Yamaha & FZ-1 Site Fued

Re: Yamaha Shuts Down, Then Licenses To, FZ-1 Site

That's all well and good longride but it seems to me you're missing something. The problem was with copyrighted material.

As a photographer who posts copyright protected images, if I were to find someone stealing my images and reselling them then I might first send a cease-and-desist letter and follow it up with the same action Yamaha took. As many in my field have found out the cease-and-desist rarely gets any attention however so often the first letter that goes out is not from the owner of the property but from the attorney representing the owner. It seems to get more action.

I had a model I used for a shoot take the images I provided her for her portfolio and started selling them on her site. In that case all I had to do was remind her that I had retained ownership per the model release and she took them down.

Knowing the rest of the story certainly provides a better understanding as to the action by Yamaha.

Re: Thanks for the Additional Information

Banda

You raise some good points. I am not a copyright law specialist so do not intend to argue the fine points of "Fair Use."

If they were taking information (ie specs) and creating a new document, I would not object at all -- especially if they added their own content. BMW sites (and I am sure others as well) do that (see the post below) apparently with no objections from BMW. I probably would not object to selected, very limited illustrations or even entire pages being posted so long as it was for free use by readers of the site. Doesn't sound like that is what was going on here, though.

If they were printing copies of Yamaha manuals to paper, and selling them, would you make the same arguement?

If I were to write a Finance textbook (argueably not a work of fiction), would you argue that someone has the right to scan it and burn cds to sell in competition with my publisher? If someone is foolish enough to steal my concepts and ideas and put them into his own words, he can go for it.

A shop manual is every bit as much an item of intellectual property as is the latest Grishom novel and the copyright holder is every bit as entitled to protection.

Re: Yamaha Shuts Down, Then Licenses To, FZ-1 Site

Anyway, where's the new V-Max?

When is MT-01 coming out?

Why can't we get TDM 900, Fazer 600, BullDog, T-Max, etc. ?

You almost didn't bring FJR & FZ1...

Yamaha, you are stealing our enthusiasm.

Can I sue you?

Facts seem to be somewhat in dispute

Seemingly, some of the critical facts in this case are in dispute. The Staff commentary quotes Yamaha as claiming that someone on the site was selling burned CDs of the manuals, while regular readers of the site dispute this. I do not pretend to know the answer.

If, in fact, the posted information was merely the exchange of information among a group of enthusiasts, Yamaha was probably heavy-handed and misguided in their approach, even if their legal grounds are sound. If Yamaha are correct and someone was using the site to sell pirate copies of the manuals, they are on stronger footing, but maybe still ill-advised.

From a business perspective, I suggest that they would be better off taking a higher road and making that information available, for non-commercial use, for free, over the internet, rather than appearing to be trying to squeeze another $60 out of a buyer who has just forked over $8,500.

My guess is that this was an action initiated by Yamaha's legal counsel rather than their marketing department.

I absolutely endorse Yamaha's full rights of ownership in the intellectual property which they certainly spent many thousands of dollars to produce. They have to do whatever is necessary to assure that they retain full ownership. I do suspect that they could have done so in a more customer-friendly fashion.

Cheers

Bob

Re: Thanks for the Additional Information

A shop manual is every bit as much an item of intellectual property as is the latest Grishom novel and the copyright holder is every bit as entitled to protection.

I'm inclined to agree, mostly because the shop manual is not part of the package when you buy a FZ-1. However, the original story only mentions user manuals. User manuals are part of the package when you buy a motorcycle. When your Yamaha dealer hands you the key and the user manual, you have the right to make a backup copy of that manual in case the original is lost, stolen, eaten by wolves, etc. That right is unalienable and unassailable. It's been held up in high profile court cases for decades. The owner of an FZ-1 is a de facto licensee of the FZ-1 user manual.

Now here's the real kicker: Who else but a FZ-1 owner would pay for a FZ-1 user manual? Perhaps there are user manual collectors out there somewhere, but I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that the ony buyers of copied FZ-1 user manuals would be the owners who were entitled to a copy of the dang thing in the first place.

The only party that could conceivably injured here would be the bike owner who was denied his fair use right to create, keep, or obtain a backup copy of a work for which he was a license holder.

If I were to write a Finance textbook (argueably not a work of fiction), would you argue that someone has the right to scan it and burn cds to sell in competition with my publisher?

