Philosophical questions on Selling/Purchasing Plans

[rule62va]

Philosophical question on rights when Selling/Purchasing Plans.  Asking for your experience and expectations as a buyer and a designer.

[PAR]

There's nothing implied at all, it's very simple, you have purchased the right to build one boat from a plan set purchase. The Design belongs to the designer and if they're a reasonable person, protected under copyright. Your "interpretations" of copyright law seem "skewed" to say the least. There is no guess work, no misunderstanding in regard to the basic question of what you get when purchasing a plan.

If you build more then one boat from the plan, without permission, you've violated the agreement and can be perused legally.

If you deviate from the plans, you void any obligation the designer might be held to, in the event of a mishap, that's deemed a "design flaw".

When you purchase the plans, you can't "do with them as you want", again you've done nothing more then purchased the right to build, which doesn't include any design ownership or possession in any fashion.

As a designer, you've presented dimensioned drawings and calculated scantlings for the boat. Other then this, your control over the builder is limited to only what a contract lawyer can dream up in a litigation, which from my experience can be quite extensive, but generally restrained to the design as a whole, not actions of any third party (such as a builder), unless in direct breach of the purchase agreement (which is what I supply with each of my plans). Some of these breaches may include failure to inform the designer of multiple builds, royalty fee payments, attempting to market the design without expressed designer consent, etc.

The bottom line, it's not a difficult question according to the courts, though you Rule62va, possibly seem to be having difficulty understanding the concepts.

In short, it's not your design after purchase. The design remains the sole property of the designer, regardless of your desires. Of course contacting the designer with a "grand plan" is an option. Most I've found are quite willing to entertain "ideas" and direction for one of their designs. If not sure about where you stand, call the designer and ask. They'll set you straight.

[rule62va]

Hello,

It's a poll not a thread.

so your "vote" would be #3

I would rather you recorded it

thanks

[ChrisObee]

None of your options represent my opinion.  When you purchase you are buying a license that gives you the right to build one boat.  Your purchase is a contract between you and the designer.  There is no philosophy involved only lawful behavior and theft. 

[Oyster]

Hello,

It's a poll not a thread.

so your "vote" would be #3

I would rather you recorded it

thanks

Really? I don't think its for you to decide how someone responds. People may not accept your premise. Two responses now have given you a pretty good idea on which way people feel about the long standing policies of the relationship between the two partners . So what is your intention here?

[Tom Lathrop]

The responders got it right. 

No vote can change what is a long standing and legal agreement between plan buyers and designers.  Any different kind of agreement can be negotiated between the principals.

Most of us are not lawyers and simple language is best.

[PAR]

The real questions should be towards the person asking these questions. What are you contemplating? Is a contractual breach in your near future? Who's plans are you looking to take advantage of? etc., etc., etc.

[lbrewer]

I built a rowboat once, with the intention of giving it to my daughter.  Circumstances arose and I ended up donating the boat to a charity auction.  I still wanted to build one for my daughter, so I contacted the designer to buy another set of plans or pay a royalty as was, I believe, the right thing to do.  The designer allowed me to build the second boat at no charge, but it was certainly his option to charge me for another set of plans. 

Aside from the copyright laws, which certainly apply, doing the right thing is just the right thing to do.

[Frank Hagan]

The plans usually dictate what the agreement is, and the usual agreement is that you will build one boat from the plans.  Other plans are given away in things like magazines and on websites, where no limit is stated.  I know some builders who have an agreement with a designer that they pay a fee for each boat produced after initially paying full price for the plans. 

There's nothing to stop you if you don't want to buy plans.  They aren't required to build a boat.  Just build it without plans.  After all, if you feel the plans aren't worth the payment, then they must not be necessary.

On a slight tangent, how do designers handle the "Bob's 'Moth', Inspired by John's 'Wingless Butterfly'" type of designs?  Aren't there a few iterations of famous designs ... somewhere in my memory is maybe a Sam Rabl design that is based on another design, with both designers mentioned when the boat is described. 

[PAR]

It is possible to have specific elements of a design patented or copyrighted. The new Hoyt lug rig is an example. The moment you come out with something, particularly one with racing success, you can bet it will appear on the next generation of yachts and the competition in short order. The wing keel on the AC Australia II, spawned dozens of wiglets. This actually slowed down more boats then it helped, but it was a fad that quickly swept through the world's sailing fleets. Water ballasting is another one of these "trends". Next, when they can do it economically will be canting keels, assuming this trend is still in favor on the ocean racing circuits.

The bottom line, as with any protection device like these (copyright and patents) is the ability of the owner to defend their right to have the protection. This generally boils down to money, with the deepest pockets carrying the day. If you can't afford to offer substantial defense of your protection rights, then the patent or copyright is basically useless.

[Ken_Potts]

  When I buy a set of plans I honor the designer's wishes.  If he says I should make ten copies and distribute them freely to the first ten people I meet I'll try to fulfill that.  If he says that the purchase of the plans covers the construction of a single boat I honor that.  If I decide not to build that boat I feel free to sell the plans along to another aspiring builder.  I would not build a boat I didn't admire and therefore I respect the designer's hard work in creating the design and the drawings.  I am a designer by trade (but not a boat designer) and I know the work involved in drawing a set of plans for a critter as complex as a boat.

  So my opinion is that people should either build the boat or sell the plans on to someone else who will.  Anyone who builds a boat to a set of plans then sells those plans on to someone else is just a parasite.

