GWTW Forum
August 18, 2018, 01:07 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Issues? Questions?
email gwtwforum@kitekids.net
 
   Home   Help Forum Info Login Register Chat  
Welcome to the GWTW Forum.
Guests (non-registered users) can view the forum but are unable to post.  If you don't have anything to say then why would you bother to register?
One of the most popular sections of the GWTW Forum has long been the Swap Meet.  A great place to sell old, seldom flown kites or to get great deals on used (gently flown) kites.  Only registered users can see the Swap Meet section, let alone wheel and deal.  1000's (literally) of kites have changed hands thanks to the Swap Meet.
There are several more benefits to being a registered user, but you'll have to join our little community to find out all the "secrets".
Questions or concerns? Contact Steve ... just drop an email to: forum.gwtwkites@gmail.com

Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Kite Builders: Creative or CopyCats  (Read 2323 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
chilese
Global Moderator
Trade Count: (+5)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3935


Location: Las Vegas, NV

WWW
« on: May 31, 2010, 01:58 PM »

We kiters are a fickle lot.

We get upset if a sport kite panel layout looks like it was "modified" from a previous effort: (Elixir, STX series, Zephyr for example).

We compare size and shape of kites to previous efforts by others.

And let's not even delve into the Rev clones, let alone the Spirit/Tirips.

But what about the kite maker who takes a design and puts it on a kite? I'm writing about probably enlarging a photo and tracing it on a Rok or Genkhi or whatever. Mickey Mouse, unicorn, Winnebago, playing card. Is it an homage to the original? Is it okay if done for personal use? What about limited commercial runs?

Randy Tom has made Nagel Revs for many years and they seem totally acceptable to us. Maybe? Heck, my photos are merely reproductions of a subject someone else made. Like taking a photograph of a sculpture and taking credit for the photo.

Here is a recent Masterpiece Rev.
http://picasaweb.google.com/chilesej/2010KitesOnlineAgainMaybe#5473559735758491682

And here is a photo I found on Picasa when searching on "Vampire Rose".
http://picasaweb.google.com/fairytale.raudeliunaite/FantasyGothic#5428530492616852386

Nothing that hasn't been done before, it just felt odd this time.
« Last Edit: May 31, 2010, 04:35 PM by chilese » Logged

inewham
Board Moderator
Trade Count: (+3)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 442


Location: Nottingham, UK

WWW
« Reply #1 on: May 31, 2010, 03:13 PM »

Randy Tom's kites are an interesting example (I've no idea if Randy Tom had any sort of agreement with Nagel or his estate).
If I make e.g. a kite with say a Triumph logo I'm not reproducing one of their bikes, just a logo and they probably wouldn't care but a Randy Tom kite is reproducing someone else's work: a Nagel Picture.
The image itself is the 'work', so I could understand any artist getting annoyed about an unauthorised reproduction.


Logged

fidelio
Trade Count: (+7)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1165


Location: las vegas

« Reply #2 on: May 31, 2010, 03:24 PM »

Logged

Fdeli
chilese
Global Moderator
Trade Count: (+5)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3935


Location: Las Vegas, NV

WWW
« Reply #3 on: May 31, 2010, 04:37 PM »

My brother-in-law made a website whose initials were ESBN (not ESPN). He did use the same font as ESPN did on their logo. He received a cease and desist order within a week without doing any "advertising" to get to his modest website.

Some hold on to their logos very tightly.  Shocked
Logged

Jared
Trade Count: (+13)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 377

Location: North Carolina

« Reply #4 on: May 31, 2010, 06:40 PM »

Failure to protect a trademark (such as a logo) can result in the loss of that trademark.

I suspect if someone from Triumph saw the logo being used somewhere they hadn't previously authorized, the lawyer letters would come swiftly.
Logged
david barnby
Trade Count: (+3)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 231


Location: France

« Reply #5 on: May 31, 2010, 07:56 PM »

pity

the mind wanders to some great designs.... especially on revs: http://www.triumph.com/global/#/index.html
Logged
MB
Trade Count: (+1)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 68


Location: N. California

« Reply #6 on: May 31, 2010, 08:22 PM »

Can't speak for others, but the playing card kite I recently made was considered after seeing that the rights to the back design, Ace of Spades and Joker were carefully claimed on the flap, with no mention of the face cards which have been out there for a significant number of years.
Logged

Matt
chilese
Global Moderator
Trade Count: (+5)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3935


Location: Las Vegas, NV

WWW
« Reply #7 on: May 31, 2010, 09:12 PM »

And very well done sir. Thoughtful of you to check into it.

I didn't know the claims were on the flap.  Huh
Logged

Gamelord
Trade Count: (+3)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 736


Location: Las Vegas, Nevada

WWW
« Reply #8 on: June 01, 2010, 12:35 PM »

I think that once you step from personal use to Commercial use it makes a huge difference.  For instance, if you were to put a Mickey Mouse image on a kite and then try to sell that kite, Disney would be on top of that right away and you would probably be getting some legal letters showing up at your door step.

