[willys36@aol.com]

I would be very cautious about challenging Jon on ANY law concerning a web site after his history of defending them. I'm sure he know More than most attorneys in the field.

[charger528]

I think you may have missed the spirit of this post the said photo on a semi private club were posted with good intent merly for discussion I believe there was no intent to harm your lively hood.

they were not posted and sent all over the internet for the free use of all.

further more most of current generation not only do not no that car exists they would be highly unlikely in any case to purchase any photo's of that car .

It's not a honda ,a toyota isnt lower to the ground and dosn't have a wing and a giant muffler.

I haven't been on here in quite a while I have no Idea how to delete those pics I posted but seeing were mine are of the clone and came dirrectly from a mopar mag layed down in my scanner I guess I will wait till mopar mag calls asking me to remove them.

[BillyShope]

Back in the fifties, engineering students were required to take a course on this sort of thing, taught by a prof from the law school. It was a very different situation then. A photo of a magazine photo was noticeably inferior. Mass production of a quality image was either impossible or expensive.

Today, if you like a picture on your computer screen, all you have to do is hit "alt/prt scrn" or use the "snipping tool" and you have essentially the same picture as stored in the photographer's camera memory.

In order to protect their income source, photographers have become very aggressive in their prosecution of copyright violators. Can't really blame them, but, at the same time, this is one more reason why I hate computers.

http://www.racetec.cc/shope

[joestevensphotos]

Originally Posted by 69DartGT

Your father worked with a Larry I believe, I'm from that area and remember these people I'll have to look for my copies, haven't seen them in a couple of years sold the cabinet they were in so no telling where they are right now, I said brother but should have said cousin my mistake.
My intent on posting those so many years ago was to recall the names of the people in the picture, look at the date that was 2004, how long has your website been up?
Just trying to say no intent was made to cut you short on these.
You take care, Okay my wife remembered where I put the stuff from the cabinet, helps when you get to be my age, but there are no stamps on mine I guess the mind was playing tricks on me.

Happens to me all of the time but more so when my kids say, "you never told me to do that" and I reply with well I thought I did. This is too much of an information age. Always new technical gadgets, new things on the computer and I haven't even learned the basic practically. I just try to stay on top of things. All I want to do is archived and scan these neg's & digitize them to my website so that people can go there to browse or buy. It's a lot easier than going to some of these car meets. You can get pretty dirty and they're loiud but fun. All this stuff I get done eventually is going to be donated to the Detroit Automotive Section of the Library when I get old unless by sons want it. But hey now, you guys have a whole new site to go to to check out cool pictures. and you can get a link to one or more of them to add here I beleive but they'll still hava a watermark.

[willys36@aol.com]

Originally Posted by BillyShope

Back in the fifties, engineering students were required to take a course on this sort of thing, taught by a prof from the law school. It was a very different situation then. A photo of a magazine photo was noticeably inferior. Mass production of a quality image was either impossible or expensive.

Today, if you like a picture on your computer screen, all you have to do is hit "alt/prt scrn" or use the "snipping tool" and you have essentially the same picture as stored in the photographer's camera memory.

In order to protect their income source, photographers have become very aggressive in their prosecution of copyright violators. Can't really blame them, but, at the same time, this is one more reason why I hate computers.

http://www.racetec.cc/shope

This discussion is sort of ironic. Billy WAS one of the Ramchargers, and could probably provide us with hundreds of almost identical photos.

[cobalt327]

Originally Posted by Crazy Mopar Guy

Does anybody remember "High and Mighty", the 392 powered Plymouth that the Ramchargers team raced back in the 50's?
The car looked bizarre, but had a ton of racing innovations.

Photos and text of "High & Mighty"" as well as the later Ranchargers can be viewed at the Allpar site. The Ramchargers link also contains additional links of interest:

Drag Racing
• The Little Red Wagon - first wheelstander
• The Dodge Ramchargers: Dodge Employee-Racers
• The Golden Commandos: Plymouth Employee-Racers
• The Dodge Chargers drag-racing team
• The High & Mighty — original funny car
• Bill "Maverick" Golden, successful racer and original wheelstander
• Dodge Pro Stock second generation Hemi 99 (2006)
• Ellis Brasher's early Hemi drag racing
• NHRA in 2010: Pomona Winternationals | Arizona Nationals
• The Pro Stock Hemi Neon - busily setting records
• Chrysler racing contract, 1969-1970
• Rich Fox’s cars, including a record-setting four-cylinder 1932 Plymouth
• Don “The Beachcomber” Johnson
• We Were The Ramchargers

