# Copyright Infringement



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 3, 2019)

This is just a reminder to everyone that posts that link to copyrighted data or published works such as music, books, other forms of literature and even pictures without the proper permissions can lead to copyright infringement. Not to insult anyone's intelligence but copyright infringement is the use of works protected by copyright law without permission, and includes the distribution, as well as the display of such works without permission. The holder of a copyright (the author / publisher of a book) for instance can use legal measures to stop and even penalize this forum, and its users for violating copyright laws. 

*This includes posting links to published books, without the express permission of the author or publisher.* If you are not paying for the book, they are probably not giving you permission to distribute it others for free. 

*Think about it. Would you want to put hard work and effort into writing and publishing a book, and then have a bunch of people basically steal it by downloading it for free?*

When quoting books, or someone else's work, it is imperative to also reference and cite that work when doing so. This can prevent a lot of hardship to our forum and membership. 

Thank you, and I hope you all understand this. If you ever have any questions regarding this, or whether something is okay to post, just ask any of the moderators or administrators. We will review it, and give you a thumbs up or down. We want a free and open exchange of information here, but we also have to ensure that we are not violating any laws, and that we remain an ethical source of information.

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
2 | Like Like:
8 | Winner Winner:
2 | Informative Informative:
1 | Useful Useful:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Crimea_River (Jan 3, 2019)

10-4 Chris. Thanks for the reminder.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Wurger (Jan 4, 2019)




----------



## Gnomey (Jan 4, 2019)



Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Tieleader (Jan 4, 2019)

Roger,Wilco!


----------



## P-39 Expert (Jan 10, 2019)

I have often wondered if it is a problem to post those performance graphs in wwiiaircraftperformance.org? Seems like the information would be public knowledge being official government information, but they all have "wwiiaircraftperformance.org superimposed on each item.

I always really liked that site and sure wouldn't want to run afoul of copyright laws from posting on a message board.  

I have emailed that site a couple of times but never got a reply. I believe some here know the principal(s), would be interested in their viewpoint.

Anybody know?


----------



## FalkeEins (Jan 10, 2019)

useful reminder, thanks...

anyone been on Facebook or Pinterest recently - its a total free-for-all. There's one chap 'Dan Case' reposts just about everything I've ever posted on my blogs, no links, no thanks, no credit - but realistically what can you do about it ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 10, 2019)

P-39 Expert said:


> I have often wondered if it is a problem to post those performance graphs in wwiiaircraftperformance.org? Seems like the information would be public knowledge being official government information, but they all have "wwiiaircraftperformance.org superimposed on each item.
> 
> I always really liked that site and sure wouldn't want to run afoul of copyright laws from posting on a message board.
> 
> ...



To be on the safe side just make sure to source it. Place a quick citation giving them credit.


----------



## P-39 Expert (Jan 10, 2019)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> To be on the safe side just make sure to source it. Place a quick citation giving them credit.


Right, thanks.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 10, 2019)

FalkeEins said:


> useful reminder, thanks...
> 
> anyone been on Facebook or Pinterest recently - its a total free-for-all. There's one chap 'Dan Case' reposts just about everything I've ever posted on my blogs, no links, no thanks, no credit - but realistically what can you do about it ?



That is up to how far you are willing to go about something. Many times the effort is not worth it. You can always politely ask to be references ot cited.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## special ed (Jan 10, 2019)

Joe Baugher's website joebaugher.com gives a good idea of how well our photos and media are or are not protected. He admits he is not a lawyer but one can see he has done much research. That's why when I start a thread with my photos I know I don't have to mark them copyright or all rights reserved as long as I own the originals. I can't stop any any from copying or using them. Only if they are published and sold. If someone makes money from my work, only then do have a case. Most of my flying model plans come from outerzone.co.uk and I can download and print as they are for my own "research and education". This will also be true if someone were to download and print my photos from this site. The staff here is correct that it is always proper to give credit and source.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## ODonovan (Jan 10, 2019)

As far as posting things to forums such as this... This is a "discussion board," so most copyrighted material can be posted under the "Fair Use Act," as long as it's a paragraph or two, or some photos, tables, or such, which don't constitute a major portion of the copyright owners' work. As an example, you couldn't post an entire chapter from a book. It is not required to post a disclaimer with the material, but it may be useful to post it if there is a significant chance of the copyright holder taking issue with having his/her material shared online.

