Copy Right Infringement ???

[Martian]

You cannot copyright a product. copyrights only cover specific arrangements, such as artwork or words or code. In order for something to be considered art, it cannot be functional.

Patents cover ideas and products. You are entirely allowed to build anything, whether patented or not. The issue comes in when you wish to use it, as using a patented item is illegal. Now, if you improve upon a patent a sufficient amount, you are no longer infringing upon that patent, as it is no longer the same design, but a new design of your making. If you improve upon it in a "meaningful way", you may now patent (and sell/use) what you built and are no longer limited by the initial patent.

Hit the nail on the head (copyrighted?:laughing As long as you are not attempting to profit off of a patented object, you are fine to build it.

 

[Redneck in training]

One of the purpose of the patent law is to spread the knowledge. The incentives for making your idea or design public is protection for certain number of years (I think 15) so you can profit from it. There are ideas or designs that are not patented but protected be other means. In example military secrets.
Copyright lasts forever (I think).

 

[bcp]

If you copy a patented item and are sued you will loose. If you make one item yourself, for personal use, it wouldn't be worth the effort for 99.999% of companies to sue.

From the Patent Office:
http://www.uspto.gov/patents/resources/general_info_concerning_patents.jsp#heading-2

The right conferred by the patent grant is, in the language of the statute and of the grant itself, “the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, or selling” the invention in the United States or “importing” the invention into the United States. What is granted is not the right to make, use, offer for sale, sell or import, but the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, selling or importing the invention. Once a patent is issued, the patentee must enforce the patent without aid of the USPTO.

....

General Information Concerning Patents

The owner of a patent may grant licenses to others. Since the patentee has the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, or selling or importing the invention, no one else may do any of these things without his/her permission.

...

Infringement of Patents
General Information Concerning Patents

Infringement of a patent consists of the unauthorized making, using, offering for sale, or selling any patented invention within the United States or U.S. Territories, or importing into the United States of any patented invention during the term of the patent. If a patent is infringed, the patentee may sue for relief in the appropriate federal court. The patentee may ask the court for an injunction to prevent the continuation of the infringement and may also ask the court for an award of damages because of the infringement. In such an infringement suit, the defendant may raise the question of the validity of the patent, which is then decided by the court. The defendant may also aver that what is being done does not constitute infringement. Infringement is determined primarily by the language of the claims of the patent and, if what the defendant is making does not fall within the language of any of the claims of the patent, there is no literal infringement.

 

[FredH]

So , I guess I just won't tell anybody what I built or show pictures . Will paint shop windows with black paint , and rather than wear a tin foil hat , will just line the entire inside of my shop walls and ceiling with foil , So signing off for a run to wally world , You may want to invest into Reynolds Wrap as I am sure their stock may go up after my buying out of all 3 wally worlds here locally .

As I mentioned though , I have NO desire to make more , even for relatives , nor does mine look nearly as good as what original maker has , But it still functions as well . All totaled up , not counting my labor , I saved around $100 over original purchase . For me , Labor was free since it keeps me from having to do the dreaded " Honey Do List " !

Thanks , Take Care All .

Fred H.

 

[lilranch2001]

I would just like to know what it is, and yes
I am nosy

 

[jenkinsph]

Fred,
FORGET the infringement issue, more or less meaningless in your case.

NOW being able to avoid the Honey do list has much more merit.:thumbsup::laughing:

 

[jwmorris]

Once a patent is issued, the patentee must enforce the patent without aid of the USPTO.

That was my point, the cost/benefit is not there for a person or corporation to sue and individual for one copy of said product. The only "damages" they can claim is profit on one unit. More often than not the lawyers fee for just filing a complaint will exceed the potential payout, much less trying the case itself.

 

[Domush]

That was my point, the cost/benefit is not there for a person or corporation to sue and individual for one copy of said product. The only "damages" they can claim is profit on one unit. More often than not the lawyers fee for just filing a complaint will exceed the potential payout, much less trying the case itself.

This is not true. Case in point, the RIAA/MPAA lawsuits. They go after individual people every single day. It is a money train for them. They sue for attorney fees and damages. They staff an attorney, so the "fees" are not true fee rates, but what they would pay an outside firm. They then pocket the difference, plus damages.

Single offenders are far less likely to fight it and are far more likely to settle out of court. it's free money with almost no effort.

 

[schmism]

If you improve upon it in a "meaningful way", you may now patent (and sell/use) what you built and are no longer limited by the initial patent.

This is the key.

Its been my experience that when ever I copy a design there are always aspects that i want diffrent for my situation. This leads to even subtle changes that while they seem little, are enough to avoid the letter of the law when coming to patents.

For instance, makeing an exact copy and painting yours pink instead of blue isnt enough. but makeing a copy and useing a hardened pin instead of a bolt or putting a 5/8" bolt in place of a 1/2" bolt due to an observed increase in wear etc is enough to side step the patent.

In short for personal use dont worry about it.

As for the example of the MPAA going after individuals, it was only the individuals that SHARED there copy of music/movies with others. If you simply made a copy for personal use, and did not SHARE it with anyone, they wont be comming after you.

 

[Domush]

As for the example of the MPAA going after individuals, it was only the individuals that SHARED there copy of music/movies with others. If you simply made a copy for personal use, and did not SHARE it with anyone, they wont be coming after you.

Um, no.

MPAA Sues Grandfather for $600,000

Like I said, cash cow. Don't think because you are minding your own business, companies aren't going to mind theirs by suing you. It is in their interests in both profit and legal rights.

The OP is wise to keep their project to his/her self, unless the OP is confident the design is sufficiently different. That said, I've likely trampled on a patent or six at some point. Most lawsuits begin with a cease and desist letter, which costs nothing and allows the plaintiff to back out unscathed less one product.. unless the company is feeling greedy or scummish that day.

 

[ctlguy]

Knew a fella years ago that had a comm mowing business. He built his own collection dump system that mimmicked another very popular commercial system, saved himself some bucks... the first year. Next summer some reps from the original company knocked on his door w/ the Sherrif in tow and he was ordered to dis-assemble and warned to no longer use ... or else. Ultimatly they did not sue, seemed pleased enough with themselves makeing him take it apart and cut into pieces.

 

[Den1952]

thousands of guys have built their own projects. one example would be a hydraulic woodsplitter. with off the shelf parts too.
this just being one example.
I have not read of anyone being pestered by a manufacturer about patent penalties for something of this nature.

 

[chad22]

For your own private use, I wouldn't worry about it at all.

Exactly I would copy away. You won't get into any trouble. You'll be just fine.

Chad

 

[chad22]

Knew a fella years ago that had a comm mowing business. He built his own collection dump system that mimmicked another very popular commercial system, saved himself some bucks... the first year. Next summer some reps from the original company knocked on his door w/ the Sherrif in tow and he was ordered to dis-assemble and warned to no longer use ... or else. Ultimatly they did not sue, seemed pleased enough with themselves makeing him take it apart and cut into pieces.

OMG. Wow that is crazy.

Chad

 

[Brad_Blazer]

You cannot copyright a product. copyrights only cover specific arrangements, such as artwork or words or code. In order for something to be considered art, it cannot be functional.

Patents cover ideas and products. You are entirely allowed to build anything, whether patented or not. The issue comes in when you wish to use it, as using a patented item is illegal. Now, if you improve upon a patent a sufficient amount, you are no longer infringing upon that patent, as it is no longer the same design, but a new design of your making. If you improve upon it in a "meaningful way", you may now patent (and sell/use) what you built and are no longer limited by the initial patent.

Not true. If someone held a valid current patent for the horseless carriage every modern car would violate it. An improvement can be patented by anyone but again a patent does not give you the right to make your invention, it gives you the right to exclude others from making it. Patent claims will be as broad as possible while maintaining the novelty of the invention. You can make vast improvements but if you violate a claim you are still infringing.

Patents do not last long and most published patents are not current. When the patent expires it is fair game and free for anyone anywhere to use. Also a patent that is pending is not enforceable until it is granted.

 

[rambler]

Is it copy right infringement if I build something from someone's idea / product , but with no intention / desire to sell or even make for anyone else . Cost of making my own was around $45 but to purchase would of been over $150 .

Granted , mine does not even come close to what the original is as far as quality , but function ability is the same .

Thoughts ? And have you done something similar ? Not going to say what the product is , as that is really a mute point , it is the principal of the general idea I guess ??

Fred H.

Denerally copyright refers to publications, like a book.

You are probably concerned about a patent?

It's up to the holder of a patent to enforce their patent, and to sue or otherwise go after folks who are violating their patent.

If you go into business selling some stuff, once they hear of it they likely would send you a letter....

If you are making one thing for yourself, and that's the end of it, the company best have better things to do that bother you about it, you aren't profiting or otherwise harming their patent. Anyone can sue anyone for anything; but don't know I've ever geard of such a thing happening?

--->Paul

 

[zing]

Research shows tinfoil hats AMPLIFY government signals!

http://berkeley.intel-research.net/arahimi/helmet/

Abstract:
Among a fringe community of paranoids, aluminum helmets serve as the protective measure of choice against invasive radio signals. We investigate the efficacy of three aluminum helmet designs on a sample group of four individuals. Using a $250,000 network analyser, we find that although on average all helmets attenuate invasive radio frequencies in either directions (either emanating from an outside source, or emanating from the cranium of the subject), certain frequencies are in fact greatly amplified. These amplified frequencies coincide with radio bands reserved for government use according to the Federal Communication Commission (FCC). Statistical evidence suggests the use of helmets may in fact enhance the government's invasive abilities. We speculate that the government may in fact have started the helmet craze for this reason.

BaaHHHAAAA!!! I love it!!

:laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing:

 

[forgeblast]

As for the example of the MPAA going after individuals, it was only the individuals that SHARED there copy of music/movies with others. If you simply made a copy for personal use, and did not SHARE it with anyone, they wont be comming after you.

My wifes father was downloadeing movies, many he would watch and then delete, some he would throw on a disk for my little on most were poor copies and new releases.
He got one letter saying they knew who he was and to knock it off or they would send their attorneys after him.
He waited a bit and then downloaded a movie and was sent a certified letter saying he was going to be sued if he downloaded any more. It got his attention and
he stopped.

 

[Agent Blue]

Knew a fella years ago that had a comm mowing business. He built his own collection dump system that mimmicked another very popular commercial system, saved himself some bucks... the first year. Next summer some reps from the original company knocked on his door w/ the Sherrif in tow and he was ordered to dis-assemble and warned to no longer use ... or else. Ultimatly they did not sue, seemed pleased enough with themselves makeing him take it apart and cut into pieces.

Yup.... And I bought the 57 corvette that the son was killed in the war for 300 dollars. No one knew its value sitting in the garage. The stories are all the same, only the circumstances change and the funny part no one is available to document the story, only third person storytellers.

 

[Leejohn]

Japan has been doing it for as long as i know of. China has and doing it real bad now. Japan seems not as bad as it was after the war. They don't get sued.