Colonial Workshop plans

[mduren]

I have been cleaning out Dad's house and came across a stack of plans from Colonial Workshop. Apparently they sold these plans back in the 70's. They are all on 8-1/2 X 11 sheets. The plans are all early american and colonial stuff, mostly easy construction. The stack of plans is about an inch high. I am offering them for just the cost of postage to send them to you. I have only one set so the first one asking gets them.

Marv

[Joe Lyddon]

Sent you a PM..

[mduren]

Plans are taken

[triplefreak]

Hey Joe, head off to Staples & have me a copy of the set made.
I'll pay ya fer it.

[Joe Lyddon]

OK....

Don't want to break any Copyright rules.... we shall see...

[triplefreak]

Trust me, if it's from the 70's, no one ever bothered to renew the copyright on them. Besides, if you're making copies available for your friends, there's no limitations on them. As long as you're not making a profit on them, you have nothing to worry about.

[Beamer]

Not to hijack the thread, but Herb do you have a source for that information about not making a profit?

Everyone I've considered an expert on the subject (those in the publishing industry) seem to disagree with the claim that you have to be selling it to be violating copyright law. Now ... it really comes down to who'd bother to pursue you in that event, but I wanna make sure I have my facts straight about the legal ramifications for sure.

[Joe Lyddon]

Not to worry..... ;D ;D

I'll only charge you an arm and a leg... ;D

Might be cheaper to just scan & email... FOR FREE!! ;D ;D

[sawduster]

Actually, I believe that "intellectual property" that is copyrighted is protected from any sort of copying for distribution, whether for profit or not, for some number of years (75 seems to ring a bell) after the death of the author. You can legally give away or sell the original (i.e. second hand bookstores do that with books and musical recordings as well as computer games etc), but even in those cases any duplicates of the material made by the original purchaser should either transfer with the original or be destroyed.

Now, whether or not someone is gonna come after you for the violation is another thing. But, one should also be concerned about the medium via which the copying deal was struck as it may have some liability as well for allowing the illegal transaction to be negotiated.

[maxwellsmart007]

You cannot copy and distribute an article without violating copyright; the period of time in Canada that copyright is protected is at least 50 years after the death of the author - I think it's longer in the States.

I've heard of a fair-use clause in the US, but I know nothing about it.

[Joe Lyddon]

I guess I could always study each plan and then mail them to someone...

... relying on my photographic memory to remember them.

Yes? ;D ;D

[sawduster]

Jan 18, 2010 0:38:32 GMT -6 Joe Lyddon said:

I guess I could always study each plan and then mail them to someone...

... relying on my photographic memory to remember them.

Yes? ;D ;D

Or you could discuss your plans to violate copyright law via email instead of here. That way WoW is not "incriminated".

[Stretch]

I've always been under the impression that you can always make one copy for day to day use which allows you do archive the original. So perhaps you could make your copy then send the original to a safe place to be archived?

[Joe Lyddon]

Jan 18, 2010 9:13:04 GMT -6 sawduster said:

Jan 18, 2010 0:38:32 GMT -6 Joe Lyddon said:

I guess I could always study each plan and then mail them to someone...

... relying on my photographic memory to remember them.

Yes? ;D ;D

Or you could discuss your plans to violate copyright law via email instead of here. That way WoW is not "incriminated".

IIRC, I said I did NOT want to violate any Copyright laws...
That still stands...

[triplefreak]

Jan 17, 2010 15:18:14 GMT -6 maxwellsmart007 said:

You cannot copy and distribute an article without violating copyright; the period of time in Canada that copyright is protected is at least 50 years after the death of the author - I think it's longer in the States.

I've heard of a fair-use clause in the US, but I know nothing about it.

Hey Dude, you're way out of your league.
Works Originally Created and Published or Registered
before January 1, 1978
Under the law in effect before 1978, copyright was secured
either on the date a work was published with a copyright
notice or on the date of registration if the work was registered
in unpublished form. In either case, the copyright
endured for a first term of 28 years from the date it was
secured. During the last (28th) year of the first term, the
copyright was eligible for renewal. The Copyright Act of 1976
extended the renewal term from 28 to 47 years for copyrights
that were subsisting on January 1, 1978, or for pre-1978
copyrights restored under the Uruguay Round Agreements
Act (URAA), making these works eligible for a total term of
protection of 75 years. Public Law 105-298, enacted on October
27, 1998, further extended the renewal term of copyrights
still subsisting on that date by an additional 20 years, providing
for a renewal term of 67 years and a total term of protection
of 95 years.
Public Law 102-307, enacted on June 26, 1992, amended
the 1976 Copyright Act to provide for automatic renewal of
the term of copyrights secured between January 1, 1964, and
December 31, 1977. Although the renewal term is automatically
provided, the Copyright Office does not issue a renewal
certificate for these works unless a renewal application and
fee are received and registered in the Copyright Office.
Public Law 102-307 makes renewal registration optional.
Thus, filing for renewal registration is no longer required
to extend the original 28-year copyright term to the full 95
years. However, some benefits accrue to renewal registrations
that were made during the 28th year.
For more detailed information on renewal of copyright
and the copyright term, see Circular 15, Renewal of Copyright;
Circular 15a, Duration of Copyright; and Circular 15t, Extension
of Copyright Terms.

www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.pdf

[Beamer]

He was stating what he believed to be canadian law on the chance that it was similar here in the states. Take it easy on the guy, ok?

Also, you haven't answered my question above. Do you have a source for your claim above about not making a profit being okay?

[triplefreak]

I believe it's in that link I posted. I wasn't getting on the guy, it just didn't come out like I wanted it to. Sorry.

[maxwellsmart007]

I've got a thick skin, but I appreciate the defense, though, Beamer!

Triplefreak, the law you provided states:
Public Law 102-307, enacted on June 26, 1992, amended
the 1976 Copyright Act to provide for automatic renewal of
the term of copyrights secured between January 1, 1964, and
December 31, 1977

My understanding of this is that the copyrights secured before 1977 and after 1964 were automatically renewed in 1992 to provide for a copyright protection of 95 years. Public Law 102-307 made renewal registration optional, meaning that no action had to be taken to protect the copyright of works created prior to 1977. Therefore, any copyrighted work created after 1964 is protected for 95 years from its creation, or 70 years after the death of its author, whichever comes first.

Did a search, and found some good information in a table - not sure how accurate it is, however, as I don't really feel like researching US copyright law in depth:
www.copyright.cornell.edu/resources/publicdomain.cfm

[sawduster]

Guess I missed it by 5 years. Hate it when that happens.

Reason I even had an idea was that I was wondering when the works of one of my favorite authors, John Steinbeck, would become public domain so I could download electronic versions for free, and found that I likely would not be around by then. ;D

[maxwellsmart007]

Heck, Jerry - what books are you looking for? I've got a few Steinbeck ones around here...

But here's a good resource of books w/ expired copyrights...

www.gutenberg.org/catalog/