Re: [Paddlewise] Boat Design

Nick Schade wrote:
> The analogy between kayak designs and software is not very good. In 
> software, the mechanics of how it works is hidden after it is compiled. 
> With a boat everything about it is out there for anyone's inspection.

Well, software is far from opaque.  It's fairly easy to disassmble 
machine code and figure out how it works.  It's also fairly easy to take 
a set of inputs and compare its outputs.  You can get at the essence of 
what a program does with some effort.

> What you sort of seem to be asking for is a complete set of lines for 
> the boat be freely available, preferably in electronic form. The design 
> isn't the electronic file, it is the boat itself.

If you're going to be making your own modified version a boat, you still 
have to buy or construct the boat itself.  Then you can accurately measure.

> My licensing agreement (build one boat from my plans, or pay a royalty 
> for additional boats) does not keep you from coming up with your own 
> design which uses ideas from mine. "Source code" is not required, it 
> just makes it easier. You can see the shape and make any measurements 
> you choose. What benefit does the designer get from making the 
> electronic CAD files available? The benefit appears to be one-way.

If the lines or build instructions were used to build a different boat, 
the same instructions would be available to the designer.  If I build a 
boat for, say, my 9-year old, from your modified plans, you would 
receive the same modifications present in my boat.  The benefit is you 
(well, everyone) would have plans suitable for everyone.

> With software there is a mechanism for being sure credit is passed along 
> where credit is due, either through comments in the code or a change 
> log. There is no similar mechanism for a boat. Should a list of all 
> contributers be laminated into the glass?

No, the analogy is this, and I don't know believe (personally) that the 
analogy is 100% accurate:

Program source code : Commerical Product :: Kayak plans : Finished boat

Contributors would be listed in the source code/plans, not the finished 
  product.

> Define a "bug" in a kayak. It is not as if there is such a thing as "too 
> stable" it is at best "more stable than I like." Some people want a 
> stiff tracking boat, other like it loose. One person's "bug" is often 
> another's "feature".

Have you heard the joke about Microsoft calling their bugs "features"? 
Clearly, a given boat has characteristics suitable for one paddler over 
another.  But let's say, given a set of "use cases" (software 
development term), the boat has inherent defects (fails given the plan's 
construction techniques) these could be corrected by the manufacturer.

For example, if a skeg box were to leak due to its design, or hatches 
leak, the coaming crack when entering, foot pedals slipping, lee cocking 
etc.  Some of these involve construction details, some ergonomics, some 
hull design.

> Maybe we should work on the Linux of shoes first. The market is bigger. 
> We wouldn't need as big malls if everyone could agree on a standardized 
> shoe. One-size-fits-all has the potential to work in operating systems, 
> but doesn't really make sense in kayaks. For better or worse, kayak 
> design has a lot to do with "style". This is not just "style" in the 
> form of what a kayak looks like, but includes the waters people paddle, 
> what they do when they are on the water, and their expectations of what 
> the kayak will do for them.

The analogy with software breaks down here, I agree.  Software design is 
very messy, you can add things to make a given product suitable for a 
wider range of customers without hurting its suitability for the 
original group.

And though the suitability of a boat for a person and paddling condition 
determines design, designs are borrowed from other designs.  Software is 
much this way.  A word processor and spreadsheet don't have much in 
common, but the fundamentals are shared.

> As a practical matter I have several design which I give away for free. 
> I have never had anyone send back a file with an "improvement" on one of 
> these designs. I have had several people use the plans in unexpected 
> ways, but there does not seem to be any groundswell in people giving 
> back. What I have seen is people make small modifications to my designs, 
> call them "new" and sell them.

Free software is, perhaps paradoxically, protected and enabled by 
copyright law.  Copyright ensures Microsoft can't steal code from Linux. 
  If Linux were public domain, people would do the same things you 
describe:  Make changes and sell the software for profit, which benefits 
only a few.

I was considering the possible consequences of the protection of boat 
design, not advocating that designers give things away for people to steal.

But if boat designs were protected by law, I think there is a chance 
there would community developing around producing "community designs." 
Whether or not they would be developed commercially or just by hobbists 
is a good question.  (And I am not here to advocate boat designers do 
such a thing if there were such a law, or condemn or push those who 
don't.)  The reason that people do not give back as you describe, is 
there is no such obligation under law.  And there is no "enabling 
technology" in place that allows for information to be shared and 
updated easily.  (This mailing list is a good example!)

Personally, I think it is wrong to steal somebody's design, change it, 
and sell as "new".  This goes against the overall philosophy.
***************************************************************************
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/
***************************************************************************