Selling origami--legal or no?

[Argil]

I truly cannot speak for nations outside the US, though I should like to see the relevant statutes. Something isn't illegal because someone thinks it should be, things are illegal because there is a law against it. I find it a bit hard to believe that there is a law about Origami anywhere,

For france an article of wikipedia sum up the applicable law : http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droit_d'auteur

I am neither able nor willing to translate french law about that.

The french "droit d'auteur" look alike the copyright US and it protects any "oeuvre de l'esprit" (book, music, software, draw etc....)

Of course there is not a particular statute about origami, but the law does not need to explicitly forbid the fact to sell origami models designed by other. There is no doubt that an origami models is "une oeuvre de l'esprit" to which the protection of the law apply.

As an example : I do not know english law but I am sure that it is forbidden by this law to kill someone else. And I am also pretty sure that to get away whith it one cannot say he killed whith a knife and the statute does not forbid specifically killing whith a knife. Since murder is a crime, the way you commit the murder is irrelevant.

In the same way "l'oeuvre de l'esprit" is protected by the law and it is irrelevant to says this sort of "oeuvre de l'esprit" is not explicitly provided for by a statute.

[gachepapier]

The usual accepted anglosaxon legal meaning of "IP" is that it encompasses copyright laws, inter alia. Sorry to cite wikipedia on the issue, but the first paragraph here has it right:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property

I'm not arguing copyright is the sole part of IP that would need to be discussed, though. Interestingly, IP covers quite a few ranges of what one could colloquially coin as "creations of the intellect", but there are gaping holes in between the different sets of applicable laws and considerable differences from one country to another.

In anglosaxon legal systems, caselaw sets precedents and essentially become laws which have to be followed. I've not seen a precedent concerning origami but would be curious to read about one. Of course, such a precedent would essentially be irrelevant to other legal systems (in spite of TRIPS and agreements of the sort), such as european or south-american ones for example, but it would nonetheless interest me.

[andssl]

Gachepapier, there are substantial differences. Copyright derives from the sole creation of a work. Trademark and Patent can not be protected by the creation only, but a register is required r. In copyright field register is voluntary, it does not mean in terms of protection. The same thing is no applied to trademark and patent. In this case register is a necessary thing to have the righs granted by intellectual property law.

[steingar]

I truly cannot speak for nations outside the US, though I should like to see the relevant statutes. Something isn't illegal because someone thinks it should be, things are illegal because there is a law against it. I find it a bit hard to believe that there is a law about Origami anywhere,

For france an article of wikipedia sum up the applicable law : http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droit_d'auteur

I am neither able nor willing to translate french law about that.

The french "droit d'auteur" look alike the copyright US and it protects any "oeuvre de l'esprit" (book, music, software, draw etc....)

Of course there is not a particular statute about origami, but the law does not need to explicitly forbid the fact to sell origami models designed by other. There is no doubt that an origami models is "une oeuvre de l'esprit" to which the protection of the law apply.

As an example : I do not know english law but I am sure that it is forbidden by this law to kill someone else. And I am also pretty sure that to get away whith it one cannot say he killed whith a knife and the statute does not forbid specifically killing whith a knife. Since murder is a crime, the way you commit the murder is irrelevant.

In the same way "l'oeuvre de l'esprit" is protected by the law and it is irrelevant to says this sort of "oeuvre de l'esprit" is not explicitly provided for by a statute.

The French law (which I could not get with your link, by the way) no doubt covers the duplication of copyrighted materials, and I would not argue that. However, if I build a Rutan VariEze in France (its a type of airplane) can I sell it and not worry about infringing Rutan's copyright on the plans? If I build a boat or a piece of furniture from plans can I sell them? As far as I know the answer is yes, since I know people who have done so, but perhaps they were skirting the law. I truly don't know.

In France, you would posit that if I were to sell someone else's model that I folded I am breaking France's droit d'auteur. I really don't know how the law works in France, so I'll have to take your word for it. If I take my model that I folded from someone else's design and photograph it, can I sell the photographs? If I make a wonderful oil painting of it, can I sell that as a work of art? Where does droit d'auteur end?

[garrasdecaiman]

As promised I now bring you real proof of piracy in the books I was talking about,
here we see this spinosaurus

[img]http://i685.photobucket.com/albums/vv21 ... G_0150.jpg[/img]

from the book papiroflexia origami #8 segunda coleccion

[img]http://i685.photobucket.com/albums/vv21 ... G_0155.jpg[/img]

by who else but one of the colins!
in this case by J. COLIN and you can see clearly the spinosaurus in the upper left hand corner.
This model is also on the cover of Mr montrolls book prehistoric origami

http://books.google.com/books?id=m-Jopt ... &q&f=false

Also I have here exhibit b
[img]http://i685.photobucket.com/albums/vv21 ... G_0152.jpg[/img]
this is a moth from gaby colin´s papiroflexia origami 9
[img]http://i685.photobucket.com/albums/vv21 ... G_0153.jpg[/img]

which is actually from Mr montroll´s origami for the enthusiast

http://books.google.com/books?id=XoV3w_ ... th&f=false

these booklets also contain tirannosaurus rex from animal origami for the enthusiast, brontosaurus from the same book, apatosaurus, dimetrodon and brachiosaurus from prehistoric origami. other books from the same collections have multiple author peices mixed with traditional ones

what do you think should be done about them?
X

[andssl]

garrasdecaiman, If Montrol has not allowed to use his models in this book, there is an infrigment of copyright laws with no doubt.

