Legalities regarding casting

[impcon]

I hope that I am asking this question properly so that people don't get the idea that I am out to steal anyone else's hard work and designs. But does anyone know what the legalities are regarding making a mold from an obsolete resin casting? I have a resin 1956 IHC cab over truck body here that is obsolete ( the original caster of it quit many years ago ) and I would like to have someone make me several duplicates of it for myself ONLY! Is this allowed in the modelling community or do people get their knickers all in a knot at the mere idea? And what about recasting a model from an existing casting ( obsolete and out of production ) for resale? I am wanting some castings made for myself and I am not about to get into the marketing business as I have more than enough irons in the fire without getting into that - just a question that came to mind as I was typing my original question..

[ra7c7er]

It's really all a grey area. I have worked with copyrighting and licensing in the past and it all depends on pretty much on how nice the guy is you are copying. What many people don't realize is that you don't have to have a patent or copyright on something for it to be protected.

If you are making the cab for the sole purpose of using it yourself and you are not going to sell it you are 100% fine. If you are making it to sell and make profit from that is when they original caster could come after you but it all really starts with a cease and desist letter. Then if you don't it might go to court. But I doubt it would get that far.

The grey area comes in when you copy something to sell. Technically every resin caster that casts and sells resin copies of plastic parts from Revell or AMT or anyone else is infringing on copyright but it's not worth the time and money involved in a lawsuit. Their is a legal term for allowed copyright infringement but I forgot it.

You would be surprised how prevalent copyright infringement is in the everyday world just go to a art or craft show and every crafter you see using cartoon characters in their work is violating copyright and every person using images of soda cans or anything branded is in violation too.

[Modelmartin]

There are laws and such but the reality is that almost all resin casters are doing it to finance the hobby or supplement their income. There are several who do it full time and make an OK living at it. The majority of resin casters don't have the resources to go after someone who copies their work. Besides that, in a court of law one would have to prove damages. The only real consequences are for your reputation. If you are copying obsolete castings for your own use and maybe a few for your friends I would say you have no problem. You would be a true gentleman if you sought out the original caster and asked permission. There have been many cases over the years and even one epic flame war on this forum several years ago about one resin caster copying other people's work and claiming it as their own. It's all about good judgement and being respectful and it sounds like you have no problem with that.

The model companies are totally fine with resin bodies made from their kits because you always need to buy another of their kits to complete it. At one point Revell-ogram was sending test shots to several resin casters so that the resin would be ready right away when the kit was released!

[impcon]

Thanks guys. What has been said is pretty much what I thought but I really wanted to ask the opinion of those who probably know a lot more about this than I do. As I said, I have no interest in getting into selling nor would I ever give something to a caster to be copied if I thought for a minute that he would use the castings for profit. I fully agree that IF a person was to want to copy an old casting and sell the copies, he would be morally and ethically bound to contact or at least try to contact the poriginasl caster and I would think it only fair that he ( the original caster ) should be reimbursed perhaps in a commission or percentage for every model sold.

It's sad that many casters have gone out of business and their work is no longer available. I wonder how those people would feel if a reputable dealer was to contact them and ask for permission to reproduce their work? Someone said somewhere on this site recently that he has learned that when he sees a resin kit that he really likes, to buy it as quickly as possible because the model could become obsolete and history at any time due to circumstances beyond the caster's control such as a nartural disaster or heaven forbid - his sudden passing. Of course what it all boils down to is just what we can afford. I know that I spend more than enough money of models and I'll never getthem all built but possesion gives one the option of building even when that model is off the market.

[iBorg]

TECHNICALLY when you copy an artist's work you are, within the United States, violating copyright law. Its like if I sell photos printed from a CD of photos I bought from you. I am violating your copyright. If making a copy for yourself, it would more than likely fall under the same protection as copying a CD to your computers hard drive for YOUR use. Technically a violation, but the court won't hear such a violation. IF on the other hand, you either give or sell that copy to someone else, the court will hear the case if the owner of the copyright wishes to pursue it. Making a copy of a previous resin piece more than likely won't bring a prosecution because most resin casters know that they're in a gray area if they recast or modify the previous work of another entity. They more than likely don't have the legal right to cast the original that you copied. The defense is their modification makes their casting a new and original work. How much modification is required to make it a new work? I'm unaware of any court ruling that indicates how much modification would be required.

More specifically both parties are violating the trademarks of the manufacturer's. Even if the automaker is out of business, their trademark is more than likely still protected. For example, American Motors is an active trademark of Chrysler Corporation. Our hobby has been blessed with a casual ignorance of both trademark and copyright holders. I know of only a few times it has been applied to the hobby. The kit manufacturers buy licensing fees to the 1:1 manufacturers as well as the tire manufacturers. Royalty costs are the given reason why current Revell/Monogram kits don't have tire markings. As for the aftermarket only a few decal manufacturers have cleared their products. The cost of that clearance is why Slixx dropped Nascar decals.

MIke