Bud Nosen 310
10-01-2003, 02:53 PM
#2
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Mary Esther, Florida, FL
Posts: 20,205
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
14 Posts
RE: Bud Nosen 310
Agman29:
How about Bud Nosen???
Bite the bullet, pay the bucks.
Nosen is not in business for the fun of it, but rather for his health. Selling the plans puts food on his table, and keeps him healthy.
Please do not steal from him.
Thanks.
Bill.
How about Bud Nosen???
Bite the bullet, pay the bucks.
Nosen is not in business for the fun of it, but rather for his health. Selling the plans puts food on his table, and keeps him healthy.
Please do not steal from him.
Thanks.
Bill.
10-01-2003, 05:15 PM
#4
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Mary Esther, Florida, FL
Posts: 20,205
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
14 Posts
RE: Bud Nosen 310
Agman:
All American Kit Cutters is an agent.
All American Kit Cutters
365 Dutch Neck Rd
Hightstown, NJ 08520
Telephone: (609) 443-3175
www.aero-sports.com/aakc
HTH.
Bill.
All American Kit Cutters is an agent.
All American Kit Cutters
365 Dutch Neck Rd
Hightstown, NJ 08520
Telephone: (609) 443-3175
www.aero-sports.com/aakc
HTH.
Bill.
10-01-2003, 09:32 PM
#5
Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gwynn Oak,
MD,
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Bud Nosen 310
The request for plans above seems to be in line with the activity on this site.
I did not think buying someones used plans was stealing. To imply that someone is contemplating stealing because they ask if anyone has a certain set of plans flys in the face of the Miscellaneous forum on the old RCU. There was a section set aside for the sale of previously owned plans. Guys (and girls) sell previously used items (including plans) here all the time. Is this a new RCU policy that no used items can be sold here if the original manufacturer is still in business?
I just noticed that there is a plans for sale section here. If someone offers the Nosen 310 plans there is it stealing to buy them? Is RCU aiding and abetting?
I just think implying attempted theft was kinda harsh.
I did not think buying someones used plans was stealing. To imply that someone is contemplating stealing because they ask if anyone has a certain set of plans flys in the face of the Miscellaneous forum on the old RCU. There was a section set aside for the sale of previously owned plans. Guys (and girls) sell previously used items (including plans) here all the time. Is this a new RCU policy that no used items can be sold here if the original manufacturer is still in business?
I just noticed that there is a plans for sale section here. If someone offers the Nosen 310 plans there is it stealing to buy them? Is RCU aiding and abetting?
I just think implying attempted theft was kinda harsh.
10-01-2003, 10:16 PM
#6
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Mary Esther, Florida, FL
Posts: 20,205
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
14 Posts
RE: Bud Nosen 310
scalefan4:
Yes, perhaps it was harsh. But the plan seller sells the right to build and maintain one airplane from each set. Just like buying software, you are licensed to use it on only one machine. Even though you can take the CD around and install it on several other machines. And you can build more planes from the same plans.
I don't think anybody is going to come after you for building more planes, or loading your software on three machines.
But it's still not right.
RCU has no official prohibition against selling ORIGINAL plans, but the selling of COPIES is not allowed. If the selling of copies without the permission of the copyright holder becomes klnown to management all concerned posts will be removed.
My personal feeling is that once you have built the first plane from the plan your license is used. While you can convey or sell the plan to another party the purchaser DOES NOT have permission to build from the plan. And if he does so he is in violation of the copyright.
Some designers have said they do not care how many planes are built from one set of their plans, but far more want it limited to a single plane from each plan.
I suppose it just depends on how strong your conscience is.
Bill.
Yes, perhaps it was harsh. But the plan seller sells the right to build and maintain one airplane from each set. Just like buying software, you are licensed to use it on only one machine. Even though you can take the CD around and install it on several other machines. And you can build more planes from the same plans.
I don't think anybody is going to come after you for building more planes, or loading your software on three machines.
But it's still not right.
RCU has no official prohibition against selling ORIGINAL plans, but the selling of COPIES is not allowed. If the selling of copies without the permission of the copyright holder becomes klnown to management all concerned posts will be removed.
My personal feeling is that once you have built the first plane from the plan your license is used. While you can convey or sell the plan to another party the purchaser DOES NOT have permission to build from the plan. And if he does so he is in violation of the copyright.
Some designers have said they do not care how many planes are built from one set of their plans, but far more want it limited to a single plane from each plan.
I suppose it just depends on how strong your conscience is.
Bill.
10-01-2003, 11:21 PM
#8
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Mary Esther, Florida, FL
Posts: 20,205
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
14 Posts
RE: Bud Nosen 310
TLH:
Printed media is published for multiple readers. Quit being ridiculous.