Here is the "Fair Use Act" disclaimer:
"Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research."

As you can see, our purposes would fall under several of those categories...criticism, comment, teaching, scholarship, education, and research. I'll be darned if I know what the difference between teaching, scholarship, and education is, for purposes of sharing information. *scratches head* 



-Irish

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Builder 2010 (Jan 10, 2019)

Also, I don't believe any of our comments to one another result in any monetary profit which would definitely be a copyright problem.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 10, 2019)

Builder 2010 said:


> Also, I don't believe any of our comments to one another result in any monetary profit which would definitely be a copyright problem.



No, but distributing whole books for instance onlinefor free (which is what brought this discussion about) when the publisher clearly wants to sell his book rather than give it away for free does equal stealing.

Simply, source and give credit...

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Agree Agree:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## wrenchedmyspanner (Jan 10, 2019)

Dumb question perhaps but does this count towards art work as well?


----------



## special ed (Jan 10, 2019)

Yes. If you use the box art for documentation, for your kit, it is not infringement. If I use aviation art for my kit colors, no infringement.


----------



## wrenchedmyspanner (Jan 10, 2019)

Thank you.


----------



## GreenKnight121 (Jan 10, 2019)

A note about government published info & photos.

US government photos, including anything taken by a service-member during the course of their duties (not ones taken for personal reasons) are, by law, available for reproduction without further permission needed.

I would assume the same for documents, graphs, etc published by the US government.

Simply put, in the US, if it was created by a government agency using tax dollars, it belongs to the people.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Agree Agree:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## swampyankee (Jan 11, 2019)

GreenKnight121 said:


> A note about government published info & photos.
> 
> US government photos, including anything taken by a service-member during the course of their duties (not ones taken for personal reasons) are, by law, available for reproduction without further permission needed.
> 
> ...



US government publications may be public domain, but their availability may be limited to US nationals and, to make things more fun, be classified after publication. 

Non-US government publications may be copyrighted, as are many documents from Britain.


----------



## Barrett (Jan 11, 2019)

I hear ya. I've lost track of how many emails I've received with material from my 2009 Flight Journal article, "The Price of Doing Business" which addressed WW II training and losses (all AAF, very little recorded by USN.) FJ was attributed once--I never have been, and when I inform the sender(s) there's a deafening silence. I don't mind the info being disseminated but you'd think SOMEBODY would have the basic courtesy to acknowledge The Source. Grump.

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Agree Agree:
4 | Like List reactions


----------



## Crimea_River (Jan 11, 2019)

The efforts of people who research and publish work should always be acknowledged, whether there is a legal requirement to do so or not. It's common courtesy, something that's becoming a rare commodity on the net.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Agree Agree:
3 | Winner Winner:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 11, 2019)

Crimea_River said:


> The efforts of people who research and publish work should always be acknowledged, whether there is a legal requirement to do so or not. It's common courtesy, something that's becoming a rare commodity on the net.



Not enough *Winner* can be given here...


----------



## R Leonard (Jan 11, 2019)

Barrett said:


> I hear ya. I've lost track of how many emails I've received with material from my 2009 Flight Journal article, "The Price of Doing Business" which addressed WW II training and losses (all AAF, very little recorded by USN.) FJ was attributed once--I never have been, and when I inform the sender(s) there's a deafening silence. I don't mind the info being disseminated but you'd think SOMEBODY would have the basic courtesy to acknowledge The Source. Grump.



