After being informed by Karen the 46 Chevy Pickup is being refused for trademark concerns which comes to a shock to me cause Renderosity has already accepted the 51 Pontiac and Studebaker I've given away already in freestuff and is still up for grabs. Both of the other vehicles have their respected trademarks on the sides and back of the vehicles as thats the way they were built.

 I respect the moderators decision but if thats the case their are free car models of cars all over the internet and even Daz has the "66 Mustang", and a "36 Sedan" their selling of which I bought both before I started modeling my own vehicles.

 I not trying to any trouble, just trying to give back models to the community for all the free ones I have got thru' the years. The model can was also uploaded to 3DC, or it can be got at this link.

http://www.schurbys.com/models/46chevy.zip

Thank you for your very kind gift!  It is very much appreciated.

Downloaded it.  POWER TO THE PEOPLE!!!

Thanks for the truck and the other vehicles. Your modeling is great.

Thank you

Thanks! I ran a search in freestuff and your Pontiac and Studebaker are no longer there.

Studabaker I could understand being there; the company went out of business..and I know next to nothing about cars..;) Pontiac maybe they'd have issues.

I had just gotten them and it clearly stated not for commercial use. I don't understand the problem here. There are tons of items in freestuff that could be pulled for copyright problems...why these cars? As he stated Daz and other merchants have cars that are named i.e. 66 mustang. Sorry guys but I think you are wrong on this one...if not please correct me.

Thank you, I downloaded it from 3dcommune.

Marque, we don't accept any item which is trademarked.

Commercial vs non-commercial is only useful when the court award damages, not when determining if usage is allowed.

If you want more info you can check into the Copyright forum where we tend to have this discussion 3-4 times a year ;-)

Karen

schurby, you've got my sympathy, but I have to agree on the trademark thing. I know they may do it differently at daz or vanishingpoint or elsewhere, and that hoagland had this same problem here. I have been told that daz's terms transfer the burden of copyright and trademark problems onto the merchants, which is not a wise policy IMVHO. does this mean they think they would not be in the list of defendants in a lawsuit, if they have that kind of disclaimer? I don't know, but at least renderosity's policy shows some recognition that the both the marketplace and merchant might be held responsible.

I can't see either Chevrolet or Chrysler, or any other company bitching over what amounts to FREE publicity; HECK, they should be THANKINg  us for using images of their products!
David P. Hoadley

 Guess I'll have to just give a link to where I have them from now on. Didn't want to turn this into a crisis as the world has enough of those going already. Or if I hear from any of the car makers on this issue I have a whole list of places where their cars and trucks as 3d models are forsale and being given away. But why shut them down, maybe I'll just stop on the cars and move on to other things. Thanks everyone for their support.

 Schurby

I can understand copyright law not letting somebody take another person's work and commercially using it and support that. Otherwise, every big company with strong distribution channels would be stealing every original work they can.

The laws get weirder when it comes to protecting commercial ventures. It's reasonable to protect trademarks to ensure that a ripoff company doesn't try to use the better company's name to sell an inferior knockoff product. When it comes to a 3D representation of a 60-year old vehicle, things begin to get hairier, but I suppose that the owning company deserves the right to make that call.

The strangest trademarks are those for buildings where a photo taken of a trademarked building cannot be published without the owner's permission. That one boggles my mind. I can imagine a day when chips will be in everybody's heads and everything a person looks at will ring up a bill.

These cars are so old that the companies would probably not bother about the copyright of them anyway.

Attached Link: Revell.com

John

Well the same thing sort of happened to us.  We created a replica of a Cola sign, years ago and emailed Coke in regards to giving it away for free.  They responded most respectfully NO, we could not, it would be in violation of their trademark even though it was very very old.  Sharen

reality pretty much sucks anyway....put your own logo on the stuff and adda fin or something.

the heck with the lawyers

Why am I still getting ebots on this when I unchecked it?? This has been happening a lot lately and it's getting frustrating...please fix this rendo or I'm not coming back to the forums or the store.

Quote - This doesn't have to do with cars directly, but is even more disturbing.  At the link, click on Support Military Replica Act.
John

So much for America being the 'Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave!  Soon all American will have to pay royalties to the heirs of Francis Scott Key just for the PRIVILEGE of singing the 'Stars Spangled Banner.'  This whole issue of copywrite and trademark has become SICK!
In the 60's we marched and shouted 'Power to the People;' maybe it's time we did so again.
DPH

Thank you very much Schurby! I am sorry about your model being rejected by the MP. I think any American business would be insane to litigate against a 3D model builder for making a model of a 60-year-old product. They should thank you, after all they pay millions for "product placement" in movies! You build marvelous models of the old classic cars, and I hope you will continue to do so despite this setback. It is pretty easy to find cars and trucks from the "80s on up, but replicas of the older American cars like yours are very scarce. Thank you for the excellent freebie!

