Tapio Does it again

[RandyT0001]

Now before anybody jumps down my throat I am NOT in any way supporting the ma, I disagree with his way of doing quite a lot but and it is a tenuous but, did he not gain the rights way back to reprint the OAF stuff? I agree with Perry that using the copy of his map is wrong, very wrong.

OAF does not own the copyrights to the works they published unless they have a written and signed agreement.

https://www.copyright.gov/title17/title17.pdf

§ 201 · Ownership of copyright
(c) Contributions to Collective Works.—Copyright in each separate contribution to a collective work is distinct from copyright in the collective work as a whole, and vests initially in the author of the contribution. In the absence of an express transfer of the copyright or of any rights under it, the owner of copyright in the collective work is presumed to have acquired only the privilege of reproducing and distributing the contribution as part of that particular collective work, any revision of that collective work, and any later collective work in the same series.

§ 204 · Execution of transfers of copyright ownership
(a) A transfer of copyright ownership, other than by operation of law, is not valid unless an instrument of conveyance, or a note or memorandum of the transfer, is in writing and signed by the owner of the rights conveyed or such owner’s duly authorized agent.

So if Tom did not give a written transfer of copyright to OAF then copyright remains with Tom.

 

[Gunner Scott]

Hi ya-

Was curious so I did a little digging around, and found a pic of the CH version and perry's version, I dont think they are alike but here are the maps for your own perusal.

Scott

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Looks like CH flipped the map - A10 on the printed map is P12 on the VASL map.

Layout seems the same, but the building, shellhole, rubble art is all different.

Printed map appears to lack sewer art.

 

[stuh42asl]

I would have to say that the layout is the same, and though the artwork is different, that is almost a 100% copy of the VASL map. Definately
a improved copy which begs to ask this question? Can copy right claims be made, I am no lawyer so I will not go there. But from my point of view, taking a picture of a peace of art, going home to repaint it almost identically and claiming it as yours and selling if for a profit without the origional owners approval is wrong. So this is for the origional owner to decide I guess.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

I would have to say that the layout is the same, and though the artwork is different, that is almost a 100% copy of the VASL map. Definately
a improved copy which begs to ask this question? Can copy right claims be made, I am no lawyer so I will not go there. But from my point of view, taking a picture of a peace of art, going home to repaint it almost identically and claiming it as yours and selling if for a profit without the origional owners approval is wrong. So this is for the origional owner to decide I guess.

It's referred to in copyright law as a "derivative work." Don't know the legalities at play here. Other than to suggest it's complicated. Some derivative works are permitted, others cross the line.

On the face of it, seems like it would be hard to copyright a map of a real world physical location.

 

[Gunner Scott]

RT owns the rights to everything published by OAF, so he owns the rights to CRS. But honestly, did anybody check to see when RT published his CRS map vs the VASL version?

 

[stuh42asl]

That is why lawyereeze is a whole different language, like trying to learn Klingon, when the only language you speak is French

 

[Proff3RTR]

I don't know about that but here's one thing I do know for sure. Somebody redrew the map using Hexdraw and posted it on VASL.info for all to use for free. I know that because it's been mentioned at least 5 times in 20 posts. We get it.

then you get that someone is gaining financial gain off the back of someone elses work, well done.

 

[Proff3RTR]

Do we know for sure Critical Hit didn't obtain permission from Tom?

yes, and he did not even though he could argue he did, that is simply not the case

 

[RandyT0001]

RT owns the rights to everything published by OAF, so he owns the rights to CRS. But honestly, did anybody check to see when RT published his CRS map vs the VASL version?

If a transfer occurred then RT owns the material in OAF written by Terry Treadaway. Unless Terry has a written copyright transfer agreements from a contributor to the newsletter he cannot sell nor transfer their copyrighted material to RT since the newsletter is a periodical publication, which is defined by as being a collective work.

§101 · Definitions

A “collective work” is a work, such as a periodical issue, anthology, or encyclopedia, in which a number of contributions, constituting separate and independent works in themselves, are assembled into a collective whole.

“derivative work” is a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications, which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a “derivative work”.


§ 103 · Subject matter of copyright:

Compilations and derivative works

(a) The subject matter of copyright as specified by section 102 includes compilations and derivative works, but protection for a work employing preexisting material in which copyright subsists does not extend to any part of the work in which such material has been used unlawfully.

 

[Gunner Scott]

On every OAF issue it says copy righted, this got OAF in hot water with AH back in the day for doing such things

If a transfer occurred then RT owns the material in OAF written by Terry Treadaway. Unless Terry has a written copyright transfer agreements from a contributor to the newsletter he cannot sell nor transfer their copyrighted material to RT since the newsletter is a periodical publication, which is defined by as being a collective work.

 

[RandyT0001]

On the face of it, seems like it would be hard to copyright a map of a real world physical location.

Rand McNally sells copyrighted road maps of real world physical locations at every Walmart in North America.

 

[RandyT0001]

On every OAF issue it says copy righted, this got OAF in hot water with AH back in the day for doing such things

Do you know why OAF got in hot water for doing that?

 

[Gunner Scott]

If I recall correctly, it was over the Japanese stuff they had worked on with Wild Bill Wilder, perhaps more but I don't remember right off the bat. But this is a pitmann type thread, so I am sure he will be in here soon to tell us what he thinks.

Do you know why OAF got in hot water for doing that?

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Rand McNally sells copyrighted road maps of real world physical locations at every Walmart in North America.

I would imagine they own the copyright to the artwork, the text, the placement of same, but not the juxtaposition of cities and roads on the map.

You would probably still get in trouble by doing a derivative map of your own, but raw data is available - I thought the government provides it.

 

[RandyT0001]

AS far as I know the USGS makes maps which are public domain. One can use that data as a source for maps.

 

[sfcmikej]

On the face of it, seems like it would be hard to copyright a map of a real world physical location.

Not at all Michael. The physical location cannot be copyrighted but the map can be. The map is work product and intellectual property. Surveying companies make money every day re-surveying and drawing a map of land that has been surveyed countless times. This is in part because the previous maps belong to someone else and cannot be used without permission.

Mike

 

[Proff3RTR]

Hi ya-

Was curious so I did a little digging around, and found a pic of the CH version and perry's version, I dont think they are alike but here are the maps for your own perusal.

ScottView attachment 2284 View attachment 2285

not at home so can not show a vasl snap shot of my version of the map but the CH version is all but 100% the same. It is as it is, up to y'all if you wish to splash the cash on a dodgy number.

 

[Philippe D.]

The dodginess of CH's practice is nothing new, and I doubt anybody learned anything more from this thread, apart from the specifics of this one publication. Some people will defend CH no matter what, and some won't buy anything from them. I doubt this thread will have convinced anybody of switching sides.

 

[Proff3RTR]

The dodginess of CH's practice is nothing new, and I doubt anybody learned anything more from this thread, apart from the specifics of this one publication. Some people will defend CH no matter what, and some won't buy anything from them. I doubt this thread will have convinced anybody of switching sides.

That is more than understood, but every time this sort of thing happens it should I feel be highlighted and everyone made aware that CH is up to its old tricks again.