High Resolution Backglass Database

[son]

Has anyone thought of starting such a database? 300dpi scans would be preferred but high resolution photos would be the next best thing. With current software and hardware advances, using the images to create new BG's would be relatively simple and cheap. Arcade BG's could also be included. I'm still looking for a scan for Sea Raider in fact.

Asking this group for scans often results in flame(how dare you ask)responses for reasons I don't understand. I thought this group was created to help fellow hobbyist. Anyway a database populated by volunteers such as ipdb would be beneficial to the hobby.

And please don't raise any licensing issues ... using a scan for a one-off personal use replacement (where no profit is involved) is not an issue.

[flippy]

son <macinto...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:09dd7da7-0e5e-492a...@googlegroups.com:

It was already done for playfield plastics and got shut down
due to licensing issues.

[Stu]

Actually, it is an issue.
Providing the general public with copyrighted material is copyright infringement.
You are allowed to "scan it yourself" for personal purposes, However, you are NOT allowed to "scan it for someone else's" use. That's Infringement, regardless of money being made from it. Copyright Infringement is not limited to someone making profit from the infringement. Copyright Infringement is the "act of copying" for any use not Authorized by the Original Copyright Owner.

[jsthom...@gmail.com]

But copyrights have term limits ... Surely some older artwork must now be in the public domain?

[John Robertson]

On 2016/12/22 10:24 AM, jsthom...@gmail.com wrote:
> But copyrights have term limits ... Surely some older artwork must now be in the public domain?
>

Most artwork prior to around 1973 is public domain as almost all was
never registered with the copyright office as required in those days.

However you will piss off the people who have legal copyright licenses
of artwork that is properly copyrighted and you may not want to do that.
Not to mention they have more expensive lawyers than you can afford...

We need a pro-bono lawyer to launch a class action suit against
Scientific Games for restraint of trade by their (Scientific Games)
claiming they have copyright on items that are actually in public domain
from the day the game was first sold.

John :-#(#

--
(Please post followups or tech inquiries to the USENET newsgroup)
John's Jukes Ltd. 2343 Main St., Vancouver, BC, Canada V5T 3C9
(604)872-5757 or Fax 872-2010 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games)
www.flippers.com
"Old pinballers never die, they just flip out."

[c...@provide.net]

Actually it's prior to 1978. If it doesn't actually say "copyright" on it and it's before 1978 then yes you can legally copy it. And do with it as you please including sharing it. That said though you would have to remove the manufacturers names from the artwork. That is the artwork cannot say Gottlieb, Williams or Bally. Those names are registered trademarks and you can't use them without legal issues.

[Stu]

Without tracking down the original copyright you will never know, People seem to use this excuse all the time without looking into it, they just assume that because the artwork was copyrighted 30 yeas ago that it now must be "public domain"...The original Copyright owner could have renewed the copyright 10 years ago, making it illegal to use for another 30-75 years....Without looking into the specific copyright you can get into some serious financial trouble.

People use the excuse "I found it on a google search so it must be Public Domain". It's Not.

Best way to look at this is: If YOU didn't create the Artwork then You have NO Right to use it. Period, End of Story.

[jsthom...@gmail.com]

Well like music just change a small item in the image and it's no longer copyrighted and like Clay says just remove the name to avoid licensing issues. It's better than having no backglass at all.

[Force Flow]

On Thursday, December 22, 2016 at 4:35:09 PM UTC-5, jsthom...@gmail.com wrote:
> Well like music just change a small item in the image and it's no longer copyrighted and like Clay says just remove the name to avoid licensing issues. It's better than having no backglass at all.

Actually, that's a falsehood that keeps being perpetuated. A small tweak or color change or whatnot won't invalidate copyright. You're still copying the original work and using it for the exact same purpose.

There is "fair use", but that only applies for purposes of review, news, or the creation of work that is new and original enough to stand on its own.

As for the Gottlieb/Williams/Bally/Stern names & logos--those are trademarks. That's something completely different than copyrights.

