Old 01-19-11, 11:16 AM
  #30  
AZORCH
Senior Member
 
AZORCH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Liberty, Missouri
Posts: 3,120

Bikes: 1966 Paramount | 1971 Raleigh International | ca. 1970 Bernard Carre | 1989 Waterford Paramount | 2012 Boulder Brevet | 2019 Specialized Diverge

Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 129 Post(s)
Liked 77 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by khatfull
Couldn't one make the argument that the restoration of a vintage bike has a "history" element? I mean, if I write a report on George Washington I'm not violating copyright by including his photo am I? Repro decals get made all the time for cars...why not bikes?
That takes you into the "fair use" argument, which applies to journalism, research, and scholastic use. Those only apply - up to a point - teachers, for example, used to use the "fair use" argument to copy sheet music so all students could have a copy. But it gets dicey and publishers lose money to people who copy, so districts tend to have policies that prevent teachers from copying because it takes money out of the pocket of the copyright owner. That is most likely the real 'test' (because everything else we talked about in this thread is purely academic) - and that is: what loss takes place? You or I restoring our bikes: no loss. Someone using another company's logo for reproduction decals: arguably, some sort of loss. There's a reason Nike protects the use of its logo.

In actual practice, none of this is going to stop me from the restoration, whether I purchase a bootleg decal or manufacture it myself!
AZORCH is offline