Certainly not. Your finance textbook, while not a work of fiction, is probably not just an index of facts, either. There is a great deal of creative work that goes into the compilation and editing of a non-fiction publication like a finance textbook. However, a pure reference work, such as the telephone directory, or a listing of handy physics equations would not enjoy the same level of copyright protection because it is less of a creative expression. That's just the way it works in court.

Re: Thanks for the Additional Information

Banda:

I checked your link and found the following -- Note that I do believe my use of this information falls within "fair use" guidelines:

>>a. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes -- Courts are more likely to find fair use where the use is for noncommercial purposes.>b. The nature of the copyrighted work -- A particular use is more likely to be fair where the copied work is factual rather than creative.>c. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole -- A court will balance this factor toward a finding of fair use where the amount taken is small or insignificant in proportion to the overall work. >c. The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work -- If the court finds the newly created work is not a substitute product for the copyrighted work, it will be more likely to weigh this factor in favor of fair use.<<

If (and I am not asserting that this IS actually the case) they are selling CD copies of the entire manual for something less than the $60 Yamaha is asking, og giving the information for free, I would say that this use clearly fails to meet the "fair use" test cited.

IF Yamaha have the facts substantially correct, and complete copies of the manual are being reproduced and sold over the site, they would appear to be fully within their rights to come down on them. Even if the copies are being offered for free, the fact that the entire manual (or substantial portions) are being offered would seem to fail the criteria in the site you posted.

Doesn't seem to fit the "fair use" guidelines.

Regards

Bob

Re: Yamaha Shuts Down, Then Licenses To, FZ-1 Site

HEY MO!

I am one of the admins of the FZ1OA board.

NOBODY has EVER sold photocopies of Yamaha's materials on our web site. Yamaha's directive to us had absolutely nothing to do with that.

YOU HAVE THE WRONG PEOPLE.

Shame on you guys for not contacting us first. Feel free to contact me. I also used your feedback form which gives you an email address.

Re: Thanks for the Additional Information

>>If you disagree, think about this for a minute: If you and I both own FZ-1s, and you lost your user manual, should it be illegal for me to tell you how many quarts of oil it takes? Or how many miles between valve adjustments? Should that information really be protected so vigorously that you and I can't discuss it? Is that what we all want?<<

That is not the correct analagy. First of all, I believe it is a Shop Manual, not an Owner's Manual at issue. I don't think you need a shop manual if all you want is to know how frequently to change the oil. If we both own FZ-1s and I am to effin cheap to by the Shop manual so I copy yours, I have violated copyright law. If I borrow it to determine the proper valve clearances, that is OK. If I buy one but lose it (or in my case, more likely accidently drop it in my oil drain pan) and get a copy from you, I would argue that that is ok within "fair use" guidelines.

Since, in this analagy you legally purchased your copy of the manual, you can copy it in any way you damn well please FOR YOUR OWN USE. As soon as you copy it for me, you are stealing (assuming that I have not legally purchased a copy). No different from copying music CDs. Copy em to your hard drive, to cassettes or whatever you want, so long as you own the original and it is for your own use, and Sony or Virgin or whoever won't give a damn. Sell the copies or give em to your friends and you are potentially in trouble. You can call it patriotism if you want, I still call it stealing.

Bob

Re: Thanks for the Additional Information

Speaking for myself, I think it is time to ratchet back the level of retoric at least until such time as the underlying facts are more clearly in evidence.

If we are talking an owner's manual (which, by definition should be the property of each owner), I probably would agree with you. If it is a shop manual, that is very different.

Meanwhile, I apologize if the tone of my posts was inappropriate. Several years ago, I worked for a consulting company writing financial and accounting manuals for multi-national companies, and we were very protective of our right to ownership of that intellectual property. This just hit a sensitive nerve.

Regards

Bob

Re: Yamaha Shuts Down, Then Licenses To, FZ-1 Site

"Why can't we get TDM 900"

We had our chance with this bike already back in 1992- none of the morons over here bought one.

"Fazer 600,"

Been there, done that with the Seca 2. No one bought one (except me).

"BullDog" "MT-01"

Almost zero demand. Note the total lack of success Buell has had with this kind of bike.

"T-Max"

This is one I would like to see, but I'm not sure that there really is that big of a market over here for $7000 scooters.