Question: copying historic arms

[The other DWS]

FWIW:

There is a new thread in the "collecting" sub-forum about a proposed "Indiana State Rifle" that raised a question in my mind about the legalities/ethics/ etc of copying historic arms. 

"The bill specifies that any duplication, reproduction or sale of a reproduction {of the rifle: DWS} must be authorized by the foundation."


 In the past when I ran a museum I got entangled in various copy-right, artistic-right issues to a slight extent; just enough to know its a mine-field designed by and for lawyer$.

A discussion with some of our experienced builders might be interesting and educational

[Larry Luck]

All:
God save your majesty!

Cade:
I thank you, good people—there shall be no money; all shall eat
and drink on my score, and I will apparel them all in one livery,
that they may agree like brothers, and worship me their lord.

Dick:
The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.

Cade:
Nay, that I mean to do.

Henry The Sixth, Part 2 Act 4, scene 2, 71–78

But here's a link to the US Copyright office website and a discussion of copyright of industrial designs (although focusing on clothing designs).

http://www.copyright.gov/docs/regstat072706.html

Larry Luck

[Robby]

"The first thing we do," said the character in Shakespeare's Henry VI, is "kill all the lawyers." Contrary to popular belief, the proposal was not designed to restore sanity to commercial life. Rather, it was intended to eliminate those who might stand in the way of a contemplated revolution -- thus underscoring the important role that lawyers can play in society.
Robby

[Dphariss]

FWIW:

There is a new thread in the "collecting" sub-forum about a proposed "Indiana State Rifle" that raised a question in my mind about the legalities/ethics/ etc of copying historic arms. 

"The bill specifies that any duplication, reproduction or sale of a reproduction {of the rifle: DWS} must be authorized by the foundation."


 In the past when I ran a museum I got entangled in various copy-right, artistic-right issues to a slight extent; just enough to know its a mine-field designed by and for lawyer$.

A discussion with some of our experienced builders might be interesting and educational

They would have to trade mark the entire design to enforce this I would think. Owning something will not keep someone from copying it. Especially if the person has photos made BEFORE the new owner got their hooks into it.
I don't think that Small will rise from the grave to enforce any artists rights to the rifle.
But I am not a lawyer.
Dan

[The other DWS]

I just do not see how they could possibly keep someone like us from copying the rifle.   Now someone going into commercial production like the outfit that built a dozen or whatever of the "Crockett" rifles might be a different story.

  I work in Vincennes regularly and next time I'm down there I think I visit the museum and ask if I can take some pictures of the rifle, talk about building one like it as a flintlock and see what they say.   The picture shown in the article seems to be the Missouri State Small rifle.

[Larry Luck]

Apparently, duration of a copyright depends on when the original work was created.  http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ15a.pdf
Here is a table that summarizes the different rules.  http://www.copyrightguru.com/copyright_duration_table.html
The copyright on all pre-1898 rifles (etc.) would have expired, to the extent that there were elements subject to copyright.
I don't see the basis for the Illinois law, but legislators pass unenforceable laws with some frequency.
This is not a legal opinion, however.
Larry Luck

[flintriflesmith]

I'm not sure I could find the history of claims right now but I believe that an artistic design on exhibit in a museum is covered under different rules than the "copywrite" on written material. Copywrite has to do with language and intellectual content (ideas) not the appearance on the page.

Colonial Williamsburg has has reason to challenge folks making "unauthorized reproductions" of furniture, silver, and textiles in their exhibition buildings in order to protect their licensed manufacturer program -- the folks allowed to make "authorized reproductions."

Whatever the legal term is for that protection it is one of the reasons so many museums prohibit photography of art --old or modern.

Gary