[c...@provide.net]

To be clear, below is the paragraph from a government website that
explains the 1978 date issue, regarding work that does not actually
have a "copyright" notice upon it (which is most backglasses in
this time period and before.) Though with Gottlieb being bought by
Columbia Pictures around 1976, Gottlieb started putting the words
"copyright" on their backglass and playfields and schematics.
But if it's prior to 1978, and it doesn't say "copyright", then you
can go nuts with it and do as you please.

BUT, and this is a big "but", the name "gottlieb", "williams" and
"bally" are trademarked. If they find you using their stuff with
their name upon it, they will get pissy about it and C&D you.

That all said, if they have the will, they can still take you
to court. They may not be right, but if they have the financial
backing, they can drag you through the mud (right or wrong.)

Here's the paragrpah...
"Works published before January 1, 1978, are governed by the 1909 Copyright
Act. Under that law, if a work was published under the copyright owner's
authority without a proper notice of copyright, all copyright protection
for that work was permanently lost in the United States. For more information
about the law governing copyright notice before January 1, 1978, see
37 C.F.R. 202.2, 'Copyright Notice,' on the Copyright Office website at
www.copyright.gov/title37 "

[John Robertson]

On 2016/12/22 10:55 AM, Stu wrote:
> Without tracking down the original copyright you will never know, People seem to use this excuse all the time without looking into it, they just assume that because the artwork was copyrighted 30 yeas ago that it now must be "public domain"...The original Copyright owner could have renewed the copyright 10 years ago, making it illegal to use for another 30-75 years....Without looking into the specific copyright you can get into some serious financial trouble.
>

> I did a ton of Graphic Design work for Fender Guitars ( Packaging ) and I created a little Alien guy playing a guitar and one playing bass for some of their packaging and having a ton of experience in Logo/Identity Design I sent printouts to my self and never opened them. Then, some idiot copied the Alien Logo, filed a copyright for the designs with the state, and then filed a Copyright Infringement against Fender for it. Fender's Insurance company paid a $50,000 payoff to this guy and then contacted me to try to recoup the funds from my company. I contacted my insurance company and sent them the unopened envelopes, for which they opened them in front of a judge who ruled it as My Copyright. Needless to say my insurance company never had to pay the $ 50,000 and I was awarded the copyright back. People really try to take advantage of other people's work, and copyright infringement lawsuits are a very common thing these days.

>
> People use the excuse " I found it on a google search so it must be Public Domain". It's Not.
>
> Best way to look at this is: If YOU didn't create the Artwork then You have NO Right to use it. Period, End of Story.
>
> On Thursday, December 22, 2016 at 11:24:51 AM UTC-7, jsthom...@gmail.com wrote:

>> But copyrights have term limits ... Surely some older artwork must now be in the public domain?
>

You need to read up on the various copyright laws and the changes over
the years. The terms have grown a lot over the years and I fully expect
when the Disney Copyrights next come up for expiration that the
copyright law will again be changed to extend the protection.

Copyright law prior to 1978 said explicitly that the item was only
copyrighted if it had both the YEAR AND the word COPYRIGHT (or the
symbol) on the published art object. If this was not done then the item
entered Public Domain AUTOMATICALLY as soon as it was produced and sold
or shipped to end consumers. Gottlieb started Copyrighting around 1973,
although some of their booklets and schematic products were copyrighted
even earlier. Williams and Bally did start copyrighting their games
around 1974 and by 1976 all games were copyrighted. These copyrights are
easy to find if you go to archive.org and search the public copyright
files. You are looking for "Works Of Art" publications and download the
text or pdf version and then search for various game names - for
Williams I suggest you look for Seeburg (owner of Williams) as there are
fewer typos in the scan for Seeburg than for Williams.
1977, 76, & 75 has all Williams games produced as copyrighted, nothing
prior to 73 that I can find.

After 1978 the rules changed, but they did not affect anything that was
already in Public Domain. Your example is fine, for protecting yourself
AFTER 1978, but that is not the period I am talking about.

