But MODELS are based purely on the ORNAMENTAL, that is the LOOKS of the aircraft.
The models use almost NONE of the technology of the real planes.
The point is they are copying a design that is not ornamental - the looks of the plane are the result of it's functional design - and copyright subsists in that design. While the model isn't an exact replica it would be considered a derivative work so the model would infringe copyright.
I'm simply suggesting that this is the kind of argument the original manufacturers must be putting forward to justify claiming copyright on Aircraft back to WWII. The designs in question fall within the 1923 to 1963 period for US works or 1923 to 1977 for other countries so must have be originally copyrighted on the basis of functional design rather than ornament and have had that copyright renewed in order to be eligible for the 95 year copyright term.
Anyway the lawyers and patent attorneys are simply working within a legal framework established by the us (and other) governments. The extensions of copyright term are being driven by media corporations - it's no coincidence that the copyright term is extended every time Mickey Mouse is in "danger" of falling into the public domain! What we are running into is collateral damage.
Obviously this is going to become a far greater problem for scale modelers in the future. It also raises the question of what kind of copyright applies designs published on the Internet for example. Unless there is a specifc statement otherwise the standard published works copyright applies, but what effect does that potentially have on the status of those designs in the future?
cheers Paul
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
