The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Ever so sleightly » » Paul Fox Cups Confusion (7 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2
Scott F. Guinn
View Profile
Inner circle
"Great Scott!" aka "Palms of Putty" & "Poof Daddy G"
6586 Posts

Profile of Scott F. Guinn
Part of the reason Busby might have let the PF thing lapse is that he had a major stroke. Don't know for sure if that's the reason, but it certainly could be a contributing factor. While I've had my differences with Jeff, I certainly do not wish a major medical trauma like that on anyone.
"Love God, laugh more, spend more time with the ones you love, play with children, do good to those in need, and eat more ice cream. There is more to life than magic tricks." - Scott F. Guinn
My Lybrary Page
Bill Palmer
View Profile
Eternal Order
Only Jonathan Townsend has more than
24315 Posts

Profile of Bill Palmer
I have had a lot of experience with copyrights. I own a handful of them exclusively, and I own from 1/9 to 1/3 of well over 700 copyrighted items that my father wrote.

When Magic Inc. issued The New Modern Coin Magic, they simply forgot to renew the old version. This took place during what one would call a "fluke" time in the history of the copyright law. Congress was getting ready to pass the Copyright act of 1976, but it had not gone through all its ramifications. The copyright on Modern Coin Magic expired in 1970. Once it expired, the book was in the public domain. The new edition was not, but the old edition was. Jay was embarrassed about this more than he was angered. He had been in the publishing business long enough to know how the law worked. He simply figured that the copyright on the new edition would cover the old one. But since the new edition has a different title, it did not. If he had called it Modern Coin Magic, second edition he might have been able to save it.

Dover books has a team of copyright attorneys who look for "hot" books on all subjects. They would have done this with Greater Magic, but it did not fall into the same category. The copyright was renewed by the Carl Waring Jones estate, and this fell under a new part of the law. It extended the copyright for a much longer period. Cole's books in Canada does the same thing.

When you get into the "real" world of publishing, "fairness" is not a factor. Too bad.
"The Swatter"

Founder of CODBAMMC

My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups."

www.cupsandballsmuseum.com
tabman
View Profile
Inner circle
USA
5946 Posts

Profile of tabman
That's interesting stuff, Bill. Thanks for posting it. That helps me understand that saga much better now.

-=tabman
...Your professional woodworking and "tender" loving care in the products you make, make the wait worthwhile. Thanks for all you do...

http://Sefalaljia.com
Bill Palmer
View Profile
Eternal Order
Only Jonathan Townsend has more than
24315 Posts

Profile of Bill Palmer
Here's a new twist to the copyright saga.

I'm writing this in October of 2022. When this thread was started in 2005, a number of changes in the copyright laws of the US were taking place, or had just begun to go into effect. Our laws were not in compliance with the bulk of the Intellectual Property laws of most of the rest of the world. In 1996, we became signatories to the most comprehensive set of IP laws, the Berne Accord. Most countries, other than India and China, are signatories to that set of laws. Up until then, copyrights from (former) iron curtain countries were not recognized by the US. Now they are, and the estates of composers whose works had been published without compensation in the US are getting back royalties (up to three years' worth).

Also some of the loopholes in US copyright laws have been tightened. A classic was that by various and sundry manipulative practices, several different licensing agencies had managed to stretch the copyright of "Happy Birthday to You" from 56 years to well over 100 years. In a courtroom trial before a judge, the judge looked at the defendant's evidence and said, "The *** song is over 100 years old. It's in the public domain!" In this case, "in the public domain" means it has no copyright any longer. This led to a decision that basically extended the lengths of most copyrights in the US to 95 years from the first date of publication. So a lot of things that had gone into the public domain, such as Modern Coin Magic by J.B. Bobo, were now under copyright once more. But it simplified calculations. No more renewals. It's done.

