discussion A model making coincidence that made me jump....Then smile.

[spanner570]

I made this Chieftain tank on here about 3 yrs. ago. The wall, road and wire complete with the 'y' support are all out of my nut. Imaging my surprise when I saw the box art from latest Chieftain release from Takom.....I had to smileView attachment 244403



View attachment 244404



Only having a bit of fun Takom, honest!

 

[Guest]

That's Nut's

 

[Guest]

Sue them!

 

[Ian M]

It could be that they saw yours and thought that's rather nice....

 

[Guest]

I'd sue them for breach of copyright!!!!!!


Cheers Andrew

 

[Alan 45]

If you had copyrighted the photos you could sue them as that is a defo copy but I'm thinking you didn't so because it's on the net its public access so your stuffed


But saying that it is a great honour IMO to have a kit company use a pic of a model you've made


I'd be chuffed with that

 

[Guest]

You do not make photographs copyright, they are copyright to the photographer until such time the voluntarily give it up or sell it on. The fact that it is on the internet is totally irrelevant, the copyright is still the photographers.

 

[monica]

I do remember you doing this one Ron,


I would be flattered,as I don,t know if you can do any think about it,


maybe say with a date,look I did this,and maybe you mite get some think,?

 

[Guest]

Great compliment and honour, I think they should give you some credit on the box.

 

[Alan 45]

You do not make photographs copyright, they are copyright to the photographer until such time the voluntarily give it up or sell it on. The fact that it is on the internet is totally irrelevant, the copyright is still the photographers.

Unless the law has changed any photo uploaded to the Internet is public access unless copyrighted by the owner


I know they changed the law a little while ago about photos of historic buildings and the taker had to ask permission of the architect to put them on the social media but as far as I know the law hasn't changed in this respect

 

[Guest]

It is public access, in that anyone can view it. Copyright still remains with the photographer and it cannot be used for comercial purposes etc without the express and written consent of the copyright owner. It has to be accepted that if you post pictures on the internet that there is a chance of it being used without permission or without acknowledging the author. This does not mean that if it is used in a country that recognises the copyright laws, the photographer cannot take action to get recompense or take Civil action against the user. This is a common action taken by photographers who see the Internet as a double edged sword. They use it to increase their presence and attract commissions but know the risks in doing so.


Copyright of the subject is a different matter. For example, it is beach of copyright to take pictures of some building, usually traditional landmarks such as the Eiffel Tower. It is also breach of copyright to take pictures which include trade marks. Because of this, it is breach of copyright to take pictures of the HSBC building in Docklands. HSBC have reputedly sued over this.


Every photograph I have or will take are automatically copyright to me. If I choose to or mistakenly take a picture of a subject that is copyright, the copyright of the picture remains mine but leaves me open to a Civil Suit for breach of the subject copyright.

 

[PaulTRose]

cheeky buggers but id take it as a compliment


and just think,,,,to find that pic means someone from Takom has been reading the forum


be nice if they actually sent you one as a thankyou

 

[eddiesolo]

I still think I would inform them, you can show the pictures dated from this site. The similarities are just too much.

 

[grumpa]

WOW! Have given this a bit of thought, and it seems to me that if they were to make minor changes in their image as compared to your photo they my have a wiggle out.


You would have to prove "conceptual theft" and considering the glaring obviousness when angles and patterns are concerned morally you should get a cut.


Note; I said "morally". Once you sink into the morass of laws {which by the way do not favor regular folks} and start peeling back the many layered {stinking onion} you will find it a hopeless cause


You have set a president and I would consider it an extreme honor if they copied one of my posts Oh well, off to checking new release box art....er.....for no particular reason of course

 

[flyjoe180]

They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Nice work on that box cover Ron

 

[yak face]

All this proves to me is that our Ron is a bit Psycho , er sorry Psychic. He must have had a premonition three years ago , any chance of a heads up on future lottery numbers mate? I totally agree with Paul (Beowulf) on this too - i would contact them and say the least they could do is give you a free kit as a bit of an acknowledgement !! cheers tony

 

[stona]

That is uncanny!


I had a good five minutes playing spot the difference, and there's not much.


Cheers


Steve

 

[Guest]

Wow!!! What a hell


Mmmm....I was thinking....maybe Takom don't know nothing about it...., maybe only copied the photo the "drawer". not?


Is it possible??

 

[spanner570]

Plenty to chew over..


To be honest I'm not the slightest bit bothered about copyright, whatever you want to call it, I'm just chuffed to bits that my friends on here think the model holds up reasonably well against the 'box art'....or vice versa.


It was seeing the box art for the first time that really stood me back on my heels......"No, it can't be!" sez I. Closer look - wrong tank.


All good fun though, eh?

 

[Guest]

It's obviously your choice about the copyright issue Ron, but surely there's a matter of principal involved? If any of us copied a company's wares, we could be sued. I think those same rules should be applied to your intellectual property.


If money isn't an issue, get Takom to donate any settlement to charity - the British Legion or Help for Heroes perhaps.