I've posted before on this topic, I don't want to retype it all again. I
had posted a number of links of how US copyright law worked back then.
After 1978 it is a bit murky as a company could file for copyright
protection within five years of production, but after around 1988
EVERYTHING is automatically copyrighted regardless if it was registered
or not.

Works for Hire (your example sounds like this) were owned by the company
not the individual, which is not always the case in other countries...

I am not advocating breaking the law, I am just saying that lots of
pinball artwork stuff from 1972 and prior is actually public domain and
no-one has any rights to it.

It affects my company in that we rent games to the film industry and the
lawyers at Scientific Games claim they own the rights to games made in
the 1930s even - when clearly they were public domain as US Copyright
law of the day as never had been copyrighted in the first place. They
want $2500USD per game for clearance and so NO Williams or Bally games
are appearing in any productions these days due to their copyright claims.

Gottlieb LLC and the other pinball folks (Stern for another) are far
friendlier to productions - they like having their names out there...and
for that I thank them!

[jsthom...@gmail.com]

Thanks for the feedback ... it has been a real education. My original post was a bit naive.
So what is the solution if we require an original BG scan?

[seymour.shabow]

jsthom...@gmail.com wrote:
> So what is the solution if we require an original BG scan?

Buy an original backglass and scan it.

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 12/22/2016 11:31 AM, Stu wrote:
> Actually, it is an issue. Providing the general public with
> copyrighted material is copyright infringement. You are allowed to
> "scan it yourself" for personal purposes, However, you are NOT
> allowed to "scan it for someone else's" use. That's Infringement,
> regardless of money being made from it. Copyright Infringement is
> not limited to someone making profit from the infringement.
> Copyright Infringement is the "act of copying" for any use not
> Authorized by the Original Copyright Owner.

Wouldn't fair use come into this somewhere? Do people just forget that
fair use even exists?

If not, it's another great example of just how broken our copyright laws
are. Originally, copyright was 28 years (14 years, then renewable for
another 14). Now, every year the first Mickey Mouse cartoons come up for
renewal, Disney calls the lobbyists to get it extended again.

--
Shawn K. Quinn <skq...@rushpost.com>
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

[fdef...@free.fr]

hi there, i'm desperatly searching a bally x's and o's backglass... if someone could help me, it would be great ! the data base would be a great idea....

[flippy]

jsthom...@gmail.com wrote in
news:6065e379-3469-476e...@googlegroups.com:

> Thanks for the feedback ... it has been a real education. My original
> post was a bit naive. So what is the solution if we require an
> original BG scan?

Ask for it on the newsgroup.
If you are a known hobbiest, then anyone
who has it will contact you privately.

[fdef...@free.fr]

well, i've tried, did get some answers like yes i have it but no i'm won't give it to you...

i'm not really a known hobbiest in usa but own 6 pinball and repaired them myself...

here's my last post : https://www.flipperfrance.com/threads/restauration-xs-and-os-bally.15526/#post-207482

so i really hope someone will be kind anough to give me the files ....

[The_Black_Knight]

There is a simpler answer.
What backglass information do you need?
Generally, someone will answer privately.
Never go public with pinball scans, as the "good times" are over.
Even flyers get taken down.

Collectors help collectors, because otherwise some parts would NEVER EVER get reproduced now due to the copyright police lawyers on the internet.

[seymour.shabow]

Watch out they might file an injunction for tattoos!

[fdef...@free.fr]

well I'm desperatly seeking for a scan of the x's and o's from 1983 bally backglass... please help me :-)

[John Robertson]

On 2016/12/23 9:14 AM, fdef...@free.fr wrote:
> well I'm desperatly seeking for a scan of the x's and o's from 1983 bally backglass... please help me :-)
>

A high resolution photo would probably work for you too if no one has
scanned it or is willing to share. It was fully copyrighted so can't be
shared publicly. However I believe Fair Use rule in the act allows for
archive purposes which implies you can make ONE copy for your game only
as you already have a licence for the artwork. You can't sell the
backglass artwork though.

Have you tried bgresto.com? Keep a search up on eBay for the translight
(assuming there was a translight for this game). The trick is the search
word. Even IPDB has trouble finding "X's & O's" unless you spell it as I
just did. Don't always use the quotes in the search expression though...

