-
Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.
Cessna Copyright Legalities.
- Thread starter Lionheart
- Start date
Now that ACES is gone, gone, gone, it is time for a new flight simulation to Phoenix itself.
If the team is wise, they'll 'up front' the royalties with the major players in the real world industries and act as a central collector for royalties. Any new flight simulation developer would then collect a royalty fee from the addon developer plus maybe a few cents more handling so that the annuals could be paid.
...and of course negotiate the "fee" from square one. The Cessna / EMI 2500 is a presumption made on just how much business a (c) user is likely to make. I would even go so far as to say that agencies like EMI would be sensible enough to realise that flight simulation addon makers are nowhere near in the same league as Tamiya(c) and Revell(c) and all those others who sell "Cessna (c)" toys in the millions. We're talking about an industry that maybe turns over a couple of hundred to maybe a thousand units per use of a (c) sim addon. Anyway... is there any plastic model of a Cesspipeech?
And for the likes of EMI the motto should be "Any money is better than no money and definitely better than expensive international court cases that are unlikely to be heard. What non-US court is going to want to waste time on a 100 dollar claim from EMI because an Italian hobbyist addon maker sold two hundred C-140 models at 20 dollars a throw. Even if they tried to force the initial licensing fee on top, the court process would cost more and have little or no chance of recovering court fees from the hapless copyright breaker.
And as courts are government bodies, who ends up paying the bill if the developer has empty pockets and (heaven forbid) is jailed?
The tax payer.
If the team is wise, they'll 'up front' the royalties with the major players in the real world industries and act as a central collector for royalties. Any new flight simulation developer would then collect a royalty fee from the addon developer plus maybe a few cents more handling so that the annuals could be paid.
...and of course negotiate the "fee" from square one. The Cessna / EMI 2500 is a presumption made on just how much business a (c) user is likely to make. I would even go so far as to say that agencies like EMI would be sensible enough to realise that flight simulation addon makers are nowhere near in the same league as Tamiya(c) and Revell(c) and all those others who sell "Cessna (c)" toys in the millions. We're talking about an industry that maybe turns over a couple of hundred to maybe a thousand units per use of a (c) sim addon. Anyway... is there any plastic model of a Cesspipeech?
And for the likes of EMI the motto should be "Any money is better than no money and definitely better than expensive international court cases that are unlikely to be heard. What non-US court is going to want to waste time on a 100 dollar claim from EMI because an Italian hobbyist addon maker sold two hundred C-140 models at 20 dollars a throw. Even if they tried to force the initial licensing fee on top, the court process would cost more and have little or no chance of recovering court fees from the hapless copyright breaker.
And as courts are government bodies, who ends up paying the bill if the developer has empty pockets and (heaven forbid) is jailed?
The tax payer.