I'm sorry Pete didn't live to see this. Or Jay, or J.B. Bobo.
"The Swatter"

Founder of CODBAMMC

My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups."

www.cupsandballsmuseum.com
Bill Palmer
View Profile
Eternal Order
Only Jonathan Townsend has more than
24315 Posts

Profile of Bill Palmer
Quote:
On Jun 14, 2005, tabman wrote:

Same with Jeff on the PF tm. Those things only run 20 years. The way he guarded it you would think that he would have taken care of it and renewed during the renewal period. I find that kind of stuff odd and baffling.

Question: Did the Bobo Book go into the public domain when Jay's cpr lapsed? It must of if even for a moment. Does that mean that Magic Inc. could publish their own version of the book still and copyright it. The way I read it it does.

-=tabman


Not to disrespect those who have gone on before (Tabman, not Busby), but trademark registration requires that the trademark actually be used in some form or another. Gibson, USA owned the "Mastertone" trademark which they originally used on several different instruments (starting ca. 1924), but which they narrowed down to banjos. Gibson Mastertone banjos became the de facto gold standard of bluegrass banjo manufacturing. However, as of now, they haven't manufactured any banjos for several years. A fellow I know in Florida, who makes some really nice medium-priced instruments waited the allotted time and registered the trademark. Now Gibson can't use it anymore. Is Gibson upset over it? Probably. Is it going to affect their bottom line? NO. They make their profits on high priced solid body electric guitars.

Intellectual Property law is a complex mess, changing with every day, for all intents and purposes. Trademarks are part physical and part intellectual. They can be anything that is repesented by a logo or a shape or even a sound. The first trademarked "sound" was the NBC chimes. But if they aren't used, they crater. And these days, they need to be renewed every 10 years or so. It doesn't cost much, but they are valid as long as they get used and the company that owns them pays the fee. Patents have a finite life -- about 25 years or so. You can check that yourself on the USPTO.gov site (United States Patent and Trademark Office.) Patents apply to mechanical devices, systems, methods, but all of them have to be verifiable entities. It is specifically stated in the USPTO regulations that you can't patent, trademark or copyright an idea. Ideas are transitory. You can trademark the physical representation of an idea, and you can patent the physical manifestation of an idea. These are specific. Ideas are not.

This brings me to an interesting quirk in the law. Take a microchip, for example, the big CPU chip in your computer. Is it patented? No. It's copyrighted. Why? Because the chip is basically a set of prints of a photograph that is used to make the chip. That basically quadruples the life of the government protection.

Did you ever wonder why TI stock and IBM stock seem to stay afloat when other people in the computer biz go TU? They own the copyright on the chip that interfaces the keyboard of every computer to the CPU. That copyright still has a few more decades to run.
"The Swatter"

Founder of CODBAMMC

My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups."

www.cupsandballsmuseum.com
lint
View Profile
Special user
Concord, CA
967 Posts

Profile of lint
Quote:
On Nov 20, 2022, Bill Palmer wrote:
Not to disrespect those who have gone on before (Tabman, not Busby), but trademark registration requires that the trademark actually be used in some form or another. Gibson, USA owned the "Mastertone" trademark which they originally used on several different instruments (starting ca. 1924), but which they narrowed down to banjos. Gibson Mastertone banjos became the de facto gold standard of bluegrass banjo manufacturing. However, as of now, they haven't manufactured any banjos for several years. A fellow I know in Florida, who makes some really nice medium-priced instruments waited the allotted time and registered the trademark. Now Gibson can't use it anymore. Is Gibson upset over it? Probably. Is it going to affect their bottom line? NO. They make their profits on high priced solid body electric guitars.


See also John Hall at Rickenbacker. They rigorously go after any and all trademark violations when they can so they can defend their ownership of their distinct shapes and various bits that go into their guitars.
"There's many a slip 'twixt the cup and the lip..." -English Proverb
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Ever so sleightly » » Paul Fox Cups Confusion (7 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.03 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL