Rocketry Book Online?

[Ez2cDave]

Books are great but they are dated. I am really surprised our community has not made a collaborative book online.

Chuck,

You are a Moderator, here on TRF, and you, seriously, wonder why people don't "agree" and work "collaboratively" on an online book . . . REALLY ?

Also, unless EVERYONE posts "all original information", including images, the "Copyright Police" will be howling like Banshee's. Better have "proof of permission" on file ! What do you do if data by a deceased Rocketeer is cited or posted ( no way to get "permission" then and "copyright" extends for 70 years after their death . . . Longer than Rocketry has been around ! ).

What about data that is already online ( "Public Domain" ) ? There are those that will cry that "just because data is on the Internet, that doesn't mean that it is legal for it to be there", etc, etc, etc..

Also, unless Copyright is CLEARLY PROVEN to exist, it does not . . . Just putting a "Circled C" on your stuff does not make it
"Copyrighted" . . . You have to PAY FOR & register EACH ITEM and there is no blanket "everything I do" clause, either.

https://www.adlilaw.com/how-much-does-a-copyright-cost

EXCERPT :
How much does a copyright cost?

Filing a copyright application can involve a number of various forms, each with a different fee. Add to that the various additional services available to copyright application seekers, as well as the potential for late fees, renewal fees, and special handling requirements – there’s no one answer to the cost of a copyright.

A full list of the current fees charged by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office can be found at the Copyright.gov website. If you are curious to know what kind of fees you may expect if you seek to file a copyright application, speaking to a law firm with experienced California copyright attorneys can help.

Basic Filing of a Copyright Application

Filing a copyright application can cost hundreds, even thousands of dollars, and later there are renewal fees to contend with. The initial filing of a copyright application will cost between $50 and $65 depending on the type of form, unless you file online which will then only cost you $35.

There are special fees for registering a copyright application claim in a group or obtaining additional certificates of registration as well. Many copyright service companies will charge you their own fees for performing copyright searches, preparing documents, and such – none of which are involved in a basic copyright application and are not paid to the USPTO.

Fees for Special Services and Renewal of Copyright
There are many special services offered by the USPTO for copyright application and approved copyrights. Expedited services for processing an initial application can set you back $760, and expedited certification will cost $265. If your initial copyright application is denied, a request for reconsideration can cost anywhere between $250 to $500. However, if your initial copyright application is rejected, you may want to find a team of California copyright attorneys with experience in copyright application to help you avoid making additional errors in securing your copyright.

Renewal of a copyright can cost between $115 and $220 depending on the form required, and the same expedition fees apply. The licensing division has its own set of fees which will vary as well.

END EXCERPT:

Dave F.

 

[cwbullet]

Chuck,

You are a Moderator, here on TRF, and you, seriously, wonder why people don't "agree" and work "collaboratively" on an online book . . . REALLY ?

Also, unless EVERYONE posts "all original information", including images, the "Copyright Police" will be howling like Banshee's. Better have "proof of permission" on file ! What do you do if data by a deceased Rocketeer is cited or posted ( no way to get "permission" then and "copyright" extends for 70 years after their death . . . Longer than Rocketry has been around ! ).

What about data that is already online ( "Public Domain" ) ? There are those that will cry that "just because data is on the Internet, that doesn't mean that it is legal for it to be there", etc, etc, etc..

Also, unless Copyright is CLEARLY PROVEN to exist, it does not . . . Just putting a "Circled C" on your stuff does not make it
"Copyrighted" . . . You have to PAY FOR & register EACH ITEM and there is no blanket "everything I do" clause, either.

https://www.adlilaw.com/how-much-does-a-copyright-cost

EXCERPT :
How much does a copyright cost?

Filing a copyright application can involve a number of various forms, each with a different fee. Add to that the various additional services available to copyright application seekers, as well as the potential for late fees, renewal fees, and special handling requirements – there’s no one answer to the cost of a copyright.

A full list of the current fees charged by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office can be found at the Copyright.gov website. If you are curious to know what kind of fees you may expect if you seek to file a copyright application, speaking to a law firm with experienced California copyright attorneys can help.

Basic Filing of a Copyright Application

Filing a copyright application can cost hundreds, even thousands of dollars, and later there are renewal fees to contend with. The initial filing of a copyright application will cost between $50 and $65 depending on the type of form, unless you file online which will then only cost you $35.

There are special fees for registering a copyright application claim in a group or obtaining additional certificates of registration as well. Many copyright service companies will charge you their own fees for performing copyright searches, preparing documents, and such – none of which are involved in a basic copyright application and are not paid to the USPTO.

Fees for Special Services and Renewal of Copyright
There are many special services offered by the USPTO for copyright application and approved copyrights. Expedited services for processing an initial application can set you back $760, and expedited certification will cost $265. If your initial copyright application is denied, a request for reconsideration can cost anywhere between $250 to $500. However, if your initial copyright application is rejected, you may want to find a team of California copyright attorneys with experience in copyright application to help you avoid making additional errors in securing your copyright.

Renewal of a copyright can cost between $115 and $220 depending on the form required, and the same expedition fees apply. The licensing division has its own set of fees which will vary as well.

END EXCERPT:

Dave F.

I am not interested in making money or a copyright. If it helps the hobby improve, feel free to copy me.

 

[Ronz Rocketz]

Print it.. and then you have... a book. We've come full circle.

I love books. No technology glitches, no cell towers, no satellites, no batteries.

A typewriter is a crash proof word processing computer.

 

[Woody's Workshop]

No matter what is covered, how it is added, who does what, etc.
The format needs to be in print size .pdf.
As manixFan posted, from the early years all there was back then was printed material to distribute. Books, Magazines, Flyers, etc. And someone, somewhere, saved some copies and it still existed to be scanned into today's network.
I have grabbed everything I could off the net, mostly in .pdf. That which was not, is bookmarked.
But, I could loose all my bookmarks when I change computers, or this ones fails.
Most of what I have taken in .pdf has been printed and punched and put in 3 ring binders.
Since the area I live in prevents advancement to even level 1 certification, my collection of data is rather limited.
But I'm sure there are those out there, like me, has done the same with the data for the level they choose to fly.
So what ever it turns out being, make each page, section, subjet, etc. a downloadable .pdf. Or at least printable.
Someone, somewhere, will have it saved and/or printed and may turn up in a future decade if it ever falls into never land.
Perhaps when the Rocket Hobby has gone away due to population growth, climate change, available launch sites, air space, and Government restrictions on propellant mediums.
Future generations can say, "My Great Grandpa use to build Rockets in his basement!"
"And Fly them Rockets in his back yard!" "That would be cool to have a back yard, wouldn't it?"
One other thing to mention, is our youth. We keep saying we need to get more of the youth evolved with this hobby.
But they are not interested in print copies is what I'm reading here, they would rather view it on one of several devices.
If this turns out to be some good interesting reads, it may draw some youth to it.
Nothing keeps me awake when I'm reading, except when it's a good read and gets me excited to find out what happens next. Presenting the material should not be like reading a text book, but more of story. If that is possible.
If it needs to be on a fast search for a specific thing, than it needs to be like a data base with searchable fields.
But still in a downloadable or printable .pdf format. If that makes sense?

 

[T.J.Bones]

Chuck,

You are a Moderator, here on TRF, and you, seriously, wonder why people don't "agree" and work "collaboratively" on an online book . . . REALLY ?

Also, unless EVERYONE posts "all original information", including images, the "Copyright Police" will be howling like Banshee's. Better have "proof of permission" on file ! What do you do if data by a deceased Rocketeer is cited or posted ( no way to get "permission" then and "copyright" extends for 70 years after their death . . . Longer than Rocketry has been around ! ).