John :-#)#

[jsthom...@gmail.com]

That's just a douche bag reply and is not helpfull ... what a jerk-off you are seymour-shabow

[jsthom...@gmail.com]

> Watch out they might file an injunction for tattoos!

God you're such a dick! Hope you haven't procreated. If so your children would be so ashamed of you.

[son]

Soooooo ... no database I guess.

[c...@provide.net]

On Friday, December 23, 2016 at 1:00:44 PM UTC-5, John Robertson wrote:
> On 2016/12/23 9:14 AM, fdef...@free.fr wrote:
> > well I'm desperatly seeking for a scan of the x's and o's from 1983 bally backglass... please help me :-)
> >
>
> A high resolution photo would probably work for you too if no one has
> scanned it or is willing to share. It was fully copyrighted so can't be
> shared publicly. However I believe Fair Use rule in the act allows for
> archive purposes which implies you can make ONE copy for your game only
> as you already have a licence for the artwork. You can't sell the
> backglass artwork though.
>
> Have you tried bgresto.com? Keep a search up on eBay for the translight
> (assuming there was a translight for this game). The trick is the search
> word. Even IPDB has trouble finding "X's & O's" unless you spell it as I
> just did. Don't always use the quotes in the search expression though...
>
> John :-#)#

BG photos really do not work. The problem is, the alignment
of the glass has to be dead nuts perfect and straight on.
Otherwise the cut outs for the score displays and back
lit lights don't line up. You'll spend all this time
editing the file to make it nice, then go to print it...
and nothing lines up!

A scan is really the only way to get a backglass. Unless
you are a master at photography and can get a picture
perfectly square and straight.

For the Xs and Os you are best to contact www.bgresto.com
as i'm sure they can help. It will take a while though
to get it. (i would guess 2 to 3 months.) But you will
have a very nice glass with no issues.

[seymour.shabow]

jsthom...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, December 23, 2016 at 12:28:59 AM UTC-5, seymour-shabow wrote:
>> jsthom...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> So what is the solution if we require an original BG scan?
>> Buy an original backglass and scan it.
>

> That's just a douche bag reply and is not helpful ... what a jerk-off you are seymour-shabow

I wasn't being unhelpful, I was being realistic. Sorry if you can't
handle realism.


Let's dissect your original statement.... "What is the solution if we

require an original BG scan?"

First off, no one "requires" an original BG scan. You "want" an
original backglass scan. You're pissed off because you think it should
be free. Your messages in this thread are so shallow, you did zero
research on actual copyright laws, just like a little child who didn't
get what he wanted, and is now throwing a tantrum.

Let's see.... options

1. contact manufacturer. Nope. They don't have it anymore assuming the
entitie(s) even exist.

1(a). Hey, they have it (most newer bally stuff seems to exist). Let's
get someone to remake it and sell it. People willing to pay for it win.

1(b). Hey, they have it. They decline to make it available to you for
free, or at all. EVEN IF the copyright WERE expired, they decline to
make it available to you.

2. Do some legwork and BUY/Trade for a backglass. If you're feeling
especially generous with your time and money, scan it and share it with
others than might want it. David Gersic did this with Zaccaria stuff.
That was rather nice of him, paying for bandwidth, for HUGE files.
According to his page Frank Giggliotti provided a lot of the scans as
well. Either person spent coin and time getting this done.

3. Wave a magic wand and hope it appears. Really, what other options
can there possibly be?

Bottom line is, you want something you can't have, and you want someone
else to provide it free for you, and you want to blame copyright
law/rights owners/anyone for that lack.


What backglass are you even looking for? Or were you trolling, like usual?

[seymour.shabow]

jsthom...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Watch out they might file an injunction for tattoos!
>
> God you're such a dick! Hope you haven't procreated. If so your children would be so ashamed of you.

Oh, that's right. I forgot, you're THAT guy. Professional troll.

Welcome back to the ignore filter.

[jsthom...@gmail.com]

Troll or no troll ... your still an asshole.