List Created Using Scott: Copyright Issue Or Plagerism?

Hi Everyone, (see photo below)
Since I have such a hard time using the Scott Catalogue, I made up my own list of stamps with photo and description. I did this because I wanted to see all the stamps in Scott # order, not just some of them.

This list, is not a spreadsheet, like in Excel or in MS Word, but instead, I have created a website / webpage but am I allowed to post this page for the whole world to view it, or is it considered copyright infringement since I took all the information right from the Scott Cataloge?

I read up on this issue a little bit, some say that it's okay if you change the text to "make it my own" but then isn't it considered plagerism?

Anyway, here is what it looks like. I love it because the photos are nice and big, all aligned to the left and with the information. Here is a snapshot of part of one pages

The webpage you see in my original thread is Canal Zone, airmail, all 53 stamps, it's very nice if I say so myself

Oh, missing a one Scott stamp # & images though... I could not find the image of C5a online anywhere, if anyone has that....

(Canal Zone, airmail, C5a, 1929, 20c on 2c, dropped "2" in surcharge)

My other question would be, if anyone wanted a copy, for personal use, would I be allowed to give them a copy?

Thank you!
SueStamps

There has been some debate aboout this issue on SCF before, with some differing views and opinions. I believe that Scott views its numbering system as copyrighted, and would not be happy with your efforts if published. What you have effectively done - from their point of view as I would imagine it - is to copy their catalogue using their numbering system, to the extent that someone reading your version would not need to buy the original.
So my view is that if you kept the list for your own use, there would not be a problem. If you put it out for public view, Scott may have legal issues with it.
EDIT on your second question, I have no idea!

The Copyright Notice right off of my copy of the Scott Catalog:



I think you need to be concerned with part (c). If I read it correctly and rephrase it (and I'm no legal expert) the theory is that if you intend to use the numbering system in a "catalog" or "stamp album" -- even a computerized one -- and do not intend to use it for selling said stamps, then it is a violation of the copyright.

Stampgal hit the nail on the head. If you're doing this for your private use, you can write whatever you want. The moment you share it publicly, whether you intend to profit from it or not is irrelevant, it becomes a violation of their copyright. This would include publishing this information on your personal blog or website.

Thank you all so much. I have removed the web page so it is not available for the public.

I appreciate it!
SueStamps

Hi SueStamps,

I agree with WT1. You are just copying the Scott catalog using a different format. You cannot put the list on public view but it is all right for your own use.

A good case in point is the web site USA1847. That site used Scott numbers and Scott requested that the numbers be removed. Now the site has permission to use Scott numbers and is back to what it once was.

Personally, I have a stamp reference system that utilizes Scott (primarily), Minkus(now defunct), Michel, Yvert & Tellier and Stanley Gibbons catalog numbers. It has been suggested that I publish the reference, but it would take a lot of work, and I expect expenses, to get permission, in writing, from all the catalog printers. So I just give the reference away for the asking.

On a different note. It seems to me that it would be nicer if the descriptive text under the stamp is moved to the right of the stamp. If the text is too long you could wrap it under the picture. Just my opinion. Anyways, nice job.

Jerry B

Sue, First of all, I congratulate you on a job well done - the display is great. However, all of the responses are pretty much "right on". But, I think there is an easy fix. First, use your own numbering system and maintain a spreadsheet which cross references your number to the Scott number. Second, remember that Scott cannot "copyright" anything but their own interpretation and catalog value of the item. Easiest way to do it is to pretend that Scott does not exist, and describe what you see in your own words. For example, for the top set, it could be as simple as "Plane Flying over Guillard Cut - Set of 9 values" and include you number. Or you could be more descriptive such as "This set of 9 stamps depict an airplane flying over a ship in the Guillard Cut which was created during the construction of the Panama Canal."

See new photo of my own numbering system below....

Reading stampgal's reply, it makes total sense about using Scott's numbering system.

So, I have just made up my own numbering system, which I like because each airmail stamp won't start with the letter "C" but with their own number, each number will be unique, better to do a search too.

