signals Posted June 30, 2023 Share Posted June 30, 2023 Does anyone know why this got cancelled? Looks like a great scheme? https://www.scalemates.com/kits/kinetic-k48154-f-16a-mlu-dream-viper--1488764 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
flanker27 Posted June 30, 2023 Share Posted June 30, 2023 Scheme copy right issue Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Fiddler Posted June 30, 2023 Share Posted June 30, 2023 It has something to do with the artwork rights of the paintjob, as far as I heard... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Niels Posted July 1, 2023 Share Posted July 1, 2023 Correct. Kinetic couldn't come to an agreement with the scheme copyright holder. It is the correct thing to do, respecting copyright and not try to cut corners. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Scott Smith Posted July 7, 2023 Share Posted July 7, 2023 Military planes with copyrights? I guess they do things differently over there? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dave Williams Posted July 7, 2023 Share Posted July 7, 2023 It’s not a copyright on the aircraft itself. It’s a copyright on the special scheme by the artist who painted it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Scott Smith Posted July 7, 2023 Share Posted July 7, 2023 (edited) So I guess they hired it out? Not military guys doing it? Interesting. Makes me wonder about the Shaw Viper demo plane now. Wasn’t the whole deal with the Tamiya 1/32 Thunderbird kit over the same thing? I had read somewhere that a private organization that supports the Thunderbirds group got a copyright on the paint schemes. Edited July 7, 2023 by Scott Smith Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Steve McArthur Posted July 7, 2023 Share Posted July 7, 2023 The model kits are licensed by the aircraft manufacturer as a trademarked products. This was a change to US law about 15 years ago. Prior to that products developed with US tax dollars like military projects could not be trademarked. This is the fine print on a Tamiya F-16 box top. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Scott Smith Posted July 7, 2023 Share Posted July 7, 2023 Steve, I remember that 💩 show. Big stirrup in the aftermarket too. No longer “Wright R-1820” radial engine on packaging. Just 1820 radial engine now. Tamiya got the permission for the F-16, but not the Thunderbirds apparently? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ElectroSoldier Posted July 8, 2023 Share Posted July 8, 2023 (edited) Copyright owner wanted to make to much money out of it. Tried to get something for nothing. Ended up with nothing. Edited July 8, 2023 by ElectroSoldier Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Niels Posted July 8, 2023 Share Posted July 8, 2023 13 hours ago, Scott Smith said: So I guess they hired it out? Not military guys doing it? Special schemes can and have been initiated by civilians and military personnel alike. If the artist patents the scheme, he/she will have the copyright to it and thus "own" it. This is quite normal when it comes to artists in general. 7 hours ago, ElectroSoldier said: Copyright owner wanted to make to much money out of it. Tried to get something for nothing. Ended up with nothing. That is a dumb statement. It is only right that the artist retains the copyright to his/her work. Why should someone else capitalize on your work for free? I for sure would want to be compensated. And since hardly anyone has details on the negotiations, we should leave these speculations in the drawer. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Da SWO Posted July 8, 2023 Share Posted July 8, 2023 3 hours ago, Niels said: Special schemes can and have been initiated by civilians and military personnel alike. If the artist patents the scheme, he/she will have the copyright to it and thus "own" it. This is quite normal when it comes to artists in general. That is a dumb statement. It is only right that the artist retains the copyright to his/her work. Why should someone else capitalize on your work for free? I for sure would want to be compensated. And since hardly anyone has details on the negotiations, we should leave these speculations in the drawer. U.S. Navy was sued by Kieth Ferris years ago when the used his scheme on F-14's. IIRC they had to pay out. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Steve McArthur Posted July 8, 2023 Share Posted July 8, 2023 4 hours ago, Da SWO said: U.S. Navy was sued by Kieth Ferris years ago when the used his scheme on F-14's. IIRC they had to pay out. Got a link for that? It smells like BS to me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Da SWO Posted July 8, 2023 Share Posted July 8, 2023 1 hour ago, Steve McArthur said: Got a link for that? It smells like BS to me. I'll have to look, was back in the 80's or 90's. Why do you think I just made this up? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Scott Smith Posted July 8, 2023 Share Posted July 8, 2023 (edited) 10 hours ago, Niels said: Special schemes can and have been initiated by civilians and military personnel alike. If the artist patents the scheme, he/she will have the copyright to it and thus "own" it. This is quite normal when it comes to artists in general. Yea, I get it if Joe citizen designed and implemented it after being hired to do it. But if military personnel do it on military time, shouldn’t it belong to the military? Just like when I spent 29 years working for the state. It was clearly stated that if I designed a widget to make my work easier on company time, it belonged to the University I worked for, not me. Hell, I designed all kinds of TV and camera mounting systems, but they belong to the university, not me. So does the military get to hold a copyright on aircraft artwork? Edited July 8, 2023 by Scott Smith Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Niels Posted July 8, 2023 Share Posted July 8, 2023 Can't say, but in the case of these markings, I understand that it was made by non-military. For military personnel I pressume someone else will know more and can chime in. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Niels Posted July 8, 2023 Share Posted July 8, 2023 7 hours ago, Da SWO said: U.S. Navy was sued by Kieth Ferris years ago when the used his scheme on F-14's. IIRC they had to pay out. I thought the Ferris scheme was a colaborative effort, and that Ferris was contracted to do the schemes for the Navy? Hmm, learn something new every day Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Steve McArthur Posted July 8, 2023 Share Posted July 8, 2023 34 minutes ago, Niels said: I thought the Ferris scheme was a colaborative effort, and that Ferris was contracted to do the schemes for the Navy? Hmm, learn something new every day That's why it smells like BS to me that Ferris sued the Navy over it. 1 hour ago, Da SWO said: Why do you think I just made this up? I didn't assume you made it up, I think you are repeating a rumor you heard once that isn't true. You presented a controversial story with no evidence. I'm just saying, back it up and show some evidence. If there was a lawsuit there should be a paper trail and at least a mention of it in one of the many, many sites that talk about US Navy experiments with Ferris camouflage patterns. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Niels Posted July 9, 2023 Share Posted July 9, 2023 There is no mentioning of any lawsuits between Keith Ferris and the USN when googling it. Doesn't mean it didn't happen, as Ferris has patent rights for various camo schemes as per his Wiki file: Keith Ferris - Wikipedia I'd rather assume that he was hired and paid for his work on camo schemes by both the USN and USAF. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ElectroSoldier Posted July 11, 2023 Share Posted July 11, 2023 On 7/8/2023 at 8:18 AM, Niels said: Special schemes can and have been initiated by civilians and military personnel alike. If the artist patents the scheme, he/she will have the copyright to it and thus "own" it. This is quite normal when it comes to artists in general. That is a dumb statement. It is only right that the artist retains the copyright to his/her work. Why should someone else capitalize on your work for free? I for sure would want to be compensated. And since hardly anyone has details on the negotiations, we should leave these speculations in the drawer. Why would they have to give up ownership of their work? You would have to be a complete and utter idiot to think a company making decals of your work is giving up ownership of the original artwork. There was no suggestion that they should be able to make the decals without reward to the copyright owner either. Being as it is in the public domain I can talk about it as much as I like without fear. Kinetic put out a statement about it, to me it was clearly a case of them not wanting to pay as much as the artist wanted to reproduce the art. On 7/8/2023 at 6:52 PM, Scott Smith said: Yea, I get it if Joe citizen designed and implemented it after being hired to do it. But if military personnel do it on military time, shouldn’t it belong to the military? Just like when I spent 29 years working for the state. It was clearly stated that if I designed a widget to make my work easier on company time, it belonged to the University I worked for, not me. Hell, I designed all kinds of TV and camera mounting systems, but they belong to the university, not me. So does the military get to hold a copyright on aircraft artwork? Depends on the contract between the parties involved. Many people have the idea that if they make something while at work it belongs to them when in doesnt. In this case it isnt about who owns the original work, its simply about how much money should be paid to reproduce it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tracy White Posted July 13, 2023 Share Posted July 13, 2023 On 7/8/2023 at 10:52 AM, Scott Smith said: But if military personnel do it on military time, shouldn’t it belong to the military? If a military member develops it as part of their duties, then it is essentially owned by US citizens. That is why so much of the US-generated photography from WWII is in the public domain. It was paid for by the tax payers - they own it. When it is contracted out to private citizens of corporations, the rules change. One reason why we don't have really much in the way of decals with Disney characters..... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.