On the other hand, you ALWAYS credit me on the rare occasions I actually have something to contribute to one of your projects 

Rich

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## gumbyk (Jan 13, 2019)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> This is just a reminder to everyone that posts that link to copyrighted data or published works such as music, books, other forms of literature and even pictures without the proper permissions can lead to copyright infringement. Not to insult anyone's intelligence but copyright infringement is the use of works protected by copyright law without permission, and includes the distribution, as well as the display of such works without permission. The holder of a copyright (the author / publisher of a book) for instance can use legal measures to stop and even penalize this forum, and its users for violating copyright laws.
> 
> 
> Thank you, and I hope you all understand this. If you ever have any questions regarding this, or whether something is okay to post, just ask any of the moderators or administrators. We will review it, and give you a thumbs up or down. We want a free and open exchange of information here, but we also have to ensure that we are not violating any laws, and that we remain an ethical source of information.



For reference: What countries laws are we operating under? Copyright laws vary from country to country, and many WW1 autobiographies are now in the public domain for countries that copyright expires 70 years after the authors death.


----------



## Shortround6 (Jan 13, 2019)

I beleive the US has just decided that anything from 1923 or before id public domain (there may be some exclusions to this if extension were filed(?) 
Next year the US gets to see what 1924 was like


----------



## GrauGeist (Jan 15, 2019)

gumbyk said:


> For reference: What countries laws are we operating under? Copyright laws vary from country to country, and many WW1 autobiographies are now in the public domain for countries that copyright expires 70 years after the authors death.


I believe that Horse is working to be compliant with EU laws, as they appear to be stricter than the U.S. and other countries.

Reactions: Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## MIflyer (Jan 15, 2019)

I don't mind if people use material from my published articles, but then again I am the only one I know of that does that. My Air Classics article, Duncan's Hot Rod, was put on the 9th Photo Recon website, with my name as the author and with permission given by the magazine, which never paid me for the article, by the way. I wrote it as a tribute to a friend of mine and I was glad to see it; it required little effort on my part to write in any case.

However, there are some sellers on ebay who have been known to take public domain information, claim they have copyrighted it, and sell it, while claiming no one has the right to do so. Screw them!

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Agree Agree:
1 | Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Crimea_River (Jan 15, 2019)

Our Mosquito restoration group was featured in an Air Classics article as well. All they did was lift pieces of one of our quarterly reports from our website to publish the article. No permission was sought, nor was anyone interviewed for the article. Probably legal but it just felt wrong that someone could basically fill their pages with pictures and words that we wrote and sell magazines with it.


----------



## MIflyer (Jan 15, 2019)

My interest in writing for the magazines decreased quite a bit when I realized they pay a total of maybe $2000 for all the content in one issue. Even so, I would have still written more if Wings/Airpower was still around.

The Air Classics article was basically left over info I collected while writing a 4500 word article for Wings/Airpower. It was rejected by Aviation History with some pretty absurd comments (e.g., If you are flying a photo recon airplane, are intercepted, and have an engine shot out you still have not been in combat because you did not have guns). I was glad Air Classics took it and gave it a good treatment, because my friend and the other men from 9th Photo Recon just loved it.

I do wish they had done a better job of retyping it because I keep getting asked about their typos.


----------



## Snowygrouch (Jan 15, 2019)

P-39 Expert said:


> I have often wondered if it is a problem to post those performance graphs in wwiiaircraftperformance.org? Seems like the information would be public knowledge being official government information, but they all have "wwiiaircraftperformance.org superimposed on each item.
> 
> I always really liked that site and sure wouldn't want to run afoul of copyright laws from posting on a message board.
> 
> ...



I can only say with regards to that site, that I recodnise many of the pages on it because I have copied the orginals at archives in the UK. I would say (having looked in depth at the legal papers of these archives), that the website you mention is "sailing close to the wind". It is tricky as the "Crown Copyright" is often expired, but the archive retains a sort of "unnofficial" copyright of its own as they pay to store and preserve the files and are the legal custodians of them. They do not like people making high-quality copies online because they make a lot of money in copyright fees to publishers to use their images, if you use them for "non-profit" purposes the area becomes a bit fuzzy provided that each picture is properly cited and referenced (the rules are different for each archive).... but if I were you, I would avoid copy-pasting from "wwiiaircraftperformance.org" - I do not really know how they claim to be getting away with putting their own stamp on images clearly taken from archives, but as I said I believe them to be "sailing close to the wind" with their strategy on that one....