What about data that is already online ( "Public Domain" ) ? There are those that will cry that "just because data is on the Internet, that doesn't mean that it is legal for it to be there", etc, etc, etc..

Also, unless Copyright is CLEARLY PROVEN to exist, it does not . . . Just putting a "Circled C" on your stuff does not make it
"Copyrighted" . . . You have to PAY FOR & register EACH ITEM and there is no blanket "everything I do" clause, either.

https://www.adlilaw.com/how-much-does-a-copyright-cost

You are confusing copyright with registering copyright. As soon as a work is created, such as me typing these words, it is copyrighted. Now it might be difficult to enforce the copyright without registering it, but it nonetheless possesses a legal copyright. No (c) notice is required.

That means that yes, everything that exists on the internet is copyright. If not by the poster, than by the person who originated the information. Just because something is easily accessible, like being on the internet, does not mean it is not covered by copyright. A person can post something to their page, and within that posting give permission for it to be copied, but that still does not mean that the person has lost their copyright.

A lot of this is covered in software circles, were people develop code that they want to be shared. The coding community developed a statement of principles called the "CopyLeft" that covers sharing, crediting authors, and protecting the author's rights.

 

[Ez2cDave]

You are confusing copyright with registering copyright. As soon as a work is created, such as me typing these words, it is copyrighted. Now it might be difficult to enforce the copyright without registering it, but it nonetheless possesses a legal copyright. No (c) notice is required.

So, then, if that is true, doesn't quoting another person's online posts, such as I have just partially done above, technically, violate copyright ?

What if I quote you on another forum or post a link to my comment, here on TRF, on another forum, such as YORF ?

Since your post would, then, appear elsewhere, without your consent, how does that work, in reality ?

Dave F.

 

[heada]

There are exceptions to the exclusive right to copyright, fair use. In this case, copying a post for reply or comment would fall under fair use. Making a whole-sale copy of all content for the purpose to replicating it (i.e. make a 1-for-1 copy of TRF to run your own forum) doesn't fall within fair use.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_...inally a common law,the Copyright Act of 1976.

 

[Ez2cDave]

There are exceptions to the exclusive right to copyright, fair use. In this case, copying a post for reply or comment would fall under fair use. Making a whole-sale copy of all content for the purpose to replicating it (i.e. make a 1-for-1 copy of TRF to run your own forum) doesn't fall within fair use.

"Fair use" is an interesting area . . .

A frequent "area of disagreement", on TRF, has revolved around the use of Scale Drawings, produced by another TRF Member, which are published in a "printed book", which is OOP and currently unavailable for purchase, except for occasional copies, offered at exorbitant prices online, from time to time.

If the purpose of posting a drawing is "educational" ( illustrating points about a prototype to a modeler or modelers ), and no "financial gain" is derived from using the material, is that, then, deemed to be "Fair Use"?

QUOTE :

17 U.S.C. § 107
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:[8]

1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

END QUOTE :

A frequent "area of disagreement", on TRF, has revolved around the use of Scale Drawings, produced by another TRF Member, which are published in a "printed book", which is OOP and currently unavailable for purchase, except for occasional copies, offered at exorbitant prices online, from time to time.

If the purpose of posting a drawing is "educational" ( illustrating points about a prototype to a modeler or modelers ), and no "financial gain" is derived from using the material, is that, then, deemed to be "Fair Use"?

The material, used as an example below, is in the "Public Domain", but similar material could have come from a copyrighted book, of several hundred pages. If the purpose is to teach details about a Scale prototype to "interested parties", and "not for profit", is that "Fair Use", under the Law ?

Dave F.

 

[Ez2cDave]

There are exceptions to the exclusive right to copyright, fair use. In this case, copying a post for reply or comment would fall under fair use. Making a whole-sale copy of all content for the purpose to replicating it (i.e. make a 1-for-1 copy of TRF to run your own forum) doesn't fall within fair use.

