Jump to content
Chuck

**Banned Kit Manufacturers on MSW - Pirated KITS Prohibited **

Recommended Posts

Just too funny!!!

 

To sum this up in simple terms and to characterize each forum based on their moral aptitudes.

 

On MSW we take a strong stance against the practice of intellectual property theft and pirating of kits.  As a private forum we choose to not allow members who believe this practice is perfectly fine and thus promote it by their actions and comments.

 

On Ships of scale its the opposite as you just saw....they take a strong stance in favor of those parties who openly steal kit designs and other intellectual property in order to make the stuff cheaper for them to buy.   If you are of the opinion that this is wrong and wish to state that on their forum you are no longer welcome.   The admin on that forum would like to remain a haven for the unethical pirating of kits and they aim to censor all and any evidence that might help educate their newer members who dont yet know of these practices.  

 

I dont know about you but I would much rather be on this side of that argument....and a member here rather than there or even on both.   Its a really immoral and unethical stance that they take as a general rule and guideline.   It actually states this in their guidelines.....to paraphrase...if you arent willing to take a blind eye towards piracy like we do and never mention that it takes place, and never post any topic or statement that might imply it actually exists....you cant be member.   SOS prides itself on looking the other way.   If you insist on living your life on an ethical path, you can not be a member here.

 

image.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Jack12477 said:

 

Edit Looks like someone edited my post above cuz that is not the wording I originally entered .

I’ve seen this before, why don’t these posts show that they have been edited by an admin? I realize this is the wrong  thread, but it mainly happens related to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, VTHokiEE said:

I’ve seen this before, why don’t these posts show that they have been edited by an admin? I realize this is the wrong  thread, but it mainly happens related to this.

We have magic software that recognises certain words and then gives a description of the said forum. ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, James H said:

We have magic software that recognises certain words and then gives a description of the said forum. ;) 

Ah okay I understand; I do think it’d be nice to recognize that it was edited but maybe that’s not possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, James H said:

We have magic software that recognises certain words and then gives a description of the said forum. ;) 

Unfortunately the AI software does a poor job because it made my post syntactically poor. Example 

" Which that forum that advocates model piracy forum are these posts in ?  "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Jack12477 said:

Unfortunately the AI software does a poor job because it made my post syntactically poor. Example 

" Which that forum that advocates model piracy forum are these posts in ?  "

It's not AI, it's manually entered. Unfortunately, we can't count for every grammatical use or we'd be creating filters for hours!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thread on the "other forum" about ZHL model kits has been blocked from further input.  The thread was then "cleaned up" by the admins of the "other forum" by deleting any member posts that presented "embarassing information" or which asked "embarassing questions" about ZHL. 

 

I know that at least one "deleted" member post did not contravene any rule or regulation published by the "other forum".  I know this because the member post was mine, and I attach it below for scrutiny.

 

It seems that I have been unfairly discriminated against by the admins of that forum, who deleted my message and censored the thread to prevent me from benefiting from dialog with friends on that forum.  What do you think?

 

If anyone else has been "censored" without breaking the published rules of that forum, do you have evidence to prove it?

Screenshot_20200126-212149_Samsung Internet.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way....the reason why we do this with regard to a certain forum or even a certain vendor....is because every time those entities are even mentioned they threaten a lawsuit.  To avoid this problem....even though there is no legal basis for that....we prevent the software from ever allowing the mention of these companies or sites.  For example.....when a member here posted that the products they bought from that company were substandard....which they were..They were garbage...we were contacted to remove the post on threat of a lawsuit.  They wanted to basically remove all and every negative opinion by threat of a lawsuit.....

 

SO......we just made sure we would never be subjected to that by making it impossible for those names to ever appear on the forum.  Sorry for the inconvenience and sometimes funny way it may appear.....but if we sneeze the wrong way...they threaten us with lawyers.   But pirating and stealing intellectual property.....perfectly fine.

 

 

 

Chuck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, James H said:

This is the sort of cafe the admin of said forum would happily frequent:

 

pics_032_clean_790.jpg

Is that the Cafe outside which their Harley David & Son motorcycles are often parked?

Edited by RobZorba

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, that other forum manages to get an awful lot wrong about copyright after conducting so much supposed research. Three false assertions were made there in just the past few hours.

 

1. 

