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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
lawyers and pens
I received an angry e-mail claiming I've violated some sort of copyright. I
would like opinions on this...and keep in mind the item in question was never sold for $ and thus I believe there is no commercial claim that is possible. A very large pure platinum nib was made...and as it was made by a certain fountain pen nut in Massachusetts near Hyannisport...and platinum is called "Pt" for a marking....so naturally I put "109" on the other side of the nib. Is this a crime???!!! What gives? How on earth is this simple act wrong? I suppose I'll have to stick to these and never be able to show the platinum version? http://members.aol.com/repairpens/TE...zetriumpha.JPG http://members.aol.com/repairpens/TEXAS/tx4aa.JPG |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
and as it was made by a certain
fountain pen nut in Massachusetts near Hyannisport...and platinum is called "Pt" for a marking....so naturally I put "109" on the other side of the nib. The Kennedys are into FPs now? Hey! I know! Ask Teddy! |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
PT 109. Good grief, I vaguely remember seeing that film in the cinema with
my mum! 1963? I don't know anything about US copyright law, but in the UK I don't think you could copyright a pennant code. (The number thingie on warships.) The worst they could do you for is practising humour without a licence... It made me laugh, anyway. Cheers KT "so what" wrote in message ... and as it was made by a certain fountain pen nut in Massachusetts near Hyannisport...and platinum is called "Pt" for a marking....so naturally I put "109" on the other side of the nib. The Kennedys are into FPs now? Hey! I know! Ask Teddy! |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Just make a settlement...say, tell them that if they back off, you won't use
it against them the way Joe Pesci used a pen in Casino. Richard "Scaupaug" wrote in message ... I received an angry e-mail claiming I've violated some sort of copyright. I would like opinions on this...and keep in mind the item in question was never sold for $ and thus I believe there is no commercial claim that is possible. A very large pure platinum nib was made...and as it was made by a certain fountain pen nut in Massachusetts near Hyannisport...and platinum is called "Pt" for a marking....so naturally I put "109" on the other side of the nib. Is this a crime???!!! What gives? How on earth is this simple act wrong? I suppose I'll have to stick to these and never be able to show the platinum version? http://members.aol.com/repairpens/TE...zetriumpha.JPG http://members.aol.com/repairpens/TEXAS/tx4aa.JPG |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
In article , "Karen Traviss"
writes: I don't know anything about US copyright law, but in the UK I don't think you could copyright a pennant code. (The number thingie on warships.) The worst they could do you for is practising humour without a licence... The pennant code was "PT-109", whereas the movie title was "PT 109". Anyway, these people need to have a sense of humor. Copyright violation over what someone scribed in a pen nib? This sounds like legal busywork. Dik |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
It is not the owner of the pen, just some litigious or complaining whiner who
examined the pen and claimed to want one, asked for my e-mail...and sent me an "official" complaint about items related to the family as if they were owned in some way. Isn't a former president so much a part of the public domain that such an issue is laughable? They don't have any standing at all....or am I wrong?? If it is a unique piece made for the sake of art...isn't that covered by freedom of expression? Did Marilyn Monroe sue Andy Worhol? This is just a number next to the symbol for platinum...that's it...nothing more. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Dear Nathan:
Some people just can’t seem to stay out of trouble While I don’t practice copyright law, I did take several copyright classes while in law school from Melvin Nimmer, the father of modern copyright law. He literally wrote the book on copyright, Nimmer on Copyright, that is frequently cited in Supreme Court decisions. Some of the principles I recall from my classes with Professor Nimmer are as follows: 1. The United States government can own no copyright. All intellectual property of the United States government is in the public domain and anyone is entitled to use it for free. 2. Titles generally aren’t subject to copyright. They may be registered by the Writer’s Guild and subject to certain Guild agreements with signatories, such as production companies, but generally they are too trivial to be copyrighted. 3. This brings us to the overarching question of what is subject to copyright. The brief answer is "writings" in the Constitutional sense. Ideas may not be copyrighted, but the expression of them may be copyrighted. As I believe Professor Nimmer used to explain: Boy meets girl/boy loses girl/boy gets girl back can’t be copyrighted. Hamlet can be copyrighted (assuming it were written today.) Professor Nimmer viewed there to be somewhat of a continuum between an idea or fact, on one hand, and the expression of it, on the other hand. Facts and ideas such as the facts of Watergate or the boy meets girl idea are freely available to anyone. Anybody can write a book about Watergate, for example. However, once one writes a book about Watergate, no-one else is entitled to expropriate the words used to express those facts. Tough issues are in the middle, or balance point, where Professor Nimmer believed free speech values were arrayed against the value of encouraging creativity. How do these principles apply here? If PT109 is used as the name of a ship in the U.S. Navy, the name probably belongs to the United States, and is in the public domain. As the title of a book, it is probably not subject to copyright protection on its own. A substantial taking from the book might yield a different result. Of course, there are other bodies of law which protect names and trademarks and other intellectual property. There is the Federal Trademark Act which protects the identifying marks people use for their products and services. Violating this usually requires a showing beyond copying, such as public confusion as to source. (I have a feeling you could sell a McDonald’s nib and the hamburger chain would have a hard time proving that sort of an element.) There are other laws dealing with mislabeling, but again, additional elements, such as harm to the public, or reaping where you have not sown, might have to be shown. In conclusion, I suspect you may be able to wiggle of the hook this time. And I don’t think you can get into any trouble saying "Remember the Maine" either. Bob |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|