Le Requin-Zebec-1750 POF 1:48 (ZHL)

[Daniel20]

Hi Daniel! Maybe I missed it back in this build report somewhere - but would you be willing to share your thinking on this subject? I'm presently having an internal conversation of my own on this topic and would love to hear your thoughts.

Hello Paul, I'd be glad to share my thoughts. When I first envisioned this ship, my intent was to build it port side exposed rib starboard side fully planked and the decking more of the same 50/50. The more I studied other builds like the beautiful wide expanse of the deck of Grants Xebec the more enamored I became with the uninterrupted (no exposed deck beams) look in my mind's eye. I do intend one small area on the deck to be open for a small display of the deck support design in between a set of two, maybe three canon locations, probably via a removable grating. This should preserve the uninterrupted decking which again is my goal. As for the hull planking, I also prefer its beauty over the look of exposed frames however I will place an long oval observation port similar to the one shown in one of my favorite builds of @barba's build see below. His build is a full scratch from Jean Boudriot's monograph. There is something classic about a reserved observation port which is just personal preference.







I suppose having built the Bluenose with a 50/50 covering, I just prefer to focus on the beauty of the exterior of these old magnificent ships.

 

[dockattner]

Thanks, Daniel! I look forward to seeing your beautiful result.

 

[oldflyer]

Daniel

YES --- "I do intend one small area on the deck to be open for a small display of the deck support design "

 

[Peter Gutterman]

Thanks, Daniel! I look forward to seeing your beautiful result.

Me too

 

[Sterling59]

Hi folks,

Here is the story:

YQ, based in Shandong Province, China, began their business around 2008 by producing replica old Billings kits. That is the reason why the brand is banned at Model ship world. the MSW. The YQ team established a new brand around 2015, Luhaiqingkong, targeting the premium market. They began developing original designed kits. However, they were later boycotted by MSW because they were accused of referencing (not replica) ANCRE’s Zebec blueprints in their kit design without obtaining approval, same reason for banning Shicheng.

As far as I know, many manufacturers do try to respect copyright, but the holders of knowledge often demand unreasonably high prices. I do not intend to deny the effort and contribution of those parties, yet greed will ultimately hinder the spread of knowledge and the growth of this niche hobby. In other words, it prevents players from accessing well-made kits at reasonable prices.

Jackie

Copyright means you can use it if you pay, you can't if you dont. Whether the cost to use the information is high is irrelevant, it's against the law to break copyright. It's also pretty easy to "respect copyright" by not stealing others legally owned property. Normalizing theft under any circumstances is also pretty irresponsible.

 

[rtwpsom2]

Using the drawings as references to create a model kit is not a violation of copyright law. Maybe if the included a copy of the Ancre drawings in their kit it would be, but just using the drawings as references is not. At worst you could argue it's transformative enough to qualify as fair use, but in reality it is two separate markets. One is a drawing and the other is a physical model kit. Ancre would never be able to prove harm in court because Ancre doesn't make or sell model kits.

 

[Sterling59]

Using the drawings as references to create a model kit is not a violation of copyright law. Maybe if the included a copy of the Ancre drawings in their kit it would be, but just using the drawings as references is not. At worst you could argue it's transformative enough to qualify as fair use, but in reality it is two separate markets. One is a drawing and the other is a physical model kit. Ancre would never be able to prove harm in court because Ancre doesn't make or sell model kits.

I guess the question is were the drawings copyrighted. If not, fine. If they were used in anyway to produce the kit, the owners should gave been approached. It's pretty cut and dried.

 

[Smithy]

current build status

= Outstanding.

 

[Jimsky]

Hi folks,

Here is the story:

YQ, based in Shandong Province, China, began their business around 2008 by producing replica old Billings kits. That is the reason why the brand is banned at Model ship world. the MSW. The YQ team established a new brand around 2015, Luhaiqingkong, targeting the premium market. They began developing original designed kits. However, they were later boycotted by MSW because they were accused of referencing (not replica) ANCRE’s Zebec blueprints in their kit design without obtaining approval, same reason for banning Shicheng.

As far as I know, many manufacturers do try to respect copyright, but the holders of knowledge often demand unreasonably high prices. I do not intend to deny the effort and contribution of those parties, yet greed will ultimately hinder the spread of knowledge and the growth of this niche hobby. In other words, it prevents players from accessing well-made kits at reasonable prices.

Jackie

Hi Jackie, @Sterling59

I think it’s fair to say that most of us here aren’t really equipped to make definitive statements about copyright law as it relates to kit manufacturers — it’s a specialized subject, and none of us are legal experts.
What I don’t think is helpful is using another forum as the “proof” or “authority” on the matter, especially one known for banning members simply for having opinions that differ from its ownership. That doesn’t strengthen an argument; it just introduces bias.

So rather than leaning on outside forums as unquestionable sources, let’s acknowledge that this is an area where none of us have the expertise to make firm claims — and maybe avoid going down that rabbit hole altogether, specifically on our forum.

 

[Sterling59]

Hi Jackie, @Sterling59

I think it’s fair to say that most of us here aren’t really equipped to make definitive statements about copyright law as it relates to kit manufacturers — it’s a specialized subject, and none of us are legal experts.
What I don’t think is helpful is using another forum as the “proof” or “authority” on the matter, especially one known for banning members simply for having opinions that differ from its ownership. That doesn’t strengthen an argument; it just introduces bias.

So rather than leaning on outside forums as unquestionable sources, let’s acknowledge that this is an area where none of us have the expertise to make firm claims — and maybe avoid going down that rabbit hole altogether, specifically on our forum.

No argument here - I was just voicing my own, non-expert opinion on copyright and ethics, nothing to do with any other person or forum .

 

[Jimsky]

No argument here - I was just voicing my own, non-expert opinion on copyright and ethics, nothing to do with any other person or forum .

Let’s set the copyright discussion aside so we don’t derail what Daniel actually started here to talk about.