Quote

everything here is copyright protected

No, it isn't, at least not in the USA. Standards for what is and is not considered protected creative content are defined on the US Copyright Office web page. US copyright recognizes eight general categories of creative work:  

(1) literary works;

(2) musical works, including any accompanying words;

(3) dramatic works, including any accompanying music;

(4) pantomimes and choreographic works;

(5) pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works;

(6) motion pictures and other audiovisual works;

(7) sound recordings; and

(8) architectural works.

Excluded works include "any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied." Forum discussions typically center on ideas, concepts, and principles (excluded from protection)) and are not literary works.

 

2. 

Quote

Not a registered copyright that is the only one that stands in a court of law.  

Wrong again. In the US, copyright protection is automatic, does not have to be registered, and will most certainly be held valid in a court of law.

 

3. 

Quote

keep in mind the line between selling something (commercial use) and giving it away which falls under (academic use)

This is a false distinction. The proper distinction is between fair and unfair use, and a guiding principle in determining whether a use is fair or not is whether the copyright holder is financially harmed by the use. If you were to give away creative content, even in an academic context, that the recipient would otherwise have to pay for, you would be financially harming the copyright holder and in violation of fair use.

 

The members of a certain forum are making the issue seem far more complex than it actually is. Bottom line: IP theft is wrong. What is so difficult to grasp about that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, ccoyle said:

The members of a certain forum are making the issue seem far more complex than it actually is. Bottom line: IP theft is wrong. What is so difficult to grasp about that?

 

Truer words have never been spoken!  Well, that may be a tad much, but I agree completely.  The lengthy discussion (more of a monologue) concerning copyrights strayed far from the original purpose.  To summarize what they got correct:

 

Any commercial product which is sold for profit and is based upon a copyrighted set of materials held by an institution (such as a museum) or individual may require some form of licensing agreement with the copyright owner.  This would include a model kit where kit drawings and plans are derived from the originals held by an institution which asserts a copyright interest in the original source.  This would also apply to the model kit drawings and materials for which the developer asserts a copyright to the items.  Any infringement of that copyright is wrong, and indeed in the terms of use said site specifically states that it is not permissible to sell your copy of the plans your purchased for a model kit.

 

What they get wrong, though, is that it is legally acceptable for you to sell your personal copy of the plans (not a copy, but your plans you purchased) to another member.  They also missed on the whole issue of intellectual property theft - the sale by one business of materials copied in total from the materials developed for commercial use by another entity.

 

I for one have a tough time trying to reconcile the the two conflicting perspectives.  I can understand that they do not want to be in the position of "policing" the industry.  I have no problem with that.  I do, however, think that they go to far in actively promoting (to varying degrees) some of the more obvious perpetrators of IP theft.  It just don't make sense!  They censor members for offering contrary interpretations, yet seemingly condone the commercial practice in question.  Free speech be damned, so to speak, unless it toes the party line.  They repeatedly bash other fora (I think that's the plural for forum?) for taking a firm stance against the practice as being bullies and worse (have you read the anti-cyber bullying section in their terms?) yet engage in that practice themselves. 

 

Oh, well.  I guess I have stirred the hornets nest over there for the last time.  It is interesting to see the "debate" continue with only one viewpoint able to participate.

 

To quote myself, "Life, like diapers, sometimes fills with undesirable products.  A change and before you know it, fresh as new!"

 

(Feel free to use the quote with appropriate attribution)

Edited by trippwj
Fixed a few typos. Sorry about that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some decades ago I attended a lecture presented by the then Chair of the Copyright and Patent Law department at Columbia University Law School. The subject of his lecture was Patents and Copyrights under US law. To begin his lecture and explain Copyright, he gave this example,

 

"You are a kid away at Summer Camp,  you get a Postcard and on one side you write your parent's name and address,  on the reverse side you write

 ' Hi, having a great time here at Camp Run-a-Muck ! Weather is great ! Love Joey'

You then put a postage stamp on it and mail it.

What you just wrote is now Copyright !" 

 

His 2nd example was this;

 

"You go on vacation to the Rocky Mountains and while there you take several rolls worth of pictures. You then come back home, take your rolls of vacation photos to the camera store to be developed and printed. Once your photos are developed and printed, they are now Copyright"

 

"Because in both examples you have placed your original "work" into a medium and published it"  

 

He then spent the rest of his lecture explaining Copyright, its origins, meanings, etc. and why his simplistic examples were Copyright. It was a very informative lecture. 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Jack12477

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shocking. Deleting posts and closing threads, banning people for having a different opinion. This is a massive issue on its own, beyond the support for IP theft. Maybe it is happening on a grander scale and on other subjects as well.

