Origami Piracy

General discussion about Origami, Papers, Diagramming, ...
Froy
Senior Member
Posts: 421
Joined: March 21st, 2008, 9:24 pm
Location: Mexico

Re: Origami Piracy

Post by Froy »

Think I now understand point 12.

The case is for the figure it self. The same point states that the copyrights for diagrams are independent from the figure copyrights.

Technically point 12 states that if you are copying a figure, reverse engineering or design to look a like, is still copying a copyrighted work because the figure itself its protected, either diagrams exist or not.

Actually I still don't see the point of banning the display of figures in such cases, but we have to admit, not all people into origami are nice and sooner or later the ideas about how to fold a model will leak (even I and a lott of people folded the Ryujin 3.5 before official CP or information was released by Kamiya)
Pobody's nerfect.

My Flickr
User avatar
origamipete
Forum Sensei
Posts: 544
Joined: August 3rd, 2010, 4:28 pm
Location: the heart of europe, that's my home, my castle =D
Contact:

Re: Origami Piracy

Post by origamipete »

so even if there is just superficial similarity without any obvious similarity in the structure of the model, anybody who makes a model which could be seen as similar to a pre-existing model would be viewed as a breach of the original author's copyright? on the one hand, I know there is probably no getting around this and that it is understandable such a rule would exist, but on the other hand, what a bummer for the second person...
HankSimon
Buddha
Posts: 1262
Joined: August 12th, 2006, 12:32 am
Location: Texas, USA

Re: Origami Piracy

Post by HankSimon »

When it has been an obviously, honest duplication by another designer for 'private' use, I recall only amicable solutions. I believe this rule intends to clarify that these sculptures and works of art are legally protected by Copyright Law in most countries, so it someone tries to plagiarize for commercial purposes, after amicable negotiations break down, the full power of the legal system is available. And, sometimes you have to explain with a hammer to communicate to people that they have crossed a legal line. There's also the respect issue.
User avatar
origamipete
Forum Sensei
Posts: 544
Joined: August 3rd, 2010, 4:28 pm
Location: the heart of europe, that's my home, my castle =D
Contact:

Re: Origami Piracy

Post by origamipete »

Yes, I can understand that.
Baltorigamist
Moderator
Posts: 2376
Joined: December 25th, 2011, 7:15 pm
Location: Inside my twisted mind....

Re: Origami Piracy

Post by Baltorigamist »

This now begs the question of who determines how similar two models are. No one's going to make a tiger model with a closed back, but does this mean all tiger models look too similar to be copyrighted independently?
I mean, I'm obviously not the first one to design most of my subjects, but I don't want any "similarity" to someone else's design to keep me from displaying or selling my models because of copyright. There's at least about a 99% chance that any two models of the same subject that have been designed independently will have a different crease pattern even if they have the same structure. Back to the tiger example: I have yet to see a tiger with legs that aren't middle points--does this mean they all have the same structure and therefore violate copyright laws?
After the fall, we rise.

My Flickr
Froy
Senior Member
Posts: 421
Joined: March 21st, 2008, 9:24 pm
Location: Mexico

Re: Origami Piracy

Post by Froy »

The case is like the grey area in making money by selling someone else models.

You still can make a model of your own, but if you are using some one else work (photos, lectures or ideas) you are still using ideas not developed by yourself.

The problem here is the intended objective of making a figure to look exactly like the original, or even using the name of the author as a attention bacon. Like X model by X author reverse engineered by me. (even if the model is not the exact figure the reference is there and the attempt to look the same was intended)
Pobody's nerfect.

My Flickr
User avatar
Brimstone
Buddha
Posts: 1729
Joined: November 23rd, 2004, 3:59 am
Location: Colombia, South America
Contact:

Re: Origami Piracy

Post by Brimstone »

Froy wrote: Actually I still don't see the point of banning the display of figures in such cases, but we have to admit, not all people into origami are nice and sooner or later the ideas about how to fold a model will leak (even I and a lott of people folded the Ryujin 3.5 before official CP or information was released by Kamiya)
And that's what should be forbidden, teaching a model or releasing diagrams without the permission of the copyright owner, but just displaying them if you reverse engineered them, I don't see the point.
bethnor
Buddha
Posts: 1341
Joined: August 17th, 2006, 9:57 pm

Re: Origami Piracy

Post by bethnor »

it's also worth noting that the reason why the phu tran rose could be relatively easily reverse-engineered, is because it was (is) just a kawasaki variant.
User avatar
origamipete
Forum Sensei
Posts: 544
Joined: August 3rd, 2010, 4:28 pm
Location: the heart of europe, that's my home, my castle =D
Contact:

Re: Origami Piracy

Post by origamipete »