"Fair use" is an interesting area . . .

A frequent "area of disagreement", on TRF, has revolved around the use of material, produced by another TRF Member, which have been published in a "printed book", which is OOP and currently unavailable for purchase, except for occasional copies, offered at exorbitant prices online, from time to time.

If the purpose of posting a drawing is "educational" ( illustrating information for a modeler or modelers ), and no "financial gain" is derived from using the material, is that, then, deemed to be "Fair Use"?

QUOTE :

17 U.S.C. § 107
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:[8]

1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

END QUOTE :

Dave F.

 

[T.J.Bones]

So, then, if that is true, doesn't quoting another person's online posts, such as I have just partially done above, technically, violate copyright ?

What if I quote you on another forum or post a link to my comment, here on TRF, on another forum, such as YORF ?

Since your post would, then, appear elsewhere, without your consent, how does that work, in reality ?

Dave F.

Quoting small portions falls under the doctrine of fair use. This doctrine applies to provide context of a discussion or presentation. You cannot copy something and claim authorship.

Fair use is a little fuzzy in how much is too much. So, I could theoretically sue you for copyright infringement. Your defense you be fair use. My burden would be to show damages. This would probably cost me thousands in legal fees, and if I won I might only be awarded one dollar in damages. So, practicality governs much of this.

But, be careful. Some sites may be free to visit and read, but they contain ads that generate revenue. Even if the author did not choose the ad revenue route, that was still their choice and the financial damages can be still be very real. When you really want to reference large portions of a website or document, that is what links are for.

 

[Ez2cDave]

Quoting small portions falls under the doctrine of fair use. This doctrine applies to provide context of a discussion or presentation. You cannot copy something and claim authorship.

Fair use is a little fuzzy in how much is too much. So, I could theoretically sue you for copyright infringement. Your defense you be fair use. My burden would be to show damages. This would probably cost me thousands in legal fees, and if I won I might only be awarded one dollar in damages. So, practicality governs much of this.

But, be careful. Some sites may be free to visit and read, but they contain ads that generate revenue. Even if the author did not choose the ad revenue route, that was still their choice and the financial damages can be still be very real. When you really want to reference large portions of a website or document, that is what links are for.

Speaking, specifically, about the TRF forum . . .

What about posting one or two images or illustrations from a several hundred page source ( a very small percentage of the total work ), for non-profit purposes, with the source of the material clearly shown ?

Dave F.

 

[ewomack]

I know at least two people who have been given legal notice for copying images and text online. Content owners watch this and the people I know had to pay more than any of us here would want to pay to get out of the situation. Don't mess with copyright.

 

[PatD]

No. Not wordpress. Not wordpress *ever*.

Agreed. Having done a travel blog on wordpress I would suggest nearly anything else.

 

[cwbullet]

A lot of not Wordpress, but are there any suggestion of what to use?

 

[JohnCoker]

A lot of not Wordpress, but are there any suggestion of what to use?

Someone suggested MediaWiki. I agree a wiki is good because it's very easy to collaboratively edit if you plan to allow everyone to contribute.

If you intend to do all the editing with a small number of people, then use whatever you like. (The content can always be transported to another system if the next editor prefers something else.)

 

[rocketlabdelta]

A lot of not Wordpress, but are there any suggestion of what to use?

That is a lot like asking what kind of glue you should use

Choose a solution that you have experience with or one where you know people who can help you with it.

When I make websites I favor static site generators like Jekyll and Hugo so I can use GitHub Pages or Netlify for free, fast, painless deployments and hosting.

Hit me up, I'd be happy to help.

 

[Ez2cDave]

Someone suggested MediaWiki. I agree a wiki is good because it's very easy to collaboratively edit if you plan to allow everyone to contribute.

If you intend to do all the editing with a small number of people, then use whatever you like. (The content can always be transported to another system if the next editor prefers something else.)