 

Forum: "a meeting or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged."

Sure, as long as the ideas or views are the same as those of the administrators.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their latest post is to get a Cease and Desist court order againt this group to prevent us from copying posts from their forums and quoteing them over here. Unfortunately for them, opinions cannot be Copyright. And if they were every News organization in the world would be libel since they all quote from one another.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, reading all this... is there any legal way to contact the owner of the server to have such a fraudulent website shut down?

Just a thought and maybe I am wrong that it is possible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Jack12477 said:

Their latest post is to get a Cease and Desist court order againt this group to prevent us from copying posts from their forums and quoteing them over here. Unfortunately for them, opinions cannot be Copyright. And if they were every News organization in the world would be libel since they all quote from one another.    

Any lawyer would laugh them out the room and charge them for their stupidity. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Nirvana said:

Hmm, reading all this... is there any legal way to contact the owner of the server to have such a fraudulent website shut down?

Just a thought and maybe I am wrong that it is possible. 

 

Let's just say that screenshots where they allude to banner-holders here pirating Bluenose are already with the company in question. The matter is out of my hands. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, James H said:

Any lawyer would laugh them out the room and charge them for their stupidity. 

Yes, especially since the screen grab clearly shows the attribution 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am intrigued about Dave Stevens’ assertion concerning Bluenose.  The present vessel is actually Bluenose II.  The original vessel was designed and built in the ‘20’s or 30’s.  In the 40’s and 50’s, prior to the construction of Bluenose II, A.J. Fisher produced and sold a Bluenose kit which of course applied to the original vessel, and for all that I know, these kits are still floating around.  Is it a copyright violation to buy and build one?

 

This is a hypothetical question as I have no interest in building a Bluenose model.

 

Roger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I have been banned from the other forum, let me respond to the owner here.

 

SNIP

So, someone investigate to see if trippwj has an ongoing build log here on that forum that advocates model piracy. I do not remember seeing anything in a long time

 

ANSWER - I may have a couple of old ones.  Please delete them.

 

SNIP
It is also my understanding that trippwj or other member(s) might be copying and pasting that forum that advocates model piracy material and pasting that material/screenshots on other media outlets such as MSW Facebook or where ever? If so, this is causing strife and conflict in the modeling community (for what purpose may I ask? - rhetorical) Then I wish to support a member being banned permanently for causing problems playing the game on both sides when we are trying our best to create a positive experience in the modeling industry especially for the new members. If the shoe fits, then wear it "I condemn it - stop trying to ruin the hobby with your nonsense".

ANSWER - Yes, I did post one of my own posts at MSW in response to a topic they had posted.  Not with any intent to cause strife but to offer a response with a slightly different perspective to the conversation.  Apparently you have staff monitoring the other forum as it was a very short time before I was told I ciuld be banned and I was banned.


FINAL COMMENT

Ultimately, which model kits people choose to buy and build is up to the individual.  The position taken at MSW is to try to protect the industry that develops the kits we build.  If the copycats take the business away those existing manufacturers may well have to close shop.  Margins on kit sales are pretty slim, and competition with cheap shipping rates from China is a major issue (real fact - look it up).

 

The theft of intellectual property is a serious issue in many industries.  We can condone it by buying the knockoffs or take a stand against it.  MSW has opted to take a stand against it (and yes, sometimes to an extreme.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/29/2020 at 10:23 AM, James H said:

We have magic software that recognises certain words and then gives a description of the said forum. ;) 

I found out about this the hard way - I sent a PM to a member I have never conversed with before asking about his Sovereign of the Seas (but I used the initials So  S ) (space intentional hopefully the software won’t pick it up) model but the software made it look like I was accusing him of pirating - or made it look like I was insinuating that he was part of that forum.... any way I never heard back from him and didn’t see the fiasco till I looked at the PM again because I had not heard from him.... so I’m not a big fan of editing my posts or PMs without permission or knowledge of the issues/ramifications -  Subsequent PMs go unanswered so it’s hard to know if he just is ignoring me or if there is some animosity there.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/26/2020 at 9:14 AM, glbarlow said:

I'm a member of both sites.  I copied your text and posted it on that forum that advocates model piracy.  They have a forum for copyright infringement, I posted it there.  Coming from the software industry I know pirating is a way of life for Chinese business, for some reason they seem to think there is nothing wrong with doing it.

