There certainly should be copy printed on those pages. In 1978, I ordered the 2-vol, bound 1977 issues directly from MAP. Since copyright is held by the successors of MAP, my sending you pdfs of the missing pages is not allowed without their permission. Your missing pages include articles on Walchaerts, Holmside loco, book reviews etc. One of the stockists of back numbers could probably supply you with a replacement.

One listed on ebay at the moment – Ebay item number 320892453956 – freepost to UK.

If not in UK happy to buy and mail to you.

Send PM if I can help.

BB

The digital ME archives only only go back to volume 187. It would be good if they could be updated with earlier copies.

Paul.

By common consent, UK Copyright Law “is a mess” and certainly not the most compelling subject for model engineers. Some key bits only then, before addressing the issue of Raymond Sanderson’s simple request.
Ownership: The individual who authored the work will exclusively own the work under the 1988 Copyright Act. Only the owner, or his exclusive licensee can bring proceedings in the courts.
Duration: 70 years from the end of the calendar year in which the author of the work dies.
Restricted acts: It is an offence to copy the work without the consent of the owner.
Acts that are allowed -“Fair dealing”: A statutory definition for fair dealing does not exist. Generally, anyone wishing to copy an owner’s works for research or private study must do so themselves. However, other people can make a single copy on their behalf. Acceptable boundary for study: one article from an individual issue of a journal (even if the article is the entire journal issue).

The picture on the cover page of ME No. 3567 is attributed to a “Robin Russell”. He or his successors will own the copyright until 2047. Other articles not printed on Raymond’s pages include one from Martin Evans, who was then a “Technical Consultant” to MAP. Whether that means he or MAP or their respective successors own the work is not known to us. But under the precise terms of the Act, copying without their consent is an offence.
However, under the 1988 Act although “Fair dealing” is not defined, by custom and practice any one of us should have been able to make a single copy of those pages for Raymond “on his behalf” if it was for his private study. Whether my reproduced MAP “All Rights Reserved” statement negates that would be for the courts to decide.
Does it matter? Probably not, the likelihood of litigation in this case is negligible.
A far more serious issue for authors & publishers is the blatant copying of books being offered for sale on non-UK websites.

Well the law is the law, so this man needs to go to Jail & no messin'.

However, where it says "No part of this publication may be reproduced"…. (Have I just broken the law there?), well, what constitutes a "part" – is it a word, a sentence, a paragraph?