Originally Posted by pilotdude57

The 3D printer would only be used to make the cowling plug, wheel pant plug, etc., not the whole fuselage (as for a fiberglass fuselage plug). Once I get things going I can have Proto Tech in Liberty Lake, Washington, not too far from me, use their $250,000 SLA 3D printer to make some parts for me, and they only have a $150 minimum charge, and the return on the investment to make plugs for vacuum forming would be justified. Even using a slower 3D machine that the library has would only take a couple of hours to produce a small engine cowl plug, and they would only charge me for the cost of the plastic. What is your company and what kits and ARFs do you produce? People on here would probably be interested to know. I don't see why a company like Guillows would have to provide much technical support, other than replacing defective parts, as the instructions and plans are all pretty much complete and inclusive, these are model airplanes, not computers, we are building. The only technical support that should be needed if for people who have never built an R/C airplane or display model before, where they are not sure about how to do something, and that could be addressed with a "FAQ" page on the website, for the most part. There would be no "cause of action" with a lawsuit from Guillows or Great Planes, or Hobbico, as the kits derived from the Guillows plans would be three or four times larger than their kits, so it would not cause them any loss of money, and might actually INCREASE their sales, with advertising their kits. In the case of a kit no longer being produced, as in Pica or Ikon N'wst kits, if they are no longer being produced then their is no financial harm to anyone, as no competition for their kits. A Judge would say, "Is his production causing you to lose money?". The answer would, of course, be "No". The Judge would say, "You have no cause of action", and dismiss the case. As a matter of fact, out of courtesy, I would forward them a bit of money for each kit I sold, so they would be getting FREE money, which nobody complains about.

Originally Posted by clandestoy

Pilotdude57,

Aaron's reasons for not continuing the line are his and not a topic for discussion on this or any forum. Why you decide to bring up personal information on someone you do not even know does not do much to support your purported portrayal as a serious and honorable business man. As I mentioned before, anyone doing a search on RCU's site can come up with the information you have stated. That said, it is not really a topic that you or anyone should be bringing up, and while he may have lived in Spokane at one time, he hasn't for quite some time now.

I know for a fact that you have NEVER spoken to him regarding his kits - EVER.

While you may think that re-sizing or re-purposing someone else's design will limit your legal liability, try re-sizing Mickey Mouse and releasing it with a new color scheme, or try blowing up a Bob Violet Models design and release it as a kit to see how far you get. I have done quite a bit of research on patents,copyrights and trademarks and can guarantee you that a good lawyer in that field will get the owner of the material a good outcome.

As for his contact info, he knows you exist and will reach out to you if he sees it fit. He has stayed out of the industry for his own reasons and I am sure he will re-introduce himself when he sees it fit to do so.

Originally Posted by RCKen

Ok, I'm going to step in here now. I am going to point what the RCU Community Rules say:
Regardless of what you may think here copying planes that have valid copyrights on them is illegal, no matter how you want to try and justify it. Even if a plane is not currently in production the copyright on that plane is still valid and can be enforced by the copyright holder for the ENTIRE period that they hold the copyright. I have been contacted by at least one company that you have already mentioned and I know that they are preparing possible actions to be taken. However, that's not why I am stepping in here. If you want to talk about your Kickstarter program that is fine. If you want to talk about the services that you are going to offer, that is fine. But if you want to talk about how you are going to copy and sell copyrighted materials then that is not fine and I'm going to step in and take actions. RCU has always supported the legal rights when it comes to copyrights such as these. If you can show that you have been granted permission to produce planes that are covered under copyrights then I will allow it's discussion here, otherwise you will need to keep them out of what you are talking about here.

Ken

Originally Posted by pilotdude57

Here's an idea for the "doubting Thomas's". Why don't you chip in $1 to $5 for the campaign, not expecting any returns, except the good probability that these kits will be available in the future for reduced cost since I will be using my own laser cutter, and spread the word around to all that you know, and have them spread the word around, and so on and so on (networking), so that it will be a successful campaign and I can get things going? If you lose $1 to $5 and, for some reason I have to do ANOTHER campaign to get the additional funding that I need, and that one fails also, you are only out $1 to $5. If 3,000 people chip in $5 that's $15,000 to get it going. Even if it doesn't ultimately succeed, then I can pay everyone back with my proceeds from the action against the FAA (which will include the last 10.5 years of salary at an average of $120,000 per year, as if an employee resigns BECAUSE OF being cheated it is "constructive discharge", same as wrongful termination), for cheating me out of $20,700 per year given to other IDENTICAL employees (which our attorney failed to tell the Judges about, however, even one Judge in the oral arguments said, "Are you telling me that there are identical employees in the same control tower getting different rates of pay?", where one of the other Judges responded with, "They wouldn't be here if that were not the case". They then used IDIOTIC reasoning to dismiss the case, however, that only concerned the SECONDARY slap in the face committed against us, how pay was set AFTER arriving at the new facilities, where it has been discovered that DURING our 14-month delay in moving we were given smaller pay raises, and on two occasions NO pay raise, than/that we would have been given if we had moved on time, so illegally putting us at the BOTTOM of the new pay band upon arriving at the new facilities was, "to add insult to injury". The INITIAL injustice has NOT gone through court (which giving us RETROACTIVE higher-percentage raises would correct the INITIAL injustice and AUTOMATICALLY correct the SECONDARY injustice and put our pay at the correct level at the new facilities WITHOUT being contrary to any court ruling), so the FAA Administrator can order Human Resources to pay us as if we moved AS SCHEDULED, and if that had been done I would now be in Seattle making $140,000 per year (actually I would be retired with a retirement income of around $75,000 per year, retiring last November as my mandatory retirement age was reached (56), at that time making $140,000 per year).