John,

Has any thought been given as to how incoming data will be processed, collated, & organized ?

Potentially, there is the very real possibility of receiving many hundreds ( maybe more ) of submissions per day, every day, 24/7/365.

Someone is going to have to handle all of that and it will be guaranteed to "inundate" those responsible . . . ( people who have "day jobs" ) As it comes in, day after day, it may rapidly become overwhelming !

Dave F.

 

[cerving]

Who'e going to moderate the glue thread? Not a job I'd want or envy!

That sounds like a sticky problem...

 

[cwbullet]

That sounds like a sticky problem...

LOL

Guys,

I will research Wikis tonight and post a few options. My goal is to have this up by 1 January.

Let’s talk organization - how would you do it?

 

[T.J.Bones]

Speaking, specifically, about the TRF forum . . .

What about posting one or two images or illustrations from a several hundred page source ( a very small percentage of the total work ), for non-profit purposes, with the source of the material clearly shown ?

Dave F.

The general principle of fair use is that a one time copy is permitted if it was not practical to obtain permission from the author before hand. In the online book we're talking about getting permission would always be possible and therefore necessary. Most authors grant permission for these sorts of things provided that their original work is properly referenced. That way, your posting sort of becomes an advertisement for the author's work.

However, "small percentage of a work" can only be decided by the author. Generally small portions of a work can be quoted if it is part of a criticism, review or parody without violating copyright. If you wanted to copy a rocket drawing that was the only thing valuable to us in that book, then by copying it you are making our purchase of the author's work unnecessary. That then is stealing money from the author by violating their copyright. If you copy a rocket picture along with a simple comment like "This is great" or "This really sucks" would probably not constitute an adequate review, criticism or parody.

The fact that you are nonprofit, or do not intended to earn a profit from the copying, does not protect you in anyway from copyright violations.

In terms of posting a copy of something to the forum that you did not create, then it is a violation of copyright. No ifs ands or buts. There is a lot of case law that holds the poster responsible for these violations and not the forum owner -- recall the music downloads issue from about 20 years ago. Still, the practicality issue that I mentioned before might give you some protection in that it may not be worthwhile for the author to pursue the violation. Morally, at least, you should not rely upon that protection.

For this rocketry book, it might be safer and nearly as useful, to collect a series of web links to valuable resources. You can always freely link to someone else's web page. The other person then retains complete control. They can block access, charge for access, or remove the material at their discretion, but if they put it on the web then they probably want the traffic to their site.

 

[Ez2cDave]

Let’s talk organization - how would you do it?

Chuck,

There are some "issues" that may crop up . . .

https://www.rocketryforum.com/threads/rocketry-book-online.162128/page-3#post-2071952

Dave F.

 

[Ez2cDave]

For this rocketry book, it might be safer and nearly as useful, to collect a series of web links to valuable resources. You can always freely link to someone else's web page. The other person then retains complete control. They can block access, charge for access, or remove the material at their discretion, but if they put it on the web then they probably want the traffic to their site.

Of course, as we all know, websites come and go . . .

Is archiving a website, on the "Wayback Machine" ( www.archive.org ), a violation of Copyright ?

Believe me, if it is on a website and of sufficient interest, data will be "archived" ( many different methods are available ) and saved by viewers, just in case it ever "goes away" or otherwise becomes unavailable . . . One example of one simple method is attached below, using a post of mine on TRF.

Process : Highlight . . . Copy . . . Paste into WORD ( can be edited, as desired ) . . . Converted to PDF . . . Done !

Websites with "right-click disable" are not problematic, either.

Dave F.

 

[JohnCoker]

Potentially, there is the very real possibility of receiving many hundreds ( maybe more ) of submissions per day, every day, 24/7/365.

A wiki has the benefit that people just edit; there is no need for "submissions." That said, I doubt we'll see anything like that scale so I'm confident there can be a single editor if they prefer it be moderated.

