Formerly NACA Ducts now copyright issues

[Ratliff]

I remember reading a very technical article in Road & Track of all places probably in the late 60's, early 70's on NACA ducts. They gave all the critical dimensions, but the thing they really emphasized was that all the corners must be sharp. Most of the accessory ones that you buy tend to be rather generously radiused. That may be why most aren't very effective.

Pete

That's the article posted at the start of this thread.

Page 3 explains why sharp edges are needed.

Page 4 gives the critical dimensions.

[Peter Jack]

Ratliff:

I didn't notice that that was the article because your scans are almost impossible to read. If you're going to post scanned items then get a scanner that's high enough quality to do the job. Probably then you'd set them up on your own web site and establish a link to them from this website as I think Jon's justifyably getting a little nervous about copyright enfringement. Both the U.S. and Canada are starting to clamp down harder and harder on any copyright violations.

Pete

[Ratliff]

Ratliff:

I didn't notice that that was the article because your scans are almost impossible to read. If you're going to post scanned items then get a scanner that's high enough quality to do the job. Probably then you'd set them up on your own web site and establish a link to them from this website as I think Jon's justifyably getting a little nervous about copyright enfringement. Both the U.S. and Canada are starting to clamp down harder and harder on any copyright violations.

Pete

I can scan an article to a resolution where someone could blown it up 500% and every letter would be sharply defined. However, burning through bandwidth to the point of overflowing the server is not the way websites function.

The Fair Use doctrine covers reprints of articles for scholarly and educational purposes. Copyright infringement is not even on the radar. It's an absolute total nonissue.

[Milwaukee Midget]

The Fair Use doctrine covers reprints of articles for scholarly and educational purposes. Copyright infringement is not even on the radar. It's an absolute total nonissue.

You are thinking of the "progress of science and useful arts" clause of the US constitution.

But review the outcome of the decision L.A. Times v the Free Republic.

Jon does assume liability, including the risk and potential expense of a lawsuit. 

That said, most of what I have read that you have posted is highly unlikely to draw the ire of a disgruntled copyright owner - at least not to the point of litigation.  I've made similar postings myself.  But in the unlikely event of a cease and desist order being served to the owners of this site, or a law suit being brought against this site, the responsibility and cost of defense would fall to Jon.  At that point, it will no longer be a non-issue.

There is a clear way for us to avoid this - simply secure for the site the written permission of the copyright holder to post it.

[John Romero]

The Fair Use doctrine covers reprints of articles for scholarly and educational purposes. Copyright infringement is not even on the radar. It's an absolute total nonissue.

That sounds like a reasonable defense if you were the one responsible for mounting it but you are not, this sites owners would be forced to defend it so what they think > what you think.

Why don't you start a blog and post all of this on it?

These are three of the big ones and are free. You can write articles, post pictures and have comments and discussions. If you take 30 minutes and try it out I bet you'll wonder why you never did it before.

http://www.livejournal.com/
https://www.blogger.com/
http://wordpress.com/

[Peter Jack]

Thanks John R. I hope Ratliff takes your very constructive suggestion to heart. While the risk to this site may be small, any risk caused by one person which could cause problems for the site should not be allowed. This site is a much too valuable resource for most of us to see it endangered in any way.  We all remember the times it was down and the severe withdrawal most of us felt.

Pete

[Peter Jack]

Ratliff:

Posting unreadable articles isn't constructive either. Why not take John Romero's very constructive advise, post the articles at a readable size on your own blog and then if you want, build a link from this site to yours. I know I'd probably go and reread that article with great interest. My complaint of a lack of readability is legitimate. I'm sure that many others find it much worse than me as I'm using a rather crisp 22" wide screen monitor.

Please take the good advise from John R., listen to the webmaster's legitimate concerns, and make it more pleasant for all of us including yourself. You don't need the friction you're causing on this forum either.

Pete

[Ratliff]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use_doctrine

"Fair use is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as use for scholarship or review. It provides for the legal, non-licensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test. It is based on free speech rights provided by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The term "fair use" is unique to the United States; a similar principle, fair dealing, exists in some other common law jurisdictions. Civil law jurisdictions have other limitations and exceptions to copyright.

United States trademark law also incorporates a "fair use" defense, which also stems from the First Amendment of the U.S. constitution."

[Seldom Seen Slim]

Ah, yes, quoting the U.S Constitution may make you feel good, but I'll trump you -- "It's my football and we're going to play by my rules!"

By the further way, I mentioned that I have difficulty enlarging your posts enough to read them -- and I use a pretty good monitor -- 24" flat screen -- at the house and can't enlarge enough to read without it becoming blurry.  At the office the monitor is a 17" -- can't read the stuff there, either.

So there are two good reasons for you to quit posting pages of text.

[Milwaukee Midget]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use_doctrine

United States trademark law also incorporates a "fair use" defense, which also stems from the First Amendment of the U.S. constitution."

Fair use defense does not include the whole-cloth reproduction of copyrighted material.  See LA Times v. Free Republic

http://www.techlawjournal.com/courts/freerep/Default.htm

[Ratliff]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use_doctrine

United States trademark law also incorporates a "fair use" defense, which also stems from the First Amendment of the U.S. constitution."

Fair use defense does not include the whole-cloth reproduction of copyrighted material.  See LA Times v. Free Republic

http://www.techlawjournal.com/courts/freerep/Default.htm

The basis for the LA Times suit was "The Plaintiffs allege that Defendants' copying and archiving decreases revenue from ads and from accessing archived materials." Road & Track doesn't archive 30 year old articles and so derives no revenue from them through ad sales. There are times when the complete reproduction of an article is required for educational purposes and scholarly research and so is covered under the Fair Use doctrine.

[Glen]

Respecting what the web master asks is only fair. Several have tried to suggest you back off and even ignore your stuff. We all know you have a great collection of LSR information and think you would better serve the LSR venue with your own web site.

[Stainless1]

I'll bet Slim would put a link to "Ratliff's LSR History Site" if ya don't piss him off first....

Organize it all and put up a site.  Wanna borrow my copy of "Websites for Dummies" 

I'd post all the pages here but I enjoy being able to participate on the worlds greatest LSR website... 

[Stan Back]

It cost me 200 big ones to be the winner in a 7-count lawsuit a decade ago.  I haven't chosen to be a winner again.

[Ratliff]

I'll bet Slim would put a link to "Ratliff's LSR History Site" if ya don't piss him off first....

Organize it all and put up a site.  Wanna borrow my copy of "Websites for Dummies" 

I'd post all the pages here but I enjoy being able to participate on the worlds greatest LSR website... 

Outside of my interest in specific episodes such as Athol Graham's project, I'm really more interested in past projects and changes in rules structure in terms of how they relate to what is going on today or could be done tomorrow. For example, when you look at Dick Keller's 1,800 lb rocket car design or Alex Tremulis' 3,000 lb jet car design in comparison to the F-104 car or the Fossett/Breedlove car does the mere passage of time make them obsolete or outdated?