locost_bryan
|
| posted on 6/3/07 at 03:36 AM |
|
|
Presumably Haynes own the rights to their name, so would legitimately own the rights to the name "Haynes Roadster". As such, they should
be able to control the use of the name.
However, it sounds like they may not be able to stop someone selling parts (as replacement parts?) or kit.
I understand Ford are trying the same stunt with the Mustang name, threatening to sue anyone who uses the name to sell non-original parts, or even to
provide maintenance or restoration.
The difference is that Ford paid for the design from scratch - Haynes have at best refined an existing design.
Bryan Miller
Auckland NZ
Bruce McLaren - "Where's my F1 car?"
John Cooper - "In that rack of tubes, son"
|
|
|
|
|
chrisg
|
| posted on 6/3/07 at 11:36 AM |
|
|
There seems to have been a misunderstanding.
My original post wasn’t intended as some sort of threat, I was just pointing out the wording of the disclaimer in the book. Haynes are not threatening
anyone with legal action and, yes, the wording is very similar to the wording appearing in the 2nd Edition of “Build Your Own Sports Car for as little
as £250”.
Of course I think that a year of my work should have some sort of protection, but I was more worried about forum members being open to legal
action.
Everyone involved with the Roadster is a car nut at heart, and I can’t imagine anyone getting into trouble.
I hope this clears the situation up
Cheers
Chris
|
|
|
omega 24 v6
|
| posted on 6/3/07 at 12:36 PM |
|
|
quote:
Of course I think that a year of my work should have some sort of protection
I'd agree totally with that part of your statement and without being nosey surely you have been taken care of by Haynes or in royalties on the
book. I don't expect you to answer this statement in any way and don't mean to offend but you are right in your above statement.
If it looks wrong it probably is wrong.
|
|
|
Tralfaz
|
| posted on 6/3/07 at 02:14 PM |
|
|
I agree as well and I also support the notion that if a company wanted to start fabbing frames to your the new book specs, as a matter of decency if
nothing elsr that some sort of licensing fee would be in order,perhaps the cost of a book per frame.
I do however find the whole copywriting notion a bit ironic given the origins and sorted history of the product.....
|
|
|
designer
|
| posted on 6/3/07 at 03:07 PM |
|
|
What 'protection' did Ron get when all the firms jumped onto the 'locost' band wagon?
|
|
|
dnmalc
|
| posted on 6/3/07 at 09:17 PM |
|
|
I appreciate the sentiments behind both sides of this discussion but I rather than people worrying about who is making a quick buck out of Colin
Chapmans basic work I think we should thank Chris G for providing us with a new reference against which we can judge our own work.
|
|
|
ProjectX
|
| posted on 6/3/07 at 09:37 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by dnmalc
I appreciate the sentiments behind both sides of this discussion but I rather than people worrying about who is making a quick buck out of Colin
Chapmans basic work I think we should thank Chris G for providing us with a new reference against which we can judge our own work.
OK, Not wanting to P ppl off:
Colin Chapmans ideas were great, if not we wouldnt be here.
RC was an inspiration to me and I am sure thousands of others. (I bought the book in 1996)
My philosophy was to build a car from scratch, i am doing it. It is based on RC's book, Rorty's designs, Mc Sorley's plans etc etc
etc.
Not all of us want to build their own, but if they do then fine! If I build the new book version in 5mm wall tube  and sell one every day you can
try to sue me I dont care! I am not selling it as anthing else, it is a chassis. We have all broken laws of copyright/IP/DR etc etc.
I say lets keep it all friendly keep the spirit alive and good luck to all.
Good luck for the new book!
Good luck for all building new/old whatever
Mr B
|
|
|
kb58
|
| posted on 7/3/07 at 12:02 AM |
|
|
quote:
We have all broken laws of copyright/IP/DR etc etc. ]
You were doing fine until that... is this a reason or justification? Either way, it's not something to hold up as why to do it.
[Edited on 3/7/07 by kb58]
Mid-engine Locost - http://www.midlana.com
And the book - http://www.lulu.com/shop/kurt-bilinski/midlana/paperback/product-21330662.html
Kimini - a tube-frame, carbon shell, Honda Prelude VTEC mid-engine Mini: http://www.kimini.com
And its book -
http://www.lulu.com/shop/kurt-bilinski/kimini-how-to-design-and-build-a-mid-engine-sports-car-from-scratch/paperback/product-4858803.html
|
|
|
Doug68
|
| posted on 7/3/07 at 07:26 AM |
|
|
One way around the whole copyright issue would be for a group of people to produce an "open source" chassis based on the idea that anyone
could do whatever they wanted with it. And have a licensing statement to that effect on the project to start with.
It shouldn't be too hard a job to come up with something sufficiently different to demonstrate enough originality to avoid legal complaints from
the rest of the industry.
Personally I think the 7 concept is so used & abused now that it's basically public domain knowledge anyway.
Or maybe someone would like to donate a design to the world?
BTW There are other 'open source' cars on the web but they're mostly based on whacky ideas and don't get finished.
|
|
|
Dick Bear
|
| posted on 7/3/07 at 09:40 AM |
|
|
With all due respect for everyone involved in this meandering thread...
Claiming this and claiming that without authentic legal documentation to back up those claims is for all practicle purposes p!ssing into the wind. If
this represents a truly unique original design and if the the author feels threatened by others who might wish to capitalize on it for commercial gain
then why didn't the creator apply for patent protection before disclosuer?
My guess is, as a result of preliminary patenting process it became clear to the author(s) that there was no basis for claiming originality beyond the
far less stringent requirement associated with a claim of copywrite protection associated with the written document (book) created.
Without a legal classification to the contrary (patent or patent or patent pending) it seems obvious that claiming any protection beyond the printed
documents' copywrite is wishfull thinking on the part of the author(s). If there were more protection available to them, the author(s) would,
I'm confident, be the first to point that fact out.
Without that legal documentation I suggest that you are feel free to copy, fabricate and market commercially the designs to whatever degree you wish.
Just don't copy photographs, reprint text or state verbatum from the book without giving the author(s) their rightful due, including footnotes
and references.
Dick Bear
www.marketpointproductions.com
|
|
|
iank
|
| posted on 7/3/07 at 10:08 AM |
|
|
I agree, but I don't believe it is possible to patent a chassis design unless it has some aspect that is novel. A steel spaceframe chassis
isn't going to be patentable IMO there is way too much prior art back from ww2 aircraft onwards.
(Not a patent lawyer, but been on too many courses covering them )
As mentioned somewhere above you could register the design, but that is only for non-functional things like material finish, and decorative shapes.
--
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.
Anonymous
|
|
|
CraigJ
|
| posted on 7/3/07 at 11:01 AM |
|
|
Ok, wish id not started this thread now. Didnt mean to cause all this fuss.
Sorry to anyone who ive upset by starting this thread.
Craig.
|
|
|
Doug68
|
| posted on 7/3/07 at 01:04 PM |
|
|
You'd better blinking go and make a bunch of frames now to atone for it
|
|
|
flak monkey
|
| posted on 7/3/07 at 02:37 PM |
|
|
IPR is a minefield in itself and there are a lot of lawyers that make a lot of money just dealing with it. I doubt anyone on here has the appropriate
level of knowledge to claim one way or the other.
Syds got it right though, 5% is the change you need to prove its different to something else.
Sera
http://www.motosera.com
|
|
|
Uphill Racer
|
| posted on 7/3/07 at 11:26 PM |
|
|
Isnt this a load of fuss about nothing?
All a chassis needs to be is something stiff enough to hang correctly designed suspension on?
|
|
|