If someone has the motivation to set it up and get it started, I say they should use whatever they are comfortable with. My guess is whoever takes the lead will end up doing 90% of the work, so it needs to be something they can manage easily.

 

[DaHabes]

LOL

Guys,

I will research Wikis tonight and post a few options. My goal is to have this up by 1 January.

Let’s talk organization - how would you do it?

I posted my thoughts on this earlier in this thread. Summary: Steering committee of 3-7 people to meet on a regular basis to address issues and make decisions (impossible to do in a general forum). Use TRF to provide feedback to members and solicit input. Make the major decisions on platform, organization and content. Solicit content experts to prepare content gleaned from TRF, personal experience and other sources. Moderate content either prior to initial posting to the new site or after (TBD) to ensure it meets general safety requirements (TRA and NAR standards as well as Federal regulations).

Per my previous post, PM me if interested in being a member of the core group. I'll start drawing up a preliminary agenda for an initial meeting. One volunteer already has stepped forward. We just need a few more. Please note. One person cannot and will not do 90% of the work. If that turns out to be the case, it will fail miserably. Just saying. It's put up or shut up time...

 

[cwbullet]

Any volunteers to serve on the steering committee?

 

[Sooner Boomer]

I'll do whatever you folks need.

 

[prfesser]

There's a small section of Info Central that I wrote. I'll be happy to add/edit wherever I can.

 

[rocketlabdelta]

@cwbullet & @Mike Haberer I'm relatively new around here but I'd love to get on the steering committee

During the month-long lull on this thread I rebuilt the presentation layer of INFOCentral as a technology demo:

https://info-central.rocketlabdelta.com/
To do this I:

• Extracted, normalized, and cleaned up the HTML using batch transformations
• Converted all in-text and in-image formulas to LaTeX presented by MathJax
• Redrew branding elements in SVG
• Designed a mobile-first responsive template with several grid breakpoints
• Created a print-friendly style sheet so that images and text would print quickly and correctly (that's for people who like their content in PDFs like @Woody's Workshop)
• Packaged the site as an offline-capable progressive web application (PWA)
• Tuned site performance with Lighthouse & WebPageTest
• Made extensions to the tempting engine for greater control for image presentation and cache controls

Now it works more-or-less how I would want it to. (There's still a few things on the TODO list.) The information architecture and the content itself need a bunch of attention and rework. I could do that myself but I would rather be involved in a larger effort.

 

[cwbullet]

@cwbullet & @Mike Haberer I'm relatively new around here but I'd love to get on the steering committee

During the month-long lull on this thread I rebuilt the presentation layer of INFOCentral as a technology demo:

https://info-central.rocketlabdelta.com/
To do this I:

• Extracted, normalized, and cleaned up the HTML using batch transformations
• Converted all in-text and in-image formulas to LaTeX presented by MathJax
• Redrew branding elements in SVG
• Designed a mobile-first responsive template with several grid breakpoints
• Created a print-friendly style sheet so that images and text would print quickly and correctly (that's for people who like their content in PDFs like @Woody's Workshop)
• Packaged the site as an offline-cababile progressive web application (PWA)
• Tuned site performance with Lighthouse & Webpage test
• Made extensions to the tempting engine for greater control for image presentation and cache controls

Now it works more-or-less how I would want it too. (There's still a few things on the TODO list.) The information architecture and the content itself need a bunch of attention and rework. I could do that myself but I would rather be involved in a larger effort.

I really like that. Would you be willing to help if I set up a site. Heck, maybe, if you have the time, you can help with that too.

 

[rocketlabdelta]

I really like that. Would you be willing to help if I set up a site. Heck, maybe, if you have the time, you can help with that too.

No problem. I can get sites like that set up in short order on Netlify.

I have over a decade of professional experience building web application front-ends so I can knock out pretty much anything you would want.