Mopar and Motown Missile
• History of the Mopar Missile - interview with the car’s historian
• Mopar Missile builder and mechanic Joe Pappas (2009 interview)
• Motown Missile and Sox & Martin Duster: match racing in 2009
• Mopar Missile Aero Tests (1973) - numerous photos, including driver’s perspective
• Night of Fire with the Mopar Missile (2009) with Ben Donhoff interview
• Testing hood scoops for the Mopar Missile - 1970s photo essay
• Motown Missile: 1972 Plymouth ’Cuda factory drag racer
• “Wire Car” - ultra-lightweight 1974 Plymouth Duster drag car

THIS is a HR article on the Ramchargers/High & Mighty and the Ram Rod (predecessor to High & Mighty) that Tom Hoover and Dick Burke contributed to.

The interweb is ate up w/articles and references to both Ramchargers and High & Mighty if more on the subject is wanted.

[1971BB427]

Beautiful day today; mid 50's temps. We took our Austins for a drive!

[sqzbox]

Originally Posted by 1971BB427

Beautiful day today; mid 50's temps. We took our Austins for a drive!

WHAT? No rain in Portland? Realy, looks even better dry! Lucky dog, We won't see 50's here probably till March.

[1971BB427]

We always have rain! It may look dry in the picture, but we put up a huge tarp to make it dry. We get rain every day, never any sun. We want everyone to know we have terrible wet weather all the time.
If you ever get here and the sun is out it's just your imagination!

[Jon]

joestevensphotos -- I have repeatedly asked you whether the copyright was renewed, and have received no answer. My attempt to contact you via private message has been ignored. The photo is more than 50 years old, and, per my understanding and research, I believe it to have fallen into the public domain, at which point we are free to disseminate it, especially for the purpose of historical discussion and scholarship.

I am re-posting the photo in this thread. As 69DartGT immediately removed the photo at your request, you may now direct any legal action, or threat thereof, at me personally.

I don't respond to bullying. If you feel that this work is still copyrighted, and that you are the owner, and you would like me to take down the image, please follow standard legal procedure. This means that you must submit a formal Digital Millenium Copyright Act takedown notice, in which you are required to swear, UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY, that you are authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed. Keep in mind that perjury is a felony, punishable by up to 5 years in prison.

Once you submit such a notice, I will promptly remove the photograph, and will not re-post it until further legal research can be used to completely justify its public dissemination.

In addition, keep in mind that, upon registering for this forum, you agreed to abide by our terms of service, which specifically state that you are "forbidden from posting any contact details (phone numbers, physical addresses, urls, and email addresses)" for any businesses with which you are affiliated. Such an agreement constitutes a formal legal contract, which you have now violated 3 times.

[cobalt327]

Thanks Jon, I didn't get to see the original photo before it was removed.

Kind of interesting that the door scrip has "Plymouth" and "Valiant" almost as if they were separate makes. This jibes w/the photo having been taken in 1960, when the Valiant debuted.

[sqzbox]

Originally Posted by sqzbox

Do we need to start collecting money now?

Once again I ask. I didn't contribute to street beasts fund but I will back you on this one if needed. (nice hammer drop!).

[sqzbox]

Originally Posted by cobalt327

Thanks Jon, I didn't get to see the original photo before it was removed.

Kind of interesting that the door scrip has "Plymouth" and "Valiant" almost as if they were separate makes. This jibes w/the photo having been taken in 1960, when the Valiant debuted.

And then came the "Dodge" and "Dart" .

[cobalt327]

Originally Posted by sqzbox

And then came the "Dodge" and "Dart" .

Yeah, I guess the Dart came along with the Valiant.

Back in the days (ca. '62) when Super Stock was all about 409's, 413's, 421's, 406's, etc. the Dodges were always quicker than the Plymouths- at least that's how I remember it. Wonder why (if it really was that way)?

[sqzbox]

Originally Posted by cobalt327

Yeah, I guess the Dart came along with the Valiant.

the Dodges were always quicker than the Plymouths- at least that's how I remember it. Wonder why (if it really was that way)?

Sibling rivalry! (I can do it batter than you)