73 Magazine: All issues now online

I hold the copyright on my articles. My livelihood has been built on copyrights, patents, and trademarks. I have 4 attorneys that assist, prosecute and defend on same. Basically I am exercising my rights as a creative American, with a system that the American people invoked and continues to invoke.

You may wish to ask an attorney who owns the copyright on works, unless some other agreement has been reached. As I stated, I had no reproduction rights given to 73 or anyone else, let alone digital rights.

If this is a subject that interest you, you may wish to seek other information from an attorney.

I know the law and I know my ownership of creative works.

73,
Chip W1YW

 

There is a distinct difference between paying one for the "right" to read a magazine and offering "donations." If I want to charge someone for the "right" to read 73, I had better be prepared to pay those whom hold copyrights. Since there is no money changing hand and 73 does not exist anymore, "donations" represent an entirely different adventure. No one is required to pay anyone anything.

I can freely give any book I own to anyone I want without charging anything or paying anything to anyone. OTOH, if I make copies of that book and try to sell it, then that's a WHOLE different ballgame!

While I don't doubt you may own the copyrights to what you wrote, the standard in the industry is when a magazine publishes an article, that magazine becomes the owner of the article in question as it relates to THAT magazine. Indeed, most contracts specifically state that what is written becomes the property of the magazine. Even submitted letters to the editor of newspapers state this.

Of course, hard to say what legal relationship 73 had with its contributors way back when. Wayne seemed to do things off the cuff in many ways.

.............Bob

 

I'm glad to see this great resource available in the public domain. My dad W7YZQ was one of the early subscribers, and I looked forward to each month's issue, in spite of W1NSD/2 and his rants. We did share a dislike of the Newington, CT address though . . .

I wonder if there is a listing of articles and what month/year they were in . . . ? I'm also interested in the advertising of the early MOTO/GE/RCA two-way surplus dealers, especially that of Gregory Electronics (GE) in Saddle Brook, NJ. The place is still in business, but obviously not grinding out Pre-Progs, Progs, and TPL's like they used to.

Never Say Die . . . tnx Wayne.

Gary WA7KKP

 

Wayne was actually W2NSD/1, but you're close.

You can do an author search or a subject/title search, it seems to work very quickly on that site.

I just typed in my own callsign and it brought up 19 articles of mine they published in about one second (wow, that's almost Google speed):

http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=WB2WIK AND mediatype:texts

 

Actually, Bob, there are "two standards" widely used in the magazine industry. Some publications pay for "all rights," but many others pay for "First American Serial Rights." I've sold work under both conditions. The difference was, I got paid for reprints under one standard, and got tiddly-toot under the other.

73,
Bill

 

So have I. But I've also written for magazines under contract, where I'm hired in advance to do an article (or series) and then you're actually an employee, which normally means the work is entirely theirs and they own the copyright from the very first word put on paper. You're still the author and can always claim that forever, but they own all rights.

 

The copyright to Ham Radio magazine is owned by CQ Communications, Inc. Back issues are available for purchase on CD-ROM from either CQ or the ARRL. The posting of issues on Internet Archive or anywhere else is unauthorized and illegal. -- W2VU (Editor, CQ)

 

Hey Rich good to work you on the air last year and thanks for the QSL card.

73

Steve WB2WIK

 

Its not hard to say what the 'legal relationship is at all': there is none. The authors hold the copyrights, unless they assigned them away. I did not. Can someone show me a signed assignment form they did for 73 Magazine?

The proffered request is a donation in support given the re-publication and wide , unrestricted distribution of the magazine 73. That is impossible to construe as anything other than a payment for provision of copyrighted work.

As I mentioned, I did not provide anyone re-publication, re-distribution, or digital rights to my 73 articles. I am not doing so now either. Such rights are not reversions; they lie solely with the author in this case. They never left the author, without an agreement stating so. There is no 'standard' regarding copyright in an industry: that would be chaos--which is why the federal government sets copyright law (not industries), and not states, towns or hamlets.

Copyright lies with the author(s) at the moment of creation and it is their right to control publication and distribution; assigment; etc. The ONLY exception lies with LIMITED copying of passages and LIMITED access and distribution of works under fair use. This is not an example of fair use. There are NO restrictions placed by that website. There are NO limitations.

The link being given is not like selling a magazine you own: It is pdf's of digital copyrighted material and is thus unrestricted publication and distribution. Downloading it constitutes copyright infringement. A similar situation exists with YouTube videos, which is why so many of them are pulled--they are put up there without authorization of the copyright holder.

73,
Chip W1YW

 

Thanks for clarifying, Bill. The key is "reprints." No doubt, when reprints are sold, those holding copyrights of those reprints deserve compensation. A magazine that is no longer in print that is freely given to anyone without charge creates a problem for those claiming copyrights, especially when the magazine clearly states ALL copyrights are held by them. Unless someone has challenged this, OR the magazine clearly states they DO NOT hold the copyright on a specific article, I question the right of someone to claim years later they hold a copyright on a specific article in that magazine as it relates to that magazine being offered for free to anyone.

Now, if another magazine decided to reproduce that article for a fee, well then we're in a different ballgame!!

............Bob

 

Exactly. In the case of 73, the copyrights are owned by the authors except for those who may have tranferred assignment or allowed one or more forms of publication or re-publication, by agreement.

73,
Chip W1YW

 

The burden is on the publication to prove assignment--not the authors. Because the copyright is held by authors at the moment of creation, it lies with them unless shown otherwise.

I do not know Mr Green's health status, but one should assume that his children may have interest in the copyrights that are held, if any. The fact that they haven't done anything only indicates that they don't know 73 is being distributed and copied from a digital website.

The fact that 73 is out of print has absolutely no bearing on the copyrights. Its not like homesteading.

73,
Chip W1YW

 

Guess we better DOWNLOAD them all in a hurry before the RBs try and shut down the site!

 

The ARRL makes its policy very clear and you must sign an agreement to be published in their journals.

It's this:

I have signed that and agreed to it.

I don't recall signing anything similar with 73, although I did do some writing for them "under contract," which is very different from freelance work. Under contract, you agree they own all rights to the product (manuscript) and can do whatever they wish with it.

 

I believe Mr. Green still holds that call.

73
Chip W1YW