Inventory Cd On Ebay- Question

This is currently listed on ebay:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Worldwide-C...em4872bbafb1

Looks nice but... I thought it was illegal to copy Scott publications without permission and I don't see any disclaimer that he has such. Maybe I missed it.

If the seller hasn't gotten permission from Scott, it's a definite, no-doubt copyright violation and Amos will be on them with a cease and desist order as soon as they get wind of it. I have no idea if sellers are required to state one way or another if they have Scott's permission, but one would think the seller would advertise that fact if they did have permission.

I went through the listing again and no, I cannot see any disclaimer. He surely didn't think he could use this material just because it wasn't recent, or did he? It looks like maybe he created this for his own use- which I understand is permissible- but then decided to sell copies of the program to third parties. I won't be the one to blow the whistle on him- I think Scott is a bit draconian on this issue- but someone will, bet on it and he will have some 'splanning' to do.

Scott has to be draconian about it from a legal perspective. Precedents are pretty clear - one can't selectively enforce copyrights - it's either do it 100% of the time or run the risk that a court won't let you do it at all. They basically have to go after violators, no matter how small, every single time they see them. If they consciously choose not to enforce their copyrights and trademarks, courts could look at it as an abandoned copyright and declare that Scott Numbers are now public domain. If that ever happened Scott would go out of business overnight. Copyright and trademark holders guard against that by being extremely vigilant about it, and merciless enforcement when they find it. I would imagine Amos probably has someone on staff that looks for things like this and then puts the hammer down.

Also he does not mention if at all he used Scott number in his
Inventory database. This Inventory could be without using scott
numbering in distributed Cds. Might have used his own inventory
numbering with the all Data and images.
Does Scott ban using Scott number using personal inventory ?
e.g. you create spread sheet and create cell to jot down Scott
number in your personal sheet..? This spread sheet you are using
yourself and not distributing.

just a thought.

tikithindi

He would be stepping on Amos toes if he uses their numbering OR parts of the content. How could a single person be able to assign values to something that large? Or images for that many stamps?
If he avoids the use of the numbering system, uses his own images, and comes up with his own values; then he could probably get away with swiping much of the remaining content (perf sizes, colors, and even descriptions to a degree) without stirring the Amos pot. This is because info like perf sizes and colors are pretty much standard things that every source has in common. But if Amos can easily see that their numbers, values, or images are being stolen, they absolutely will have someone one this and close him down.
Don

What I think may be happening here is the seller is offering a "converted" 2007? Classic Catalogue pdf that one can use the highlighting, notation, etc. features of your favorite pdf editor to annotate. This is the inventory component. I'll let you read between the lines as to how kosher this is.

This is not correct. Abandonment of rights, as a result of failure to enforce, is sometimes found by courts with respect to trademarks, but is not recognized for patents or copyrights. There is no obligation to "police" copyrights or lose them. Courts recognize that parties have limited time and resources. In the case of trademarks, "failure to police" is recognized as leading to loss of rights because it usually means that the brand also loses its distinctiveness and value as a source identifier to the public.

I disagree with the prior comments suggesting that the Scott numbering system, per se, constitutes a work of authorship that is protectible by copyright. Scott asserts that it is, but in my personal opinion, it does not qualify because a numbering system does not involve sufficient creative authorship and the "sweat of the brow" theory of copyright protection was eliminated in a Supreme Court decision years ago. There have been many court decisions stating the same for other numbering systems and the US Copyright Office will not grant you a registration for a numbering system if you attempt it; Amos has none. Innumerable auction catalogs, ebay listings, commercially published books and articles, and my own spreadsheets use "Scott number #" to identify items and there is no need for a license to do so, in my personal opinion. No reasonable consumer would think that an auction catalog or article referring to a stamp as "Scott number 578" comes from, is licensed by, sponsored by or otherwise affiliated with Scott, so there is also no basis for a trademark claim.

What about images not taken from Catalog at all. But Internet sites
e.g. Stampoftheworld.com etc. These sites do not publish Picture of copyright material or from Wikipedia site.

tikithindi

(. . pictures of . .?)
I think Wikipedia sotes use pictures found in the public dimain. If I give them a picture them I agree that Wikipedia may publish it as it is in the public domain, or it come from me, shareable to the public.

(.. Picture of ..)
I meant Images of the Stamps. In WikiBook (Wikipedia) and SOTC (Stamps of the world) site. Nice Stamps Collection, Images and Pertinent Information one can find. Beautiful Images and good information available.

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Catego...mp_Catalogue

http://www.stampsoftheworld.co.uk/w...of_the_World

tikithindi

(.. Picture of ..)
I meant Images of the Stamps. In WikiBook (Wikipedia) and SOTC (Stamps of the world) site. Nice Stamps Collection, Images and Pertinent Information one can find. Beautiful Images and good information available.

In these cases, there's no copyright issue - unless it's with the issuing authorities. I don't think they use Scott, Gibbons, Michel or other numbers.

Great sites, though!

Geoff

No they do not use Scott numbers as such. But there is column
Named Mi,Sc,Gi and the reference number, may it be Scott or Michel or gibbon .

tikithindi

Well here is another questionable listing:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Stanley-GIB...em33985c1d09

Some guy in Ukraine is selling a DVD with Gibbons 2014 pages- nice guy that he is he is also tossing in a 2001 George VI catalog scan and scans of GSM for two years. Such a deal!

I don't know how SG reacts to this stuff but unless he got permission I think he is out on a limb with this. Not that it matters, the worst that can happen is his listing may be pulled.

Just looked at the original post & the seller.
This was obviously a scan of someone's personal copy. Generally the copyright would deny any type of duplication.

Anyway unless he made an exhaustive text recognition scan, the copy is useless as a pdf version since you cannot do searches if it is just images (magnifying is also an issue) & if no bookmarks that makes it even worse.

Scott published their own 2009 pdf version & there are loads of these for sale from $5-$50.
A lot considering that with a little knowledge & risk you can get them free off many "pirate" sites.
The really enterprising "pirates" break it down into country specifics such as "France & Colonies" & get $9.95 for them.

Too bad as searchable pdf's are great - can't find the stamp? - search the denomination or name & you have it.
Unfortunately Scott may have stopped doing pdfs due to piracy.