I can email you a copy of the MP3 file of the 45 minute oral arguments that you can listen to it yourself, just give me your email address at [email protected], or you can go to the website for the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and go to "oral arguments" and put in "Ted Brodowy v. U.S." case number 2006-5113. The MP3 oral arguments should still be available and you can listen as it is streamed to you. Very interesting example of "confusion in government". I am about to send a message to the FAA Administrator to the effect of: It is AGAINST THE LAW, and AGAINST FAA PERSONNEL REGULATIONS to apply DIFFERENT pay-setting procedures to the Air Traffic Controllers in the fourth year of the program to contract out control towers at small airports, where FAA controllers moved to higher-level facilities and were replaced by contract controllers, than the pay-setting procedures that were applied to those who moved in the first three years of the program". Section 2301(b)(2) and (b)(8), Title 5, U.S.C., which has been incorporated into the FAA Personnel Management System WORD-FOR-WORD, state, "Employees should be given fair and EQUITABLE treatment in all aspects of personnel management.......", and "Employees should be protected against ARBITRARY action".

Originally Posted by RCKen

Ok, I'm going to step in here now. I am going to point what the RCU Community Rules say:
Regardless of what you may think here copying planes that have valid copyrights on them is illegal, no matter how you want to try and justify it. Even if a plane is not currently in production the copyright on that plane is still valid and can be enforced by the copyright holder for the ENTIRE period that they hold the copyright. I have been contacted by at least one company that you have already mentioned and I know that they are preparing possible actions to be taken. However, that's not why I am stepping in here. If you want to talk about your Kickstarter program that is fine. If you want to talk about the services that you are going to offer, that is fine. But if you want to talk about how you are going to copy and sell copyrighted materials then that is not fine and I'm going to step in and take actions. RCU has always supported the legal rights when it comes to copyrights such as these. If you can show that you have been granted permission to produce planes that are covered under copyrights then I will allow it's discussion here, otherwise you will need to keep them out of what you are talking about here.

Ken

Originally Posted by RCKen

Ok, I'm going to step in here now. I am going to point what the RCU Community Rules say:
Regardless of what you may think here copying planes that have valid copyrights on them is illegal, no matter how you want to try and justify it. Even if a plane is not currently in production the copyright on that plane is still valid and can be enforced by the copyright holder for the ENTIRE period that they hold the copyright. I have been contacted by at least one company that you have already mentioned and I know that they are preparing possible actions to be taken. However, that's not why I am stepping in here. If you want to talk about your Kickstarter program that is fine. If you want to talk about the services that you are going to offer, that is fine. But if you want to talk about how you are going to copy and sell copyrighted materials then that is not fine and I'm going to step in and take actions. RCU has always supported the legal rights when it comes to copyrights such as these. If you can show that you have been granted permission to produce planes that are covered under copyrights then I will allow it's discussion here, otherwise you will need to keep them out of what you are talking about here.

Ken

Originally Posted by acerc

And if you (the OP) are being given a warning by an RCU administrator you can sure as %@#* bet all your info, namely ip address, has been given to the interested parties. And trying to erase breaking the law does not negate the original act. I would not want to be in your shoes!!!!

Originally Posted by willig10

9 pm still nothing. Let me guess, your old computer dont work or the files are missing.

Originally Posted by pilotdude57

You act as if SAYING you are going to bring old out of production kits is a criminal act. Wouldn't want to be in my shoes! LOL

Originally Posted by acerc

When you solicit and accept funds in the guise of producing a protected from infringement product, yes, you bet your sweet petunia that is a criminal act. And I also said those with interest in such products will be seeking legal recourse. And probably even hand there findings over to whom ever they choose to prosecute under fraud.
Where it currently stands you have already committed the acts. No turning back now.

Originally Posted by egc-8

I own Ikon N'wst I will not allow anyone to produce them on a royalty basis. However I will sell everything lock stock and barrel. Make an offer. Most kits are setup to laser cut.

Originally Posted by pilotdude57

What is your name and where do you live, and what company and kind of work did you do when you bought Ikon N'wst?