Scott/Sg/Michel Converter Site?

Ages go (back in the late 90's) when I first discovered the advantages of internet and philately (back when stampauctions was still a website before e-doggybay bought it out) there were at least 2 websites I knew of that would convert numbers for these three catalogs. Does anyone know if they still exist?

I know at least one of the major ones was shut down because of copyright violations. If those sites come to the attention of the catalog manufacturers, they don't last very long.

Here's one:

http://www.ansoniaphilatelic.com/in...=v&chapter=0

Thanks, Rev. Is this one just for Germany ? I guess it was that major one that was shut down was the one I was thinking of. I wish sometimes that these companies would get off their high horses and allow conversion sites and books. It's not like Amos has much competition in the US.

Here's the one I was thinking of that Scott shut down.

Does Scott sell their own progrms for that sort of thing? I'm trying to understand the logic in shutting down something like that. It's not like the numbers are copyrighted. The stamps are definitely public domain.. and I think the values from catalogs are just what one person or a group of people think various stamps are worth. Very interesting!

It is EXACTLY like that -- they ARE copyrighted and carefully protected by the copyright owners. And that goes for Scott, Michel, and Stanley Gibbons numbers.

KirkS

Can you copywrite numbers like that? I wasn't aware that you could do that. I mean like even car parts numbers(from the chilton manual) and other things?

Sure you can. And by the way, look in the front of that Chilton Manual -- you'll find a copyright!

My understanding is you can copyright/patent any categorization/classification system as long as it is not a trivial or intuitively obvious system (e.g., simple sequential numbering of items in chronological order -- which Scott catalog numbers are NOT).

Also, stamps are NOT public domain. Several countries have been copyrighting their stamps (the US since 1978).

Amos tends to be more aggressive in protecting their copyright than Michel, SG, Y&T... I personally think they have overdone it in a few cases. However, I also believe they are correct in going after "some" sites that are essentially providing you a comprehensive illustrated listing of Scott numbers so that you don't have to buy the catalog. We are not talking about someone showing their collection online -- I mean a pretty comprehensive illustrated listing of stamps from a specific country/area.

I note that the 1847 website and swedishtiger have a licensing agreement with Amos, even though neither of them are operating for profit (1847 does sell items, but it does not appear to me that it is done for profit -- I am open to correction on this). Here are 2 sites that I personally feel have been responsible for encouraging a non-trivial number of people to eventually buy a Scott catalog. I hope Amos cut them a minimal cost licensing agreement, but I doubt it.



I agree with you, however...

Most people buy their first set of catalogs primarily for the listings/information, not necessarily for the prices. If they are then interested in prices, or recent issues, they will then possibly update their catalogs based on their need/interest.

I'm not looking for something to "avoid buying the catalog". Nor, do I really need images. I just need a decent way of converting numbers. I generally trade with want lists and for me it would be nice to have a program or method of converting the numbers only. I don't think I've ever bought a set of Scott catalogs new. It's cost prohibitive for me. I'd rather spend the money on stamps and buy the catalog set a year or two old and secondhand. I especially prefer the ones that the library reference rooms selloff. They are sometimes plastic covered/bound. I feel like I'm recycling by buying second hand. Heh! That way I don't feel so bad about writing in it. :)
Personally, I've always preferred Michel and the late great Minkus catalogs. The Minkus US I've got is from the mid '70s but it has ALOT more details and (in my opinion) is better organized than Scott.
I suppose that Amos feels that they have a monopoly now and have to do whatever they can to protect it.

Kirk your 1st answer is incorrect. However your 2nd response/clarification is very very close to correct. But, not quite.



You can copyright a categorization/classification system. You can not patent it. So, like I said Very, Very close.
Their Copyright is on the system Not the numbers themselves! The Numbers themselves are NOT copyrightable.

Comment added for accuracy only! Not, to sound snooty or any such thing.

So would this mean that if a person had a program which only had numbers (and not images) it would be ok? (Not that I'm any computer whizz)
I realize the Scott system would be right protected etc. However, the numbers?

[quote]So would this mean that if a person had a program which only had numbers (and not images) it would be ok?[quote]

It can be done as long as they do not follow the Scott numbering system. As for pictures as long as you are not counterfiting them most Postal Admin's. don't care.

No, it has little to nothing to do with the presence or absence of images.

A person who describes the first U.S. airmail stamp as "C3" can't claim any other rationale for doing so other than the Scott numbering system. The particular prefixes are Scott's creation, and the particular assignments of numbers are Scott's creation. As kim alluded to, the numbers are not always consecutive, and not always chronological.

If someone found out a way to monetize the moniker "C3a" and Scott (Amos) noticed it, I suspect the letters from the attorneys would start flying.

No offense taken, Eric. I appreciate your clarification.

That's the problem with copyright law -- there's usually an "easy answer" and another "technically correct answer"

For example, it's easier to say "life plus 70 years" than to go into the all the with/without notice and registration issues.

Anyway, I appreciate your comments.

Also a note to the Original Poster, it's not that we don't commiserate with you and the need for a conversion table, but some of us feel that we have to work within the copyright issues as they are.

And if you've ever been on the other side of someone using your intellectual property without payment, it changes your perspective.

KirkS