W2EWL Special - How Vintage SSB started in Ham radio

<< < (2/4) > >>

Pete, WA2CWA:
Quote from: WD5JKO on November 22, 2009, 10:11:36 AM

Quote from: k4kyv on November 20, 2009, 06:29:13 PM

This is not hearsay; I have all three instalments of the article in my magazine collection.  


Don,  This sounds interesting. Maybe you can scan and post them one at a time. I bet Pete will look the other way concerning the copyright issue since the authors and the publication are all long gone..

Jim,
WD5JKO


Actually, R/9 Magazine has been succeeded by CQ magazine. The question to ask is whether CQ Magazine cares what you do with R/9 articles at this time.

Further, the link you provided displays a QST article which might raise the eyebrows of Headquarters staff since there's no indication that permission had been granted to post the article.

There was also a great SSB construction article in GE Ham News 1950 (Nov/Dec issue) called SSB Jr. I believe Ham News had several SSB contruction articles back in the 50's.

In Nov, 1948, CQ had an article on Phase Shift Exciter. Also, in 1953, they ran a article, starting in March 1953 and spread over 5 issues, called "Getting Started on SSB".

k6hsg:
I have a National HRO receiver that has a chassis attached to the back that I think is the circuit described in the ARRL "Single Sideband for the radio amateur"  first edition page 103.  The article is by Donald E. Norgaard, W2KUJ, listed as W6VMH in the fifth edition of the same book.  It refers to a July 1948 QST as the source for the reprint.  The article is titled "Single-Sideband Reception by the Phasing Method".
 I bought it on EBAY and haven't done anything with it yet.  To busy working on my AM rig.

John, K6HSG

k4kyv:
Quote from: Pete, WA2CWA on November 22, 2009, 01:08:18 PM

Actually, R/9 Magazine has been succeeded by CQ magazine. The question to ask is whether CQ Magazine cares what you do with R/9 articles at this time.

I'm not sure if CQ Magazine has any control over R/9 copyrights.  In the early 30's, the publishers of R/9 and Radio closely collaborated and both originated in California. Each one even ran ads for the other in their magazines, but they very deliberately emphasised that they were two separate, independent magazines, until late 1935 when it was announced that starting in January of 1936 the two magazines would merge into one publication.

R/9 was a small format magazine like the old CQ and QST while Radio was large format, about the same size as those publications to-day.  The merged publication retained the name Radio, but went to the small format like R/9's.

Radio magazine continued publication through WW2 and for a while after VJ Day, but shortly after the beginning of the War when ham radio was closed down, they changed from a predominantly amateur radio publication and became devoted to industrial electronics.  After the war, the publishers of the pre-War amateur oriented west coast magazine regrouped, moved to NYC, and launched a separate amateur publication under the title CQ.  The format, style, content, authors and editors of the early CQ's were virtually the same as the old pre-War Radio. About the only thing that appeared different was the title printed on the cover, the location of origin and the cheaper binding of the early CQ's. All the while however, Radio continued its existence as a separate publication, but as an industrial electronics rag with little radio content, commercial or amateur.

So the question is whether or not CQ would have any controlling interest over Radio or R/9 copyrights after this somewhat complicated series of mergers and spin-offs.  R/9 did not simply morph into Radio, and Radio did not change directly into CQ.  CQ started out as a brand new publication that continued the format and content orientation that had been abandoned by Radio.

 

WD5JKO:


"Further, the link you provided displays a QST article which might raise the eyebrows of Headquarters staff since there's no indication that permission had been granted to post the article."

So did the ARRL post copyright protection back in the 30's, 40's, 50's? If not then the content is public domain. You cannot retroactively do that. If they did post, then the copyright protection has since expired. Did they renew? If not, then this content is public domain. 

http://inventors.about.com/od/copyrights/a/expiration.htm

When Copyright Protection Becomes Public Domain

Published before 1923 - now in public domain
Published from 1923 to 1963 - When published with a copyright notice © or "Copyright [dates] by [author/owner]" - copyright protection lasts 28 years and could be renewed for an additional 67 years for a total of 95 years. If not renewed, now in public domain.
Published from 1923 to 1963 - When published with no notice - now in public domain
Published from 1964 to 1977 - When published with notice - copyright protection lasts 28 years for first term; automatic extension of 67 years for second term for a total of 95 years.


It is too bad we cannot get back to discussing radio. This "legal" issue reminds me of taking my 12 year old daughter to the ballgame. At the ticket counter, several unsavory looking fellas were passed by until it was my daughters turn. She was taken aside and thoroughly searched by a lady cop while 10 more suspicious looking people were waved by.

Jim
WD5JKO

Pete, WA2CWA:
Actually Jim, you brought it up. But, to answer your question, the copyright notice for each issue of QST, or at least the May 1958 QST from which the article came from, appears on the Table of Contents page, left side, under the Offices banner, 3rd paragraph.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page