Re: Copyrights/Copywrongs

From: Steven (
Date: Wed Feb 21 2001 - 21:04:06 EET

Well I can speak for how we will handle copyright issues on our realtime
automation of CAD jewelry items. Our subscriber licensing agreement is for a
single purchase/single sale of each mounting. The user never gets access to the
.stl file since it resides on our server but they could potentially make a
rubber mold of the finished mounting that we sell them. Actually this happens
all the time so the issue of doping an .stl seems to miss the mark since the
finished piece can always be molded. The license would prohibit the molding and
mass production of our models. Copyright enforcement will always be a legal
issue instead of a technology issue.

In effect we have automated the creation of master models with our patent
pending technology and this might seem very tempting for a manufacturer to
purchase a series of our mountings for use in their production process but our
business model is to provide mass customization to independent jewelers for
single use resale.

By late summer we will have 100 elastometric jewelry models. As we increase
this library and as RP gets faster and more accurate there would be little
incentive for mass production by using molds since the per model RP cost will
keep declining. We will eventually be able to price custom RP created jewelry
as innexpensive as traditional mass production produced pieces.

Actually, when direct metal fabrication processes like DTM, EOS, or POM start
using precious metals we might actually be able to produce for less than
traditional mass production by skipping the lost wax process altogether.

Steven Pollack
President, Digital Jewler, LLC
660 Vernon Ave
Glencoe, IL 60022

"Steven Adler ( A3DM )" wrote:

