If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
So why are the plans no longer avilable?
More than likely they were withdrawn out of a fear over liability or the owners just couldn't justify the time and expense of supporting them. Whatever the reason, Bob is right. Intellectual property law serves the public good. That's the reason the Constitution gives Federal government control of copyright and patents - to encourage the "useful arts and sciences." If Burt wants to put the EZ plans in the public domain, he's free to do so. No one else. For all the jawing about "information should be free" - and there is in fact a TON of taxpayer-funded (nothing's free) aeronautical information available for the downloading from NASA and the dot-gov sites, including AC 43 and the AIM/FAR - there doesn't seem to be a single "open source" airplane design. The closest are arguably the Pietenpol Air Camper, Evans VP-1, and Bowers FlyBaby, but the plans aren't *free.* Very reasonably priced, but *not* free. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Excuse me for being stupid, but why keeps a person from selling a set of
plans they bought and built with? Fred "Corrie" wrote in message om... So why are the plans no longer avilable? More than likely they were withdrawn out of a fear over liability or the owners just couldn't justify the time and expense of supporting them. Whatever the reason, Bob is right. Intellectual property law serves the public good. That's the reason the Constitution gives Federal government control of copyright and patents - to encourage the "useful arts and sciences." If Burt wants to put the EZ plans in the public domain, he's free to do so. No one else. For all the jawing about "information should be free" - and there is in fact a TON of taxpayer-funded (nothing's free) aeronautical information available for the downloading from NASA and the dot-gov sites, including AC 43 and the AIM/FAR - there doesn't seem to be a single "open source" airplane design. The closest are arguably the Pietenpol Air Camper, Evans VP-1, and Bowers FlyBaby, but the plans aren't *free.* Very reasonably priced, but *not* free. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
As an engineer, I am very disappointed that you as another engineer doesn't
appreciate the intellectual property concept more than others. As an employee you don't own anything. Your employer is reimbursing you for your ideas, both good and bad. How many of your ideas or designs were completely useless to your company? did you give back your 'good money' for those designs?? I did not think so. Your employer is taking a risk on you that you will be productive and come up with something that is of tangible value to them. That's how they manage to pay you when your just being creative to no profit. Now, just when you design something they can market - you also run out the back door and sell copies of the prints to others, or even post them on the internet for public information, how do you think this will be acknowledged by your employer. Or even if one of your competitors 'copies' the design - but because of having a larger facility they can mfg it cheaper, hence sell it cheaper. Whose do you think the public will buy? How long will you be getting your 'good pay' as long as this is happening? Lets not even get into the legal liabilities aspect of a 'bootleg' copied plans built aircraft. heaven forbid, a fatal accident occurs, who do you think is going to get sued? even if they have 100% proof the plans were illegally copied, illegally sold/distributed, probably even modified by the builder or new 'designer', (do you think the family of the deceast cares about the industry? they just want money from anyone they can link to the accident) the lawsuits would still make a few lawyers rich at the cost of the everyone in this sport/hobby/industry. Sorry, for rambling. I don't post often, but I just had to say this. Jeff 'Snoopy' T "Jay" wrote in message om... If I take someones car, I'm denying him use of that property, but if I take a picture of it, than he's had no loss. There are other ways to make money with plans other than hoping that nobody in the world ever draw something similar or copy it. You can sell support, by the hour, or per call, or manufacture key componants needed to complete the kit, or simply be first to market. Most people in the world have no concept of intellectual property. The value of something is simply what you have to pay to get it, and if there is a less expensive way to buy something, they'll do that. I wish it wasn't true, and I wish I didn't have to have locks on my doors, but thats world we live in. Best bet is to accept this and work accordingly. As an engineer, most of my work product is simply designs or ideas, and I realize my value is that the ideas can be made into physical objects that people trade for money. My company pays me good money to do that design for them, but they give me nothing if they use it more than once. I understand thats the deal, and it works out okay. osite (RobertR237) wrote in message ... In article , (Jay) writes: Okay, now I get you. I meant to say that somebody should post the plans for a "Long EZ like" plane- The Extended E-ZEE. It just happens to also be a tandem seat canard of composite construction much like a lot of other copies of that ubiquitous airplane. Information needs to be free. [beware, troll ahead] We have to get away from business models that depend on the enforcement of unenforceable laws, if forces business people into bed with law-makers (politicians). BULL ****! TOTAL BULL ****! Law or no law, you should have no rights to intellectual property any more than you have a right to take a pesons car. Making a copy of the planes and calling it something else is no less theft than stealing his car. Those plans are NOT information, they are the results of somebodys work and as such deserve protection and compensation. Would you work for free? I doubt it but even if you do, would you accept being forced to do so? Bob Reed www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site) KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress.... "Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice, pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!" (M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman) |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Jay wrote:
If I take someones car, I'm denying him use of that property, but if I take a picture of it, than he's had no loss. That is not necessarily correct. You may be denying him/her the opportunity to sell you a photo of the car. It's that lost sale that he/she loses. Most people in the world have no concept of intellectual property. Ignorance is no excuse. The value of something is simply what you have to pay to get it, and if there is a less expensive way to buy something, they'll do that. If they want to pay someone else to design an airplane for them, and that designer charges less, there's no issue. (Actually, there's no issue if they charge more, either.) The problem is when the designer's work product, namely the design, is used without compensating the designer. That's IP theft. If the designer sells a builder one set of plans with a contract stipulating that only one aircraft can be built using those plans, and then the builder builds more than one (or gives the plans to another who does so), then the original contract has been violated and the designer's IP has been stolen. I wish it wasn't true, and I wish I didn't have to have locks on my doors, but thats world we live in. Best bet is to accept this and work accordingly. By that logic, you should realize that laws against burglary aren't going to prevent all burglaries, and therefore you should just accept that sometimes people's stuff gets taken from them and that the burglary statutes are a waste of time and police shouldn't waste time chasing burglars. As an engineer, most of my work product is simply designs or ideas, and I realize my value is that the ideas can be made into physical objects that people trade for money. My company pays me good money to do that design for them, but they give me nothing if they use it more than once. I understand thats the deal, and it works out okay. Not everyone works your way. The value of your work product isn't that it "can be made into physical objects that people trade for money." (Although that may be why your employer pays for your work product.) Think about a movie theater. Assume you paid $7 for a ticket. Did it cost $7 to manufacture that ticket? No freakin' way. So what did you buy? Ans: the right to view (one time) the intellectual property of the movie maker in that theater at a particular time. Should you be able to copy what you viewed and show it to yourself (or others) over and over again? No. The IP owner didn't agree to that in the "contract" that covers the ticket you paid $7 for. Russell Kent |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
In article _yn1b.223504$Ho3.28382@sccrnsc03, "Frederick Wilson"
writes: Excuse me for being stupid, but why keeps a person from selling a set of plans they bought and built with? Fred Probably the arrangement made at the time of purchase. You buy the plans with an agreement to use them once and once only. Depending on the purchase contract, if you never use them you might be able to transfer them. Bob Reed www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site) KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress.... "Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice, pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!" (M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman) |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
(Jay) writes: If I take someones car, I'm denying him use of that property, but if I take a picture of it, than he's had no loss. You were not talking about taking a picture of the complete aircraft, you were talking about the plans and their use. They are property, no less than the car is and you have NO legal or moral right to them. If you take them and copy them it is a loss and no matter how you try to deny it, it is a fact. There are other ways to make money with plans other than hoping that nobody in the world ever draw something similar or copy it. You can sell support, by the hour, or per call, or manufacture key componants needed to complete the kit, or simply be first to market. Drawing something similar is one thing but copying it is another. The plans are a result of mental and some physical effort to produce. It is no different that someone building a structure or any other physical object. Once built, the structure is not free for use by all who wish. It belongs to the owner and should be used or not used at his discretion. If he wishes to sell support it is his business but if not, it should not be your choice to take the use anyway. I have heard this same stupid argument regarding the software that I have created over the years and it is a total bull**** concept. If I expend the effort and hours to create a new and useful