  Is that strong enough for you?  Sorry I didn't click the button on the poll but none of the buttons matched my real opinion.  I'm also sorry that I was so blunt about the matter but I've had designs stolen before and it fosters a strong opinion on the subject.

  Sell as many copies as you want as long as the design and the drawings are your own.  And if you take the trouble to do the work there's a good chance you'll agree with me.

  And before I forget - Welcome to the forum!  You'll never meet a nicer bunch of people than you'll find here.  Good folks all around.  Please feel free to share photos or details of your current, past or future projects  :cool:  If you post a photo of a really cool battery box installation or something I'll feel free to copy it and tell everybody where I got the idea but if you send me dimensioned drawings and instructions on how to build it I will ask your permission before I pass it along because as far as I'm concerned that design is YOUR property, not mine.

[Tom Lathrop]

There's nothing to stop you if you don't want to buy plans.  They aren't required to build a boat.  Just build it without plans.  After all, if you feel the plans aren't worth the payment, then they must not be necessary.

Frank,

That gets to the heart of the matter.

Ken,

I had a patent directly infringed by the British Post Office because the designer they hired, an earlier co-worker, could not come up with a suitable alternative.  I only got one dollar for the patent anyway so I was not too disturbed personally.

rule62va, 

Now that we have pounded on you for a spell, welcome to the forum :grin:

[Ken_Potts]

  My company pays a little better than that for patents (but not as much as one might hope) 

  The man who designed the airplane I'm building had a bad experience with design theft.  If I understand it correctly somebody essentially took his plans and tooled up a factory in the Balkans to build the planes.  No royalties, nothing.

  I think from an ethical standpoint that's the same as building the boat then selling the plans you used to someone else.

[Tom Lathrop]

Ken,  I was overstating the case a little.  The one dollar covered all of my patents while employed by them. 

[aprophet]

The plans usually dictate what the agreement is, and the usual agreement is that you will build one boat from the plans.  Other plans are given away in things like magazines and on websites, where no limit is stated.  I know some builders who have an agreement with a designer that they pay a fee for each boat produced after initially paying full price for the plans.  

There's nothing to stop you if you don't want to buy plans.  They aren't required to build a boat.  Just build it without plans.  After all, if you feel the plans aren't worth the payment, then they must not be necessary.

On a slight tangent, how do designers handle the "Bob's 'Moth', Inspired by John's 'Wingless Butterfly'" type of designs?  Aren't there a few iterations of famous designs ... somewhere in my memory is maybe a Sam Rabl design that is based on another design, with both designers mentioned when the boat is described. 

This is what I have been led to belive, is this correct ? I once asked Phil Bolger about this  and he told me each one I build and sell just figger the cost of the plans into the sale price of the boat . I need to check with Ms. Altenburger and see if this is still good. Is this how most designers do? ??

When plans are put into magazines and books you can build with out limit ?? and without fees ??  thanks for any help. Oh yea I am new here been reading as much as I can

[ChrisObee]

When plans are put into magazines and books you can build with out limit ?? and without fees ??  thanks for any help. Oh yea I am new here been reading as much as I can

That is probably correct.  If they publish full plans in a magazine have at it.  In most cases when you purchase plans from a designer it means that you are licensed to build one boat.  In any case the designer will provide you with instructions with you plan package that will make this plain. 

[Tom Lathrop]

When plans are put into magazines and books you can build with out limit ?? and without fees ??  thanks for any help. Oh yea I am new here been reading as much as I can

That is probably correct.  If they publish full plans in a magazine have at it.  In most cases when you purchase plans from a designer it means that you are licensed to build one boat.  In any case the designer will provide you with instructions with you plan package that will make this plain. 

Chris,

That is the way I understand it but there is an area that calls for another decision.  Some "plans" are made available in magazines or books as well as available from the designer.  The magazine/book plans are limited and small but do contain enough info for many to build from. 

I know what I think, but what do others think about building multiple boats from magazine/book plans? 

[ChrisObee]

That is the way I understand it but there is an area that calls for another decision.  Some "plans" are made available in magazines or books as well as available from the designer.  The magazine/book plans are limited and small but do contain enough info for many to build from.  

I know what I think, but what do others think about building multiple boats from magazine/book plans?  

What you really need to do is read the magazine.  It probably says right there what the rules are.  Otherwise if you are not using the plans then you don't have a problem.  Boat designers look at other designers boats all the time.  Then they design thier boat.  Its the details that make a design.  If you are supplying the details I think its your design. I guess if you took measurments from the plans in the magazine you could wander back accross the line to unreasonalble use. 

[Sage]

Ethical considerations aside, I can't imagine that the restriction on the number of builds is legally enforceable. The plans are protected by copyright, which only prevents the buyer from copying and distributing the plans. The designer can specify restrictions (such as a single build or that only hand tools can be used), but copyright certainly doesn't protect these. The first-sale doctrine would also allow the purchaser to sell the plans, even after building the boat. I'm not sure that considering it a license to build a boat would really hold up in court. Has anyone ever heard of case where this was challenged. Perhaps a person buying a set of plans and then building and selling multiple boats? I'm only talking about the legal aspects, not what should be done.

[PAR]

Yes, on many occasions a single set of plans has been purchased and the buyer has gone on to build several boats from them, just to be held liable. I'm reminded of a case where a fellow tried to change the plans a little and then produce them as his own, using a different building method and all. He built several and when the original designer was contacted (by accident) about a rudder issue, the jig was up and a suit filed. The original designer won the suit. It's an easily defensible position from the designer's stand point.