Brimstone wrote: that's what should be forbidden, teaching a model or releasing diagrams without the permission of the copyright owner, but just displaying them if you reverse engineered them, I don't see the point.
If instructions do not exist, that may be an indication of the author's wish to prevent the model from being reproduced. If someone does manage to reproduce the model despite that, they are doing what the original author didn't want to happen. Don't you think it's understandable to prevent the display of such models? Do you think painters would take it kindly if someone else copied their artworks stroke to stroke and wanted to display them in a gallery? They should be the one hanging on the wall in there, not this other guy. Without the explicit permission of the original author, I think it's a good thing the display of these models is being prevented.
User avatar
Brimstone
Buddha
Posts: 1729
Joined: November 23rd, 2004, 3:59 am
Location: Colombia, South America
Contact:

Re: Origami Piracy

Post by Brimstone »

origamipete wrote:If instructions do not exist, that may be an indication of the author's wish to prevent the model from being reproduced. If someone does manage to reproduce the model despite that, they are doing what the original author didn't want to happen. Don't you think it's understandable to prevent the display of such models?
Most of the times, diagrams don't exist, just because they're a pain to draw and creators much rather invest their time in creating more models than drawing.
bethnor
Buddha
Posts: 1341
Joined: August 17th, 2006, 9:57 pm

Re: Origami Piracy

Post by bethnor »

origamipete wrote: Do you think painters would take it kindly if someone else copied their artworks stroke to stroke and wanted to display them in a gallery?
unfortunately, the comparison to painting isn't quite apt. for better or worse, origami's "rules" make it possible to reproduce something in that fashion. i.e, because you're starting with a square, if you're the type of person who understands design (of which i am not one), you can indeed reproduce something, whereas reproducing a painting from scratch is much different.

and again, one can see why the person who reproduced it shouldn't be allowed to show it in an official capacity, but what we're talking about here is the very loose term of "not private," which is too all encompassing. furthermore, people do reproduce real paintings, but no one seriously thinks they're the author, and anyone who pays millions for that "van gogh," is seriously getting what comes to them. if some kid reproduces a famous model and wants to put their achievement on flickr, i fail to see what is gained by haranguing them.
HankSimon
Buddha
Posts: 1262
Joined: August 12th, 2006, 12:32 am
Location: Texas, USA

Re: Origami Piracy

Post by HankSimon »

The Law - very different from Art - requires that you protect your property under Copyright Law. This is why Disney and Apple are vigorous in protecting their properties ... it's required, otherwise there is the chance that in a courtroom someone might argue that the property, such as an easement or "Jello" or "Xerox" or "Fridge" might fall into public domain.

The discussion has crossed over to legal fine points, and no one here is a lawyer. Again, this Forum is for the fun of posting opinions back and forth. But, if you want definitive legal answers, send an email to OUSA, etc.
Froy
Senior Member
Posts: 421
Joined: March 21st, 2008, 9:24 pm
Location: Mexico

Re: Origami Piracy

Post by Froy »

Then the discuss can be terminated easily:

If you figured how to fold a model by an author and no diagrams or any word about reproductions has been said by the author, you either: a) ask authorization to make it public, because the author has the right to not allow to display unauthorized reproduction of it or, b) do not brag about what have you done and don't make your reproduction public.
Pobody's nerfect.

My Flickr
User avatar
malachi
Senior Member
Posts: 354
Joined: December 18th, 2004, 9:19 pm
Location: Tennessee
Contact:

Re: Origami Piracy

Post by malachi »

HankSimon wrote:The Law - very different from Art - requires that you protect your property under Copyright Law. This is why Disney and Apple are vigorous in protecting their properties ... it's required, otherwise there is the chance that in a courtroom someone might argue that the property, such as an easement or "Jello" or "Xerox" or "Fridge" might fall into public domain.
I believe you are confusing different types of intellectual property law.
http://sites.lib.byu.edu/copyright/about-copyright/basics/ wrote:Myth #11: If I don’t defend my copyright I may lose it

False. Copyright protection is effectively never lost, unless explicitly given away or the copyright has expired. However, if you do not actively defend your copyright, there may be broader unauthorized uses than you would like. It is a good idea to pursue enforcement actions as soon as you discover misuse of your copyright protected material.
http://sites.lib.byu.edu/copyright/abou ... ht/basics/

In other words, if you don't act to protect your copyright you might enable additional infringement, but you don't lose the copyright and the material does not enter the public domain until the copyright expires or you explicitly release it.

The examples you give of "Jello", "Xerox", and "Fridge" would be trademarks which are different and, if I recall correctly, do require infringement to be actively defended against to retain the right to exclusively use the trademark.
HankSimon wrote:The discussion has crossed over to legal fine points, and no one here is a lawyer. Again, this Forum is for the fun of posting opinions back and forth. But, if you want definitive legal answers, send an email to OUSA, etc.
If you want definitive legal answers, contact a lawyer that specializes in intellectual property law in your jurisdiction. OUSA has gotten opinions from lawyers and they represent a set of social norms, but they cannot offer definitive legal advice for each individual's situation.
HankSimon
Buddha
Posts: 1262
Joined: August 12th, 2006, 12:32 am
Location: Texas, USA

Re: Origami Piracy

Post by HankSimon »

I notice that you didn't address easements?

In any case, you did successfully defend my point. Thank you.
Post Reply