program, what damn right do you have to take it and do as you please with it. If you want a similar program then get off your lazy fat ass and create it yourself. Don't steal mine and don't copy mine. The same goes for stealing or copying an aircraft design. Most people in the world have no concept of intellectual property. Clearly you rank among those. The value of something is simply what you have to pay to get it, and if there is a less expensive way to buy something, they'll do that. Buy it, you have not been discussing buying you have been trying to justify stealing it by copying it. I wish it wasn't true, and I wish I didn't have to have locks on my doors, but thats world we live in. Best bet is to accept this and work accordingly. As an engineer, most of my work product is simply designs or ideas, and I realize my value is that the ideas can be made into physical objects that people trade for money. My company pays me good money to do that design for them, but they give me nothing if they use it more than once. I understand thats the deal, and it works out okay. You have a contract with your company that gives them the legal and moral rights to your intelectual property. They pay you for your ideas and you gladly accept that payment. You find that arrangement to be OK since you are selling your ideas to a company and are getting paid rather they use them or not. You on the otherhand would deny that same payment to others who sell their intellectual property the same way you do, just to individual buyers. You are guaranteed a customer by the contract with your company and are isolated from most problems with your ideas and designs by that same company. The maker of the plans, which you don't think you should have to pay for, had to do the design without a guaranteed market, market those plans, and accept the potiential problems associated with them. They get nothing until someone pays for their work by buying the plans. You would have them do so for free? If you are not willing to pay for the plans then either don't build the plane or show us how commited you are to your concept and design your own and give the plans away for free. If you design your own, make it your design and not a copy of someone elses with a few cosmetic changes. Start from scratch and design it with proven design concepts without stealing from other peoples actual plans. Bob Reed www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site) KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress.... "Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice, pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!" (M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman) |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Ron Wanttaja wrote:
One niggling problem of the all-electronic approach is that there are still folks out there who don't mess with computers. They'll want hard-copy plans, so you're still stuck with dragging a master copy to Kinkos every once in a while. Nah, mail 'em a CD and a letter telling them to go to Kinko's with the "shiny plastic disc." :-) Russell Kent |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
That's the deal because you're an *employee*. They own your designs.
If you were an independent contractor, you could *license* the design and get paid for each copy. (Assuming that you were successful in negotiating that deal.) But most experienced people know that negotiating a deal that's difficult to verify or enforce is a recipie for disaster (AKA giving lawyers lots of money). I had some first hand experience with that when we, a small company, brought some ideas to a large company to see if they would be interested in licencing the technology. In order to get in the door in the first place we had to agree to sign their NDA which is common place. So a year later they come out with a product that has this feature we were showing them. Their response was "Prove we weren't already working on it in our own R&D." We realized that would be pretty tough to do considering their legal departments budget was larger than our yearly gross, so we learned from that experience and moved on. What you don't realize is that the designs - the ideas themselves - have intrinsic value. The VP-1 plans on my shelf have value above and beyond the cost of the paper and ink even if I never build a plane from those plans. Thats true in theory with perfect enforcement of property rights, but in the real world, its the ideas that give a manufacturer an advantage to make something sooner, or better than the others that counts. In some countries if you're big enough you can sue for protection in that market, but everywhere else, its open season on the idea. I think the Japanese have it figured out, they never try to license any ideas, they just adopt other peoples, make incremental improvements and sell goods. You want to get the technology, you're going to have to try to reverse engineer it. Sure they get US patents, but there are lots or ways to circumvent the disclosure requirement without breaking the letter of the law. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
All I Wanted For Christmas Were Inverted Spins | [email protected] | Aerobatics | 3 | December 29th 04 07:40 PM |
First Two Aero Lessons This Weekend (Long) | David B. Cole | Aerobatics | 12 | December 3rd 04 01:18 AM |
Vans RV4 or RV6 wanted | Joe | Home Built | 0 | August 17th 03 01:02 PM |
Free aircraft plans? | Gil G. | Home Built | 0 | July 23rd 03 04:18 PM |
Murphy Rebel Wanted | Joe | Home Built | 0 | July 8th 03 06:21 AM |