MAR Online is frequently referred to in these forums and there has been quite a lot of two-way traffic between their website and our own. So I thought it worth pointing out (as no-one else has yet done so) that the MAR Online website has been deactivated, presumably for good.
This came about because some time ago they inadvertently published a photo which turned out to be copyright. As soon as they were advised of this the photo was removed and (most of us would say) no harm done, but French lawyers have persisted in pursuing a claim for damages on behalf of the copyright holder. MAR have no funds to pay damages or to defend themselves in court proceedings, so Maz has been forced to close the site after nearly 15 years of trying to carry on the tradition of the print version of Model Auto Review.
Of course we don't know the full background but it looks like money-making litigation to me. The copyright owner could simply have said "OK, honest mistake, don't do it again." But now the collecting community has lost another asset, for what looks like a ridiculous reason.
The site has also been operating through a Facebook connection but I don't do Facebook so I don't know if Maz can still keep something going through that medium, but the way he described the shut-down it certainly sounds as if activity has been terminated.
Shame.
Graeme.M. Ogg
London U.K.
It's a sad situation. It will be interesting to see what happens and if shutting down the operation will put an end to the litigation. I don't believe Maz has the option to continue MAR in any form. If he wants to move forward, it will have to be under a new moniker. He's a good guy who has surrounded himself with other equally good guys in the hobby, and they have worked hard to keep the hobby vital. I hope they can work something out.
John Kuvakas
Warrenton, VA
@jkuvakas It will depend on under what formation he conducted his business as Mar. If it was a sole proprietorship, they may continue to pursue their case. In any event it would behoove the owner to obtain legal counsel, if they do so.
As I mentioned on the other string related to this, France does not allow "fair use". Their copyright laws are very strict.
@lloyd-mecca You are correct, strictly speaking, but French law does allow 'specific uses like private copying, educational use, and certain public performances,' which is not dissimilar to fair use, when applied to the Mar circumstance, wherein Mar was disseminating information in an 'educational use' manner, and not for financial gain.
A clear case of a money grab. Seriously, how much damage did temporarily posting online one image that was not correctly cited? I authored a design related textbook in the late 90s, a major publishing house printed & distributed it internationally. The book included my own design drawings, plus images by others, all corrected cited. You don't get rich authoring a textbook but I did receive what I felt was generous royalties' for more than a decade. Major publishing houses typically copyright under their name, however, I had my own attorney and the book was copyrighted under my name. To clarify, my work was published for educational purposes which is very broad by definition. Over the years I lost count how many times I was notified by various sources of copyright infringement's of my text and/or images occurred (China was the worst). I always just blew it off, time & effort with lawyers can suck the life out of you, plus you have to put a $ value to damages which is really hard to prove.
Sorry to hear what happened to MAR online. With MAR closed down, at least the plaintiff has little chance of getting a cent and might now only have attorney fees. Or, the attorneys wasted time and money to file the case to begin with.
As said in one of these strings, we don't really know the full story, so kinda hard to come to a competent conclusion.