Here is my scenario. I'm an engineering graduate who did structural engineering for a few years, but never tested for my PE. I hit job cutbacks and eventually decided to do AutoCAD Drafting to earn a living. I service different Engs, Archs, Int Dgns, and etc, which has provoked this question. …When someone gives me paper copies of building drawings (or civil site, or similar) to recreate in AutoCAD format, can I trace them into AutoCAD without violating "copyright" of the original creator of the drawings? …Here is a perfect example I'm currently working on. ...A client of mine who does anti-corrosion systems contacted me about a water tower. The owner of the water tower wants to add my client's anti-corrosion system to their tower. My client gave me paper copies of the water tower, that were originally created by a structural engineering firm, so I could get the tower into AutoCAD format. From that point I will overlay his anti-corrosion system on the tower. The thing is, the paper copies have a “property of XYZ Company” stamp on them. I have assumed that my client has received these drawings from the owner and that he has the right to give them to me for recreating them in AutoCAD format. …This is how many of my projects are. They are improvement or revision type projects that require existing paper copies to be converted to AutoCAD so that the improvement or revision can be added.
Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet
Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals
-
Congratulations waross on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Working off of "Copyrighted" Project Plans 5
- Thread starter testrun
- Start date
I'm not a lawyer, either, but I do like to argue ;-)
There are lots of possibly relevant cases:
> Suzuki(?) was sued by HD for infringing on their trademarked exhaust sound. Suzuki lost, and was forced to change their exhaust system, which was designed specifically to mimic the HD exhaust sound.
> Apple litigated a case about 2 decades ago, suing Microsoft for infringing on Apple's "look & feel." They lost, but that was mostly because the specific GUI items in contention had already been licensed to Microsoft previously.
TTFN
FAQ731-376
There are lots of possibly relevant cases:
> Suzuki(?) was sued by HD for infringing on their trademarked exhaust sound. Suzuki lost, and was forced to change their exhaust system, which was designed specifically to mimic the HD exhaust sound.
> Apple litigated a case about 2 decades ago, suing Microsoft for infringing on Apple's "look & feel." They lost, but that was mostly because the specific GUI items in contention had already been licensed to Microsoft previously.
TTFN
FAQ731-376
- Thread starter
- #22
In the past week I've learned allot about copyright. It's a bit tricky when one factors in "fair use" and and "implied license". I've actually even spoken to an engineer turned lawyer, who specializes in eng law suits and copyright matters. IRstuff had some good comments that line up with what I found, and what the lawyer said. An Owner buying plans (ie design services resulting in plans) is like him buying a book, but the analogy isn't perfect. ...Some of my understanding on this topic is that as soon as a drawing is