This is not legal advice, just my personal opinion.

A small "tip". Google image search allows you to search by copyright usage, (click on IMAGES>TOOLS>USAGE-RIGHTS). This way you can be (fairly) sure that an image of a plane or whatever is not infringing someones rights.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## MIflyer (Jan 15, 2019)

Numerous ebay resellers will take some public domain Govt material, stick an intro page on it with their logo, and claim it as theirs. I guess that with the capabilities of some of the later PDF manipulators we can strip that stuff off.


----------



## GrauGeist (Jan 15, 2019)

I've been seeing a great deal of WWII photographs ending up on Alamy and Shutterstock, too.

Not sure how they can legally do that, to be honest.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## gumbyk (Jan 15, 2019)

GrauGeist said:


> I've been seeing a great deal of WWII photographs ending up on Alamy and Shutterstock, too.
> 
> Not sure how they can legally do that, to be honest.



There's nothing stopping them from charging for something that is out of copyright, after all Shakespeare is well out of copyright by now.


----------



## GrauGeist (Jan 15, 2019)

gumbyk said:


> There's nothing stopping them from charging for something that is out of copyright, after all Shakespeare is well out of copyright by now.


That may be so, but I can't see how they can sell you an image and grant you commercial rights to something they don't own.

Like this image, for example, where licensing can be as high as $149 for commercial usage.

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## gumbyk (Jan 15, 2019)

GrauGeist said:


> That may be so, but I can't see how they can sell you an image and grant you commercial rights to something they don't own.
> 
> Like this image, for example, where licensing can be as high as $149 for commercial usage.
> View attachment 525905


Not sure what their arrangements with the Bundesarchiv are, or when Oscar Tellgmann died. 
Bundesarchiv terms of use do have a provision for copyright protection of the original owner. So there are a couple of legitimate avenues, but it does look a bit suspicious.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Ryewit (Jan 17, 2019)

Two words. "Fair Use". It is the law in the UK and by court decision in the US.

And always know that if a person can prove copyright ownership,, they can requested irt be removed.

Pictures only have a copyright with regard to the person who took the picture. Owning a picture in your collection does not give you any legal copyright protection. If you don't want it shown around, don't post on the internet.

Misrepresenting the full extent of the law is also a violation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Agree Agree:
1 | Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 17, 2019)

Again posting links to download complete books equals copyright violation, and is not allowed on this forum.

Thank you.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Like List reactions


----------



## Marcel (Apr 11, 2021)

Bumping this because of the recent misunderstanding of the rules.

We expect from all users to take their responsibility as it's un-doable for the forum team to check every post on the forum. As for copyright rules, we just take no chances. We're dealing with many law-makers internationally with each their own rules. So when in doubt, material will be removed without discussion and if someone refuses to send you a scan from a book, just get the book yourself.

The guidelines are when using sources:
- make sure you have permission to use them
- make sure this is legal both under US law and EU law
- When posting an external source, always mention the source and give them credit
- When in doubt, explicitly put the question forward to the forum team

Last but not least, as for any problem on the forum, don't just assume that we'll see it. Use the Report function if you think there is a copyright infringement or any other disobedience of the rules. That's what the function is for. I can assure you, we *will* see that notification if you do so.

Reactions: Winner Winner:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 11, 2021)

Just to add to Marcel’s post above...

This forum nor our staff (admins/moderators) tolerate copyright infringement. When found, we remove the post, and warn the person who is posting the works or requesting it.

We unfortunately missed the post in the Ta 153 thread. There are hundreds if not thousands of posts every day on this forum. It is impossible for us to read all of them. We also have lives outside of this forum, and families. We are not paid, so we have full-time jobs. We cannot be here at all times, and do not see every infraction.

Therefore use the report function and notify us of any issues that go unnoticed. It helps us out. It’s also better than getting mad at our forum and staff and saying you are going to not participate in the forum because we apparently allow actions or behavior that we most certainly do not allow.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
2 | Like List reactions


----------