 

I think it is very wrong to say members of that forum that advocates model piracy "endorse" or "embrace" stolen intellectual property, more likely some member (certainly not all) simply don't know.

Glenn, I removed my membership over there because I saw a post where Gerald Delacroix was chastising an owner of a Chinese kit company for producing  a kit of his latest monograph and the members and the admins were praising this guy for all his “efforts”. Even after Mr. Delacroix’s post instead of looking into the issue or verifying the claim they just deleted the thread..... so I think it’s pretty fair to say that the admins and most of the members over there do advocate piracy - At the very least they refuse to acknowledge it in any way, and they justify it with all kinds of rhetoric but mostly I think they just want to save a few bucks and don’t really care about the legal and moral issues as long as kits keep being produced. I initially  thought they just left it up to each individual to make their choices but after seeing that example I realized they are are taking a stand that I can not support.... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

 

I'm new here and still going through the forum. Sorry if this is answered elsewhere, but I'm looking for original company/manufacture who made "USS BONHOMME RICHARD - POF - Cross Section in Pear"? 

 

Thank you,

Yuri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Uri

 

But no kit exists yet for that.  There are only a few pirated chinese and russian kits  available.  They pirated the plans and design from Ancre publications without authorization or acknowledgements.  The ancre monographs were written for those to build them scratch and they include all plans and framing info.  These plans and parts design were stolen by those Chinese companies who now offer them as kits.  
 

I believe legit versions which have proper authorization and licensing from Ancre may be in the works.  But until they are released,  no kits are available which are not pirated and unethical to build.  Therefore they are prohibited on Model Ship World.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/29/2020 at 2:54 PM, Roger Pellett said:

I am intrigued about Dave Stevens’ assertion concerning Bluenose.  The present vessel is actually Bluenose II.  The original vessel was designed and built in the ‘20’s or 30’s.  In the 40’s and 50’s, prior to the construction of Bluenose II, A.J. Fisher produced and sold a Bluenose kit which of course applied to the original vessel, and for all that I know, these kits are still floating around.  Is it a copyright violation to buy and build one?

 

This is a hypothetical question as I have no interest in building a Bluenose model.

 

Roger

 

 It is NOT a copyright violation to buy and build an original Bluenose kit produced by Model Expo. 

The link below is to the ME Bluenose kit instructions. 

Page 4 of those instructions clearly states:  "Drawings are used with permission from the Fisheries Museum of the Atlantic"

 

https://modelexpo-online.com/assets/images/documents/MS2130_Bluenose_Canadian_Fishing_Schooner_NEW.pdf

 

 

FWIW, a couple of years ago, another member of  that other forum that advocates model piracy,  claimed the ME Bluenose kit was a violation.  I provided this same info and crickets.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They never let facts get in the way of their delusions.  That moron's latest statements say it not the fault of the pirates for stealing others work.  It is the original authors/designers fault for releasing the plans and designs into the market.  If we are foolish to release our stuff then its perfectly fine for others to steal it.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

About us

Modelshipworld - Advancing Ship Modeling through Research

SSL Secured

Your security is important for us so this Website is SSL-Secured

NRG Mailing Address

Nautical Research Guild
237 South Lincoln Street
Westmont IL, 60559-1917

About the NRG

If you enjoy building ship models that are historically accurate as well as beautiful, then The Nautical Research Guild (NRG) is just right for you.

The Guild is a non-profit educational organization whose mission is to “Advance Ship Modeling Through Research”. We provide support to our members in their efforts to raise the quality of their model ships.

The Nautical Research Guild has published our world-renowned quarterly magazine, The Nautical Research Journal, since 1955. The pages of the Journal are full of articles by accomplished ship modelers who show you how they create those exquisite details on their models, and by maritime historians who show you the correct details to build. The Journal is available in both print and digital editions. Go to the NRG web site (www.thenrg.org) to download a complimentary digital copy of the Journal. The NRG also publishes plan sets, books and compilations of back issues of the Journal and the former Ships in Scale and Model Ship Builder magazines.

Our Emblem

Modelshipworld - Advancing Ship Modeling through Research
×
×
  • Create New...