What is illegal for printed matter is copying. As it is for plans.
Bill.
Printed media is published for multiple readers. Quit being ridiculous.
What is illegal for printed matter is copying. As it is for plans.
Bill.
10-02-2003, 08:28 AM
#9
Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gwynn Oak,
MD,
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Bud Nosen 310
Last comment: Where does it say "copy" in the original request that started this thread?
My only concern is the imputing of wrong motives to request that fall well within accepted and encouraged activities on RCU.
My only concern is the imputing of wrong motives to request that fall well within accepted and encouraged activities on RCU.
10-04-2003, 06:37 PM
#10
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Kortessem, BELGIUM
Posts: 3,609
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
12 Posts
RE: Bud Nosen 310
My conscience tells me that if I buy a set of plans, build a beautiful twin engined airplane and consequently wreck it for some odd reason, I will head down to the basement and start building a new plane from the same set of plans...
I totally understand people don't want other people copying their stuff just like that.
But saying I am only allowed to build one plane from MY set of plans is taking things a bit too far IMHO...
By the way, how many times is a set of plans going to change hands...? I know what my plans look like after I get through with them... and I even take care not to ruin them...
I totally understand people don't want other people copying their stuff just like that.
But saying I am only allowed to build one plane from MY set of plans is taking things a bit too far IMHO...
By the way, how many times is a set of plans going to change hands...? I know what my plans look like after I get through with them... and I even take care not to ruin them...
10-05-2003, 11:10 PM
#11
RE: Bud Nosen 310
I have seen a few examples among full size plans built aircraft where the purchase of a set of plans includes the purchase of a liscense to manufacture one example of the aircraft. The plans are even serial numbered. Repairs would not constitute the manufacture of a second example. Exceptions would be public domain plans and those which specify unlimited examples. Hmmm, wotta concept. BTW, even with a plans protector my examples are usually pretty beatup by the time I'm done with them.
10-05-2003, 11:14 PM
#12
RE: Bud Nosen 310
Hold the phone! Are we talking plans to complete a kit? One could consider them part of the kit and as such they are basically no differnt from a wing rib or a part of a spar.
My head hurts.
My head hurts.
10-15-2003, 08:39 AM
#13
Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Arkadelphia,
AR
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Bud Nosen 310
Thanks for all the replies. The reason that I left the original post was to find out what the quality of the plans were. I have heard that the kits leave something to be desired. I will purchase the plans from kit cutters like WR first posted. Thank you.
10-17-2003, 08:16 AM
#15
Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Arkadelphia,
AR
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Bud Nosen 310
Thanks FLYBOY. I tried to look them up on the web, but I forgot the address. Can you give me the number and I will call them. Thanks
01-24-2004, 10:34 AM
#17
Member
My Feedback: (23)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: DERBY,
KS
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Bud Nosen 310
I guess I'm getting in on this late - I was really looking for info on building the Nosen P-51 - but REALLY " Quit being ridiculous"! Yes it's illegal and plain ole wrong to copy a set of copyrighted plans to sell & rip off the owner of the copyright. There is NOTHING wrong with selling or giving away the ORIGINAL plans or building multiple models from the same set of original plans. Your REALLY trying to split hairs. According to your "logic" you can't build a replacement using the original plans. I have an OLD Nosen Citabria that I'm seriously considering building a replacement for. I'm NOT going to throw away the old one - it still flys so I'll sell it. It'll make someone a nice starter large scale plane. I will probably build the replacement from the somewhat faded & ragged ORIGINAL plans. If my NOSEN Mustang & Jenny are lucky enough to survive that long (not to mention ME) I'll do the same with them. I challenge you to get Nosen or AA industries to find any fault with that.
I have a couple of sets opf plans that have been blown up larger - TECHINICALLY speaking the copyright was violated because the enlargement requires COPYING the original. I've never heard of ANYONE complaining about that but you "logic" says it both illegal AND wrong to do so. Additionally, when scratch building I copy the ribs & formers for cutting the wood. I even have one set of plans (f7f?) that TELLS you to do so right on the ORIGINAL plan! Some of the commercial custom kit cutters have a COPY of the ribs & formers glued to the cut pieces - I'll bet they don't buy a new set of plans for every kit they cut! CALL THE COPS!
I have a couple of sets opf plans that have been blown up larger - TECHINICALLY speaking the copyright was violated because the enlargement requires COPYING the original. I've never heard of ANYONE complaining about that but you "logic" says it both illegal AND wrong to do so. Additionally, when scratch building I copy the ribs & formers for cutting the wood. I even have one set of plans (f7f?) that TELLS you to do so right on the ORIGINAL plan! Some of the commercial custom kit cutters have a COPY of the ribs & formers glued to the cut pieces - I'll bet they don't buy a new set of plans for every kit they cut! CALL THE COPS!