[garrasdecaiman]

Well since his name does not appear in any part of the book or the website which I´ve linked in a previous post that is exactly what I believe.
And unless Mr montroll is lurking somwhere along the forum we cannot confirm if they have consent to print his models with no attributions.

Also I´m thinking of trying to contact Mr montroll but I´m still not sure if I should?

X

[bethnor]

yeah, that's pretty bad.

nicolas terry had a similar problem, too, recently. perhaps the two should talk.

[steingar]

People have used my designs for reprint materials, but they paid quite a bit for the privilege. If the author has not got John's permission (if I recall, he self-publishes his work) then there is indeed a breach of coyright, and John would be well advised to seek redress, especially since there actually is an entity from whom redress can be sought (the book publisher).

[Argil]

The French law (which I could not get with your link, by the way)

Perhaps this link would be better http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCod ... e=20100914

[steingar]

The French law (which I could not get with your link, by the way)

Perhaps this link would be better http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCod ... e=20100914

Obviously, I have not read through the entire statue. I did however perform a word search with "pliage de papier", which is the best french translation I could come up with that describes Origami. It failed to retrieve any results. I therefore believe that there are no French statues dealing with Origami, and htat it is perfectly legal to sell a model designed by another in France, contrary to what has been said here.

If I have used the wrong terms I welcome the correction, French is not a language I speak at all well. If I missed a statute I would like to see it.

[Argil]

I therefore believe that there are no French statues dealing with Origami, and htat it is perfectly legal to sell a model designed by another in France, contrary to what has been said here.

Which means that you do not understand french, or my english is very bad or you did not see this in my link :

Article L112-1
Créé par Loi 92-597 1992-07-01 annexe JORF 3 juillet 1992
Les dispositions du présent code protègent les droits des auteurs sur toutes les oeuvres de l'esprit, quels qu'en soient le genre, la forme d'expression, le mérite ou la destination.

(my translation : The provisions of this code protect the rights of authors on all works of mind, whatsoever their kind, their form of expression, their merit or their use)

[Jonnycakes]

Under that statute, it could be interpreted that an origami work is the intellectual property of the folder, regardless of the designer. The designer should certainly be credited for the design, but there is nothing in that statement that defines who owns a folded origami design. The folder certainly has some stake in it, and it is very fair to say that they may sell it without consent from the designer as long as diagrams have been made available. Until a legal precedent is made there is not an irrefutable solution to the question of origami copyright. It is pointless to argue about it ("Yes!" "No!" Yes!" "No!") when there is no absolute ruling on the matter.

[steingar]

I therefore believe that there are no French statues dealing with Origami, and htat it is perfectly legal to sell a model designed by another in France, contrary to what has been said here.

Which means that you do not understand french, or my english is very bad or you did not see this in my link :

Article L112-1
Créé par Loi 92-597 1992-07-01 annexe JORF 3 juillet 1992
Les dispositions du présent code protègent les droits des auteurs sur toutes les oeuvres de l'esprit, quels qu'en soient le genre, la forme d'expression, le mérite ou la destination.

(my translation : The provisions of this code protect the rights of authors on all works of mind, whatsoever their kind, their form of expression, their merit or their use)

I do not understand French beyond the words I use to call my dogs. However, I'm afraid what you yourself have translated is far too vague to make any categorical statements about the legality or illegality of selling an origami model designed by another. If I fold something from a book, I have not directly copied any text or infringed on the author's work. Indeed, I could claim that my own work of art is a work of my mind, and an author trying to get royalties out of me is infringing on my rights. Since either is an equally appropriate interpretation, I suspect that once again it is up to a judge or jury to decide the matter. Where I am a bit fuzzy is, in the US, in lieu of such a ruling the activity is perfectly legal. Perhaps in France judgments based on novel legal precedents can then be applied retroactively. Seems daft to me, but I wouldn't put anything past the French.

If your translation is in error, or if there is a specific law or precedent specifically concerning Origami I am truly interested. What we currently have is your opinion, which along with a couple euros may buy a croissant.

[Argil]

So you can see also this :http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichJur ... &fastPos=1

particularly this extract : "Pour ce qui est des oeuvres telles que la sculpture , l'auteur est celui qui est à l'origine de leur création c'est-à-dire celui qui les conçoit, les dessine et choisit le matériau de réalisation" meaning (my translation) : "for work like sculpture, the author is the person who is at the origin of their creation, is est, the person who design, draw them and choose the material of ther realization"