[Paddlewise] Design copies

Matt wrote:

>Spoken like a lawyer. To use someone else's design (or a boat they
>designed--without mutually agreed compensation) as the basis for making
>modifications (whether improvements or not) is theft of the time and effort
>of the original designer.

Interesting point since one can easily find points of departure in almost
any design. I have a picture of a sambuk from Port Sudan with hard chines
aft, asymmetrical hull, and skeg. The picture dates from before 1946. I
don't think Matt copied the design but one can see the problem in
determining what constitutes "using someone else's design as  a point of
departure" or simply employing certain commonly used features either singly
or in concert.

The courts freq uently face this problem. Sometimes what seems obvious to
designers seems less obvious to the judge (or jury) who may have little or
no background in design. A few buckets of body putty and one can easily
disguise a hull to the untrained eye. This, of course, differs from a
"splash" where a mold gets made over an unaltered boat.

>While in the
>past there may have been little the designer can do legally, they have had
>their hard work converted to the enrichment of the person stealing their
>original design.

For a designer the question frequently boils down to "How much will I
willingly spend to prosecute?" and "What chances do I have of winning?".
Here in Canada it may cost up to $30,000 to get in the courthouse and then
you have no assurance of winning. In the canoe and kayak business the
royalties rarely make pursuing a prosecution worthwhile even if you have an
"air-tight" case. My lawyers have always recommended sending a strongly
worded letter and then, if you get no satisfaction, drop it. Surprisingly
enough the strongly worded letter has worked for me.

When it doesn't I take Steve Scarborough's advice and just design a new boat
because it takes less time and bother.

 > Since the
>copy-cat didn't do the mental work in the first place (and as a result is
>unlikely to have nearly the same understanding of the original) it is very
>unlikely that the result will be an improvement on the original.

True enough when done by unprincipled builders but many designers use the
work of others as a basis for their designs. The evolution of racing
sailboats provides ample evidence of this. As Newton once said, " If I have
seen further it is by standing upon the shoulders of Giants". Mind you,
building on the ideas of others differs considerably from simple theft.

> Does that formerly unique hull bottom, rib keel,
>hard chine, and radical Swede-form shape look a little familiar to you? If
>so, then the Max hull should look even more familiar than that one.

In the cases that I know about the courts have asked, "Is the combination of
features unique?" The overall design may claim a unique nature but did no
other boat precede the one in question with this combination of features?
You can see how these things get bogged down in one side saying "You stole
my design." and the other saying  "I modified it enough so it has become a
new design." Yes, but my conbination is unique." So you say but what about
such and such which looks pretty similar." etc etc etc

The issue raises other possible problems. Consider this possibility.

Builder Sleaze Boats copies your design (closely). A buyer using the design
drowns and the family sues both Sleaze Boats and you arguing that your
design caused the problem. You argue that Sleaze stole your design. The
plaintiff's lawyer says, "So you admit it is your design?  Yes, Sleaze stole
the design but he stole it in good faith. He used it because you said it was
a good boat. If you  had not promoted the boat so well he  would have used
some one else's design. That he stole the design does not get you the
designer off the hook for poor design work"

(This is the ame lawyer who won the judgement for the lady who spilled
coffee in her lap)

How does the judge know it was your design?  Why, you said so on the
internet.

Absolutely scary.

Anyway, the issue poses interesting problems. How much change constitutes
enough change to claim a "new" design? How would one measure it? The naval
architecture business has puzzled over this for many years without much
satisfaction.

Cheers

John Winters
***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed
here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire
responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author.
Submissions:     PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net
Subscriptions:   PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************