For personal use I don't think it would even bother them at all....unless again you started to produce 1000 of them for personal use...

It also boils down to just how popular the trademark and copyright is.  In the example of your ESPN situation, ESPN is very popular and I am sure that someone accidentally typed in the wrong URL, came up to the other page and immediately sent that to ESPN - which resulted in the legal letters.  Now if it would have been HBJL.com in the same font as ESPN, nothing probably would have ever been said.

This opinion is worth exactly what you paid for it. Smiley
Logged

indigo_wolf
Trade Count: (+10)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1342


Location: North of Washington, DC (USA)

« Reply #9 on: June 01, 2010, 12:50 PM »

I am sure that someone accidentally typed in the wrong URL, came up to the other page

A huge pet peeve.... vermin that have registered (with malice) common misspellings for popular websites.  2nd place for annoyance has to be ISPs that direct you to their search page when you mistype a URL.  Undecided


F-Secure staff has found a malicious website that utilizes a spelling error when typing the name of the popular search engine - 'Google.com'. If a user opens a malicious website, his/her computer gets hijacked - a lot of different malware gets automatically downloaded and installed: trojan droppers, trojan downloaders, backdoors, a proxy trojan and a spying trojan. Also a few adware-related files are installed.

The name of the malicious website is 'Googkle.com'. PLEASE DO NOT GO TO THIS WEBSITE! Otherwise your computer will get infected! We have reported the case to the authorities.

I guess this kind of thing is more common than we realise. It seems to be a bunch of guys with Russian names who ahve registered misspelling of the Google name (how many more are out there) as a way to install phishing and other tricks on your computer. The website is still active at the time of writing.


ATB,
Sam
Logged
chilese
Global Moderator
Trade Count: (+5)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3935


Location: Las Vegas, NV

WWW
« Reply #10 on: June 01, 2010, 01:24 PM »

Received a private email on this subject.

My thanks to the author for their time in preparing this information.

I am reprinting only the first part which is both germane and well written:

__________________

Copyright is the protection of an original work.
Trademark is the protection of something iconic associated with a business.

In the case of the masterpiece rev's, I don't think they are violations. Nagel was not the only artist to render in that style. Mukai, and others also used that blockish look, and before Nagel, the warhol marilyn and other screen prints. As long as it is not a direct repro of a piece done by an artist, it is not a copyright infringement, even if it is stylistically similar. In the case of the vampire rose, the original was a photoshop image. Since the rev is not printed, it can not be a copy.

So, then there's trademark. This is when something is so identified with a company that it becomes representative of that company. Like, a white wave on a red container is associated with Coke. It's why Pepsi's logo although using a similar white wave, must use blue and red. Mickey, etc are trademarks of Disney, which is why a facsimile is not allowed.
Logged

mikenchico
Board Moderator
Trade Count: (0)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2199


Location: ‪‪‪‪‪‎Chico, Ca

WWW
« Reply #11 on: June 01, 2010, 04:58 PM »

I think that once you step from personal use to Commercial use it makes a huge difference.  For instance, if you were to put a Mickey Mouse image on a kite and then try to sell that kite, Disney would be on top of that right away and you would probably be getting some legal letters showing up at your door step.

For personal use I don't think it would even bother them at all....unless again you started to produce 1000 of them for personal use...

This opinion is worth exactly what you paid for it. Smiley


Well I can say this assumption isn't true in the case of Disney, I also held the belief that personal use was exempt, but for most kiteflyers that arguement doesn't hold. Personal use means "For your eyes only", if you fly it in public it is considered that you have put it on display. Randy Tom can vouch for this, his filmstrip kite of Disney characters drew the wrath of Disney and he subsiquently had to perform preformances for them to stay out of court as I heard it.

I once let Zoe take the Genie to the AKA Nationals when they were held in SoCal, as she was taking it out of the bag somebody recognized it and asked if that was Mike's Genie, she said "Yes", he said put it away quick Disney is here and they are confiscating kites that infringe on their copyrights.

Contact the copyright holder before using a copyrighted image, many may be fine with the request, better to be safe then in court. In Disney's case I contacted them on the next planned kite, the Lion King, the requirements you had to meet to get permission put that kite off the list ... oh well
Logged

"Living is easy with eyes closed, misunderstanding all you see" John W Lennon

"People do not quit playing because they grow old, they grow old because they quit playing" George Bernard Shaw
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Support the GWTW Forum

Kite Classifieds Ad
Kite Classifieds

A Wind Of Change
A Wind Of Change

FMKS
Fly Market

A Wind Of Change
skyshark

Blue Moon
Blue Moon Kites

Our forum is made possible by the good folks whose ads appear above and by the members of our community (PayPal donation button at top)
In case you missed it each ad is linked to the sponsors web site.  So please, take a moment and visit our sponsors sites as this forum wouldn't be possible with out them.
Interested in running an ad for your business or kiting event?  Contact Steve at advertise.gwtwkites@gmail.com for a quote.

Cal Custom

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.8 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC
SimplePortal 2.2.1 © 2008-2009
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!