestly do not know how it could not make a big come back eventually, when Preppers find out how useful they are, maybe they will use them.

 

[goldstar31]

So if the original owner dies the stuff should be free-for-all? So if you were to pass away tomorrow there'd be no issue with everyone in the area turning up to your place and helping themselves to whatever they wish? I think your heirs may have a different view...

I belong- or belonged to a a club of modellers who naturally donated the contents of their workshop to be sold to help with club funds.

Things haven't really changed for other hobbies. This concept of generosity, brotherly love and whatever still exists.
We, and I'm not alone donate vast sums to charity. I recall with some pride and sadness to '9/11' when a vast sum was donated to those helping in the problem. There were fire fighters in my lodges who knew the 'future' dangers and simply wanted to fly out-- and to put it bluntly to die!

My daughter and son in law were and are in the thick of the pandemic- operating on Covid-19 patients.
My Australian uncle went to war as an ambulance driver- and got malaria. His elder brother went to a previous war- and got malaria. I helped to form a civilian mountain rescue team. It was the first. of course, those who have followed on- are much better but the dangers continue. My father was 'mine rescue' and terrified me. I'm not that brave.

I often wonder about the despised 'Good Samaritan' and wonder did he ever get his coat back?

I have friends and children like that. Lucky me!

 

[Jasonb]

So if the original owner dies the stuff should be free-for-all? So if you were to pass away tomorrow there'd be no issue with everyone in the area turning up to your place and helping themselves to whatever they wish? I think your heirs may have a different view...

The right stays with the authors estate for 75yrs after death in UK law

As far as ME Mag then they hold the right to the work as set and published by them, author still holds right to original so can publish elsewhere eg like Mason's Minnie book which is basically all the mag content in one place.

 

[Charles Lamont]

Have over 2-3 dozen sets, most of which are of planes but also the Minnie, Firewagon, Boiler, and steam engine plant setup.

If anyone is looking for that hard to find plan , I imagine the small plane engines are the rarest.

Let me know and if I get several inquiries I'll post a complete list.

Al

Al, did you put that list together?

 

[mohavegun]

I am interested in Westbury's SEALION and Wall's Wizard engines if you have drawings for them. I would also appreciate a listing of what you do have and what $ you expect for these drawings...

Per one of your other posts, you can simply reply to my message, if someone snipes off the purchase... well, we know that can happen and some people do not respect the rights of others but it does not hurt my feelings if someone is willing to offer to pay more than me but you would not have to sell immediately to a sniper would you? Listing the plans openly will also help you get the exposure you need to sell them.

Rod

Have over 2-3 dozen sets, most of which are of planes but also the Minnie, Firewagon, Boiler, and steam engine plant setup.

If anyone is looking for that hard to find plan , I imagine the small plane engines are the rarest.

Let me know and if I get several inquiries I'll post a complete list.

Al

 

[mohavegun]

The right stays with the authors estate for 75yrs after death in UK law

As far as ME Mag then they hold the right to the work as set and published by them, author still holds right to original so can publish elsewhere eg like Mason's Minnie book which is basically all the mag content in one place.

Cogsy,
You are absolutely correct Cogsy and I see less and less respect for the copyrights these days.... However, in the case of some of the stuff that has been around forever, there is an accepted use permitted for most "in domain" artwork know as the "Creative Commons" wherin a work may be copied in part or whole to support a related product, such as castings sets, and if generally made when and where the original art is no longer commonly available and is made without intent of profit from the production, duplication of the art is considered a non violation. Several suppliers of castings sets reproduce Westbury drawings in this manner.

Just my observation
Rod

 

[Richard Hed]

I am interested in Westbury's SEALION and Wall's Wizard engines if you have drawings for them. I would also appreciate a listing of what you do have and what $ you expect for these drawings...

Per one of your other posts, you can simply reply to my message, if someone snipes off the purchase... well, we know that can happen and some people do not respect the rights of others but it does not hurt my feelings if someone is willing to offer to pay more than me but you would not have to sell immediately to a sniper would you? Listing the plans openly will also help you get the exposure you need to sell them.

Rod

Just that I am interested: What is a Sealion and a Wall's Wizard? I won't snipe but I love that word "snipe". Makes me laugh.

 

[goldstar31]

Just that I am interested: What is a Sealion and a Wall's Wizard? I won't snipe but I love that word "snipe". Makes me laugh.

Snipe? I've eaten them. I don't think that one oof my lady friends would be suited but I haven't told hder

 

[BaronJ]

Snipe? I've eaten them. I don't think that one good my lady friends would be suited but I haven't told her

Hi Norman,
I don't see why not ! Very little difference from duck, and a Mallard is quite tasty. Particularly French ones.