> Well said, thank you for passing that along....I never thought the
> conversation would go this far.....
> I wonder what the jewelry industry will do as they are moving towards CAD
> being a viable creative form. I know some people who have made more on
> copyright infringement suits than they did producing the item ( net ). The
> process of protecting Copyright and Trademark in this industry is a business
> in itself.....
> Did you know that no jeweler can make a "nautical" style stainless steel
> cable product that includes a gold component without infringing on a US
> trademark owned by a French holding company.....? Strange but true.....
> Steven Adler CEO
> Automated 3D Modeling
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Elaine Hunt" <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 11:21 AM
> Subject: Copyrights/Copywrongs
> > by Jack Munday,
> > Esq.
> > Munday and Stanton
> > 3434 Garrett Road, Suite 100
> > Drexel Hill, PA 19026 610-259-2381
> >
> > The English poet Keats has said that "A thing of beauty is a joy for
> ever."
> > Whether by intention or by pleasant surprise, metalworking artisans
> > occasionally create a thing of beauty and a work of art. The
> > concern we have as artisans, therefore, is not whether the beauty will
> last
> > but whether we will be able to reap the benefit from our work. In other
> > words, while Emerson may have said "The reward of a
> > thing well done is to have done it" he made his living as a writer, not as
> > a creator of beauty for the beholder. How does an artisan protect the
> > beautiful thing that has been created?
> >
> > Congress has recognized that works of art need to be protected and has
> > included pictorial, graphic and sculptural works in that class of works
> > that may be protected by copyrights. Title 17 U.S.C. Section
> > 102(a)(5) covers these types of creations. Congress has also said that the
> > definition of sculptural works implies no criterion of artistic taste,
> > aesthetic value or intrinsic quality. In other words, as long as
> > you made what you consider to be a work of art as a metal worker, it is
> > capable of being protected by the copyright laws.
> >
> > There are two separate issues for metalworking artisans and these issues
> > arise depending upon what the artisan is intending to do. An artisan may
> > create a sculpture that has no functional use, such as a
> > statue or ornamental object that has its appearance as its sole function.
> > The non-functional object is clearly entitled to copyright protection. At
> > the other end of the scale is the creation of a totally
> > functional work, as simple as a nail or as complicated as a working
> > machine. If the functional object also is aesthetically pleasing, such as
> a
> > door knocker, bookend, candlestick and the like, then the form
> > (but not the substance) of the object is properly protected by a
> copyright.
> > While the machine may be patentable, and that is a totally different
> > matter, by itself it is not protectable by copyright laws.
> >
> > QUESTION: How do I obtain a copyright on my 18 ton artistic,
> > aesthetically pleasing (to me, if no one else) sculpture?
> >
> > ANSWER: Registration of copyrights for sculptural works and objects
> > of art may be accomplished by sending in Form VA with the appropriate
> > information requested, along with a $20.00
> > fee to the Register of Copyrights at the Library of Congress. The
> > form is relatively self explanatory, and can be done by the author without
> > assistance of an intellectual property lawyer.
> >
> > QUESTION: If I make a metalwork sculpture, or several incorporating
> > the same intrinsic artistic appearance, can I sell a copy that I make and
> > still keep my copyright?
> >
> > ANSWER: Yes, just as a publisher sells books without concern that
> > others will make copies of the book to sell, a sculpture or other
> > ornamental design is sold without giving any right to
> > the purchaser of the object to make copies. That right remains with
> > the owner of the copyright, not with the owner of the copy.
> >
> > If your artistic work is worth protecting, it is advisable to contact an
> > intellectual property attorney who has had experience in copyright law, at
> > least for an initial consultation. Getting good advice before
> > you start is like any precautionary measure. Better safe than sorry, as
> > someone is always saying.
> >
> > The owner of a copyright has the exclusive right to display sculptural
> > works and other solid, physical creations that might be created by an
> > artist-blacksmith. Included in that right is the exclusive right to
> > reproduce the pictorial, graphic or sculptural work in copies, including
> > reproducing the work in or on any kind of article, whether useful or
> > otherwise. An artist, for example, can paint a picture, register the
> > copyright of the painting, and then license the right to reproduce the
> > image on tee-shirts, plates and cups, and other functional objects. The
> > artist-blacksmith can do the same thing.
> >
> > Samuel Yellin created the gates at the entrance to Northwestern
> University,
> > in Evanston, Illinois. I wonder if he sold the rights to copy the work, or
> > if he even obtained a copyright. The gates are used
> > often by the school as a symbol unique to Northwestern.
> >
> > Here in Philadelphia we are witnessing the demise of the famed Wanamaker
> > department stores. In the 'showcase' store in center city, Philadelphia,
> > the 2500 pound bronze eagle has been in residence since
> > 1911. The eagles individually crafted feathers were hammered and bent
> while
> > hot, and fit into place by hand. The head alone contains 1600 feathers,
> and
> > 5,000 more on the body. Created by August Gaul
> > of Berlin and manufactured in Frankfort, Germany, the eagle was created
> for
> > the 1904 Louisiana Purchase Exposition, held in St. Louis.
> >
> > The Wanamaker eagle, as it is known, has served as a landmark in the city
> > of brotherly love, and has become a trademark logo of Wanamakers. The
> > company undoubtedly has made great and substantial use of the work ever
> > since it took its place. One presumes that the copyright was purchased,
> for
> > it is clear copyright law that purchasing an object, even a great work of
> > art, does not convey the copyright as well. Remember our analogy that one
> > who buys a book does not obtain the right to copy it.
> >
> > While most artist-metalsmiths are not fortunate enough to create a work
> > that becomes the symbol of a major retail organization, they are creating
> > works all the time. Remember that the right to copy your original work is
> > not transferred when you sell the work. One advantage of being
> commissioned
> > to create a work of art for a company or organization is that the work
> will
> > become prominent. It would be worth while reminding your purchasers of
> that
> > fact as they intend to use the image of the work in their main business.
> > Then might want to pay more for all the rights.
> >
> > In 1990, the Visual Artists Rights Act. 17 U.S.C. 106A was added to the
> > copyright laws, hence lawyers are involved with those items that qualify
> as
> > visual arts. These things include paintings, drawings,
> > photographs, sculptures and the like, provided that less than 200 copies
> > exist, that the author has signed or placed an identifying mark thereon,
> > and has numbered them consecutively beginning with the
> > first or original version. Thus sculptures would seem to qualify, and in
> > fact do qualify under this provision of the law if it is placed in a
> > building in such a way that it cannot be removed from the building
> > without modification or destruction. An example would be a major sculpture
> > created in the lobby of a building , and, of course, the fact that it is
> in
> > a building means that there is a real estate owner
> > involved. Real estate being what it is, mainly something far less lasting
> > than art, there often comes a time when the owner decides to change the
> > nature of a property, such as by making a parking lot out
> > of the building. The use of a bulldozer or other form of building
> > destruction would, in its use, also destroy the sculpture. To destroy a
> > wonderful, or not so wonderful, work of art is a violation of the
> > author's moral right. And all that is true unless the work of art is in
> the
> > public domain.
> >
> > This law is new and applies only to visual art that is protected by a
> > copyright and that is not created as a work for hire. There is one major
> > decision on this provision in which an artist was successful in
> > preventing a major property management firm from removing the work from
> the
> > lobby. A trial judge actually found that the work was one of recognized
> > stature and removing the work would in fact
> > damage the artists' reputation.
> >
> > What does this mean to building owners? They are having their lawyers draw
> > up the appropriate contract language to make sure this never happens
> again.
> > In fact, real estate lawyers who don't take this
> > law into account when it fits may be guilty of malpractice.
> >
> > What does this mean to a metalsmith? It means that when a metalsmith
> > creates a work of visual art by creating a sculpture, and when that
> > sculpture is placed in a building on display, the metalsmith also
> > creates certain rights that may be valuable to him. These rights are
> > attribution rights and integrity rights. The former includes the right to
> > have the author's name used in conjunction with a display of the
> > work and also to prevent the use of the author's name after the work has
> > been distorted, mutilated or modified to be prejudicial to his or her
> honor
> > or reputation. Integrity rights permit the author to
> > prevent any intentional distortion, mutilation or other such modification.
> > Under some circumstances that means the building can't be torn down and
> > even, possibly, that the sculpture can't even be
> > removed.
> >
> > Which brings me back to the lawyer in the situation. If you create
> > sculpture or any other visual art, see an intellectual property lawyer
> > before you create it and before you sign any contract relating to that
> > creation. Knowing your rights puts you no worse than on equal footing with
> > the building owner.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *******************************************************************
> > Opinions, suggestions, and other controversial matter VOID where
> prohibited.
> >
> > Hell is truth learned too late. John Locke
> >
> > ******************************************************************
> > Elaine T. Hunt, Director
> > Laboratory to Advance Industrial Prototyping
> > Clemson University 206 Fluor Daniel Bldg.
> > Clemson, SC 29634-0925
> > 864-656-0321 (voice) 864-656-4435 (fax)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > For more information about the rp-ml, see
> >
> For more information about the rp-ml, see

For more information about the rp-ml, see

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Jan 04 2002 - 09:56:52 EET