Thread replies: 18
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
File: Copyright-_all_rights_reserved.png (63KB, 1280x854px) Image search:
[Google]
63KB, 1280x854px
Let's talk about copyright, especially because I have a business idea that may be infringing on copyright.
Say you have a product from a very well-known company. The product is an old product; most people would consider it obsolete but I can imagine in third world countries it is still traded from used product sellers.
Now, what if I went and bought all of the used ones repurposed the function of the product but appearance wise it is the same as the copyrighted from the big company.
The key question/dilemma here is can I use the exterior appearance of the product and sell it under a different name. Note: I will not be reproducing the copyrighted "cover", rather I will be repurposing it, as I very well know that if I try and manufacture the same looking cover it will be copyright infringement.
If that wasn't clear enough, let me put it this way, I buy an old LG computer monitor, I rice it out with speakers and a new better display, more inputs and sell it as a TV, not as a monitor. Would that be copyright infrigement since I bought the actual LG product and I didn't try and reproduce it. Example can also be like an iPhone 4, repurposed to my own chipset, software and everything, only the case remains the same?
>>
Copyright law depends on the country
What country do you live in and which country is the company that makes the product based?
>>
>>1622986
USA, and USA
>>
Maybe I need to ask this at a more peak time.
>>
>>1624695
I would imagine as long as its entirely repurposed AND you completely remove any logos from it, youd be fine.
People turn monitors into fishtanks and sell them just fine.
Im no lawyer though.
>>
drunk and not a licensed attorney, this is not legal advice
you should consult a lawyer
but...
this sounds like a pretty clear trade dress and/or design patent problem
>>
>>1624710
But I wanna keep the logo. That's what's going to make it sell.
>>
>>1624710
my hunch is that this is a matter of the IP owner choosing not to enforce
>>
>>
>>1624735
But even if I purchased their product and reused it?
I'm thinking like a reseller kinda situation. You know how you don't have to pay taxes on someone's product if you're not the end user, so if im not the end user that means I'm going to sell a modified version of the product to an end user.
Any thoughts with that in mind?
>>
>>1624748
Let me ask you this too, when you say "refurbish" do you mean just improving the products intended purpose and will compete with the IP (its probably patent and trademark issues, not copyright) owner's products?
The monitor example:
Monitor to fishtank =\= competion with modern monitors
Monitor to better monitor = competition
>>
>>1624766
Well I think my example of LG monitor to TV would be basically the equivalent of my idea.
What I mean is that LG makes monitors, and LG also makes TVs, but if I take a LG monitor and repurpose it to a TV and sell it for my own profit, would that be a problem for LG?
>>
>>1624803
Errrr... I know for sure it will be a problem, just want to know if they can sue me for copyright on it.
>>
>>1624807
it's a trade dress and design patent problem
it's not a copyright problem because you are not copying what is legally considered an original work of authorship fixed in a tangible medium, or whatever the standard is (still drunk)
so... no copyright problem whatsoever
>>
>>1624822
Soooo is that illegal? or may I proceed?
Cuz I already bought a bunch of this shit... The money is invested.
I just had a shower thought... People buy intel chips all the time, build and sell computers advertising "Intel i7 computer... blah blah blah" Isn't that the same thing?
>>
Did mark Zuckerberg care about MySpace when he made facebook?
>>
>>1624840
(1) not illegal, b/c that word connotes criminal law. but you could be liable, i.e., be sued
(2) including an i7 chip in a product isn't trade dress or design patent problem, b/c it does not relate to the appearance or design of the product
>>
>>1624846
this isn't a copyright problem, b/c it's an idea
this is called the idea-expression dichotomy
also not a trade dress or design patent problem, b/c of clear dissimilarity in appearance
Thread posts: 18
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1