01-24-2004, 09:32 PM
#18
Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Lake Placid,
FL
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Bud Nosen 310
This is a great example of why this hobby is going down the tubes, all I hear at the field are people arguing over the dumbest things. Just about every post that gets put on any forum here anymore turns into a verbal slugfest, Jees, I've had enough, Good bye RCU
01-25-2004, 05:34 AM
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Anchorage,
AK
Posts: 2,565
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Bud Nosen 310
It's not "about you"...
The obvious ethical issue here is beyond debate. Instead of thinking "What if I.... (whatever)", try thinking from Bud Nosen's point of view.
RC modeling isn't going to make millions of dollars for anyone, as a rule. A guy conceives, designs, and tests a plane, then starts selling kits. If everyone who had a set of plans started selling them, copying them freely, and/or distributing them in any way, it takes income away from the designer. It's that simple, no matter how you qualify it. I don't think Bud Nosen or any designer, for that matter would mind you repairing your (paid for) airplane, using your (paid for) plans, but I'm positive that he would mind you copying, selling, or even trading them, when that is his business. ... And, just because you can "get away with it", that doesn't make it ok. What we need to do is support each other's endeavors, not sabotage them and possibly even drive them out of business. To say that it's "harmless" implies that you don't care about the quality of the product you're trying to copy. If it's "no big deal", then why not draw your own plans?
I get this all the time, for no other reason than the fact that I have a web site. I get many requests per year for each of my designs, from people who want me to simply "send them my drawings", or "send them my CAD model", or whatever. Why? It's not for research! It's so that they can use my work to create their own (copy) of my design, without paying me or putting out any time, research, or other effort on their own.
That's why, thanks to people like the ones above, I skew all the images on my site, and never publish isometric images which reflect the true design. (You can copy/download them, but you're copying an inaccurate image.) Boeing, Lockheed Martin, etc., all do this, and even many of the (EPS) graphics on the NASA Dryden site are skewed. (I've seen EPS files of airplanes that were not even bilaterally symmetrical in the top view.)
That's why more manufacturers are making ARFs and molded planes, too... No full-size drawings required, and as a by-product, less piracy. You can copy them physically, by making molds from their parts, etc., but it's a lot of money and time, compared to simply getting drawings duplicated. As soon as you publish or distribute an accurate image of a design today, you can probably kiss a hefty percentage of your potential customers goodbye.
If you have a conscience, I suggest paying for the things you use. The originator deserves it.
The obvious ethical issue here is beyond debate. Instead of thinking "What if I.... (whatever)", try thinking from Bud Nosen's point of view.
RC modeling isn't going to make millions of dollars for anyone, as a rule. A guy conceives, designs, and tests a plane, then starts selling kits. If everyone who had a set of plans started selling them, copying them freely, and/or distributing them in any way, it takes income away from the designer. It's that simple, no matter how you qualify it. I don't think Bud Nosen or any designer, for that matter would mind you repairing your (paid for) airplane, using your (paid for) plans, but I'm positive that he would mind you copying, selling, or even trading them, when that is his business. ... And, just because you can "get away with it", that doesn't make it ok. What we need to do is support each other's endeavors, not sabotage them and possibly even drive them out of business. To say that it's "harmless" implies that you don't care about the quality of the product you're trying to copy. If it's "no big deal", then why not draw your own plans?
I get this all the time, for no other reason than the fact that I have a web site. I get many requests per year for each of my designs, from people who want me to simply "send them my drawings", or "send them my CAD model", or whatever. Why? It's not for research! It's so that they can use my work to create their own (copy) of my design, without paying me or putting out any time, research, or other effort on their own.
That's why, thanks to people like the ones above, I skew all the images on my site, and never publish isometric images which reflect the true design. (You can copy/download them, but you're copying an inaccurate image.) Boeing, Lockheed Martin, etc., all do this, and even many of the (EPS) graphics on the NASA Dryden site are skewed. (I've seen EPS files of airplanes that were not even bilaterally symmetrical in the top view.)
That's why more manufacturers are making ARFs and molded planes, too... No full-size drawings required, and as a by-product, less piracy. You can copy them physically, by making molds from their parts, etc., but it's a lot of money and time, compared to simply getting drawings duplicated. As soon as you publish or distribute an accurate image of a design today, you can probably kiss a hefty percentage of your potential customers goodbye.
If you have a conscience, I suggest paying for the things you use. The originator deserves it.