Like for Canal Zone, Airmail stamp, the very first numbered stamp, (Scott's C1) would be CZAM#1 (CZAM#1 = Canal Zone, Airmail #1).

Here is a photo of the webpage I just created:

Wow ncbuckeye, I better ask you, if it's okay to use your description, ha! Thank you so much, I am very excited to create my own web pages now, with my own numbering system, plus I can still reference back to the Scott airmail numbering system since the numbers are exactly the same, I just replaced the letter "C" with my own "CZAM#.

Also to ncbuckeye, thank you for the compliment. I am far from being a HTML code writer, but I do know the basics and don't use a template as I am a control freak and like to have things just so so, LOL....

Thank you so much for your suggestion! I am going to start working on renumbering and getting my own inforamtion without using the Scott Catalogue.

So then could I give everyone the link to my webpage?
Thanks again!




Hi Jerry B,
I have heard that something was going on with the site USA1847. I go there often, it's a fantastic site! I love the fact they have so much information, including the various colors and how many stamps were issued, etc.

What is it that you have as a reference? Sounds very interesting.

I agree with your opinon, and at first, I did have the description beside each of the photos, but not to get into much detail, it was a pain in the ruckus because I don't know enough about HTML so tying to put the text beside, instead under, would move the photo below it, beside and over and to the right, it was a mess, lololol... I may try it again though.
Thank you all so much for your opinions, I value them all!
SueStamps

Just an observation - "Gaillard" has two l's
.......... and blush - I mispelled it too!

I've had plans on scanning my stamp album pages and making a "virtual" stamp album (mostly for my own reference for things I'm missing and for upgrades than anything else) and putting them on my website. Would that be a problem too as the Scott #s are visible on the pages where I'm actually missing the stamps? I've really been looking forward to doing that over the winter and would hate to end up getting emails from lawyers about it LOL

Here's someone who's posted their album on line and used Scott #'s:

http://album.dweeb.org

His FAQ pages tell you how he did it.

Plagiarism is illegal if it involves a copyrighted work and it exceeds the "fair use" clause of copyright laws.

We often reply to questions with information from the numerous catalogs, but don't always cite which catalog (I admit, I frequently do this out of laziness or forgetfulness). This falls under "fair use"; especially since the catalogs themselves also got much of their information from other sources and did not give proper credit.



He is basically feigning ignorance and daring Scott to do something about it. I find it ironic that he is claiming copyright for his website, and yet makes the following plea to Scott:






I'm sorry, but by your own admission, it is NOT your own numbering system. Simply adding on a few letters or numbers to each does not make the numbering system "different", as nothing is really "changed". Depending upon the type of work (e.g., software, compilations...), there are guidelines (such as %change) that are used to determine whether or not something qualifies as being "different".

As Stampgal and Rileysan correctly noted, you are free to make your own personal pages/notes using the Scott numbering system, even if it is a complete section such as your Canal Zone airmails; but once you "publish" it (i.e., make it public by putting it on the web), you are violating copyright laws because it exceeds fair use and it does not fall under the exemption given by Scott.

That being said, I am not the copyright police. The only time I jump on someone is when they are selling pirated Scott software or selling copied (not original) catalog pages.

BTW, I really really liked the pages you set up. The collectors in this Forum have an amazing amount of creativity and patience!

k

If I understand you correctly, there should be no problem as far as I know. As long as the Scott #'s are not shown with an image of the corresponding stamp, there is no problem. In fact, as long as you are either selling (or buying -- my interpretation that "want lists" are also exempt by Scott) the stamps, you are free to produce a "non-comprehensive" list of Scott numbers with pictures.

You do bring up a good question. I pencil in the Scott numbers next to my stamps in my album. That would be personal use and legal. If I were to scan my album pages, still no problem. If I were to put the scans online, would I be...? Legal issues aside, would Amos even care? Does it matter if Amos enforces/cares or not?

Since the Scott numbering system is the standard way to number US stamps, I fail to see how it can be protected by copyright. To number them any other way wouldn't make much sense. I think the Scott catalogue people need to accept that the general use of their numbering system all over the place is the price of success. I think a 'fair use' lawyer would have some interesting things to say about this matter.