Marque, click the "unsubcribe"link at the top or bottom of the thread and you'll no longer get ebots for that topic.

You also sang: "America, where are you now? Don't  you care about your sons and daughters?" Can you imagine movies like Zabriskie Point being made today?
Time to start a new spring, no?

easy to adapt: "and it's one, two, three, what are we fighting for? don't ask me I don't give a damn, next stop is called "Saddam". And it's five, six, seven, open up the oily gates! O, there ain't no time to wonder why: whoopee! we're all gonna die!"
And do a remake of  "the thief of Bagdad".

we need action!

Gongyla; Saddam isn't the ISSUE!  Not when vintage Americana is put under Lock-n-Key by Trademark Fanatics.  It's a truely sad state of affairs when a little boy has to get permission from  McDonnell Douglas (or whoever) in order to build a model of a P-51 Mustang.  And if I wanted to build a model today of the USS Constitution, whose heirs would I have to buy off?  These idocies have gone far enough!

Thanks a lot!!!   :)

Yeah, but some of those who marched and shouted are now the ones coming up with these inane copyright laws.

Quote - We created a replica of a Cola sign, years ago and emailed Coke in regards to giving it away for free.  They responded most respectfully NO, we could not, it would be in violation of their trademark   Sharen

That sadly is the new state of businesses run by lawyers. Long ago, a businsess might have said that it would be okay to do something like that. In today's more letigious and self-centric society, things like that are rarely allowed anymore. Coke has to worry about some idiot suing them if that 3D sign is used in an inappropriate fashion. Nobody wants to take the blame if somebody somehow uses that sign in a financially successful fashion and they didn't get a cut of those earnings. That latter philosophy runs rampant in Hollywood where they'd rather lose money than let somebody else make money. Any time a studio head changes, movies in early stages of development die because the last thing the new studio head needs is a successful project started by his predecessor. Johnny Carson long lamented that NBC destroyed a warehouse of old Tonight Show tapes instead of donating them to a university or selling them. Alan Ladd, Jr. got chewed out by stockholders for giving away merchandising rights to Star Wars in trade of pouring more money into the movie to finish it. Stockholders didn't care that the movie made them more money than they'd seen in a long time--there were pissed that somebody else made more money than they thought should get it even though there was no reason, at the time, to expect that giving away toy rights meant anything.

Today, most companies look at a bottom line for every action and allowing somebody to give away a 3D replica of their history doesn't benefit them tangibly, so they won't let it happen. This is the byproduct of using the legal system to enact social change. Society becomes risk adverse. When every action has to be analzyed by what is the worst that can happen, it becomes better to not allow anything to happen. A lot of communities will no longer develop or support free parks and playgrounds because the risk of being sued, by somebody getting hurt, is so great that it's not worth the benevolent act.

Thank you very much!

Your models of classic cars are beutiful, wish I could do one myself someday :)

Regards / Jonny Bode

Is it "that" time again?

First- if you want a more detailed description about why copyrighted items are not allowed here, go read the Copyright Forum. There are plenty of threads discussing which things were not allowed and why. Sometimes it's an obvious copyright issues (such as using the words "X-Wing Fighter") and sometimes the admins don't know a name is copyrighted (such as "Space: 1999").

Maybe an admin didn't know the name of your car was copyrighted.

Plus, as I've mentioned many times, the constitutional right to "free speech" only applies to people speaking out against government agencies. This right does NOT give people protection against businesses or corporations... nor does it give people the right to uncensored speech on a privately-owned website.

--John

Small Reminder... Copyright and Trademarks are not the same thing. In copyright law there's some fuzziness about derivative works, otherwise anybody could draw their own version of a black cartoon mouse with round ears. Trademarks mean that you can't call a cartoon mouse Mickey, even if it's dark grey with square ears. Things like company names, badges and logos are protected by trademarks, and if an infringement comes to a trademark owner's attention, he has to take action. If you ask in advance, he might give permission. I believe a few people do have trademark permission to make and give away certain 3D models. It can still be impractical to prove that permission to the satisfaction of a third-party hosting site. (This is getting to be a rather large reminder)

I just don't understand how if all this copyright stuff is true, Daz gets away with selling Mustangs, Corvettes and so on??????

Mainly, it looks as though they avoid using the trademarks, like the model names. So you get a year, and a continenr, EUrope or AMerica, and some idea of what sort of vehicle it is. And I don't really recognise the American ones. And the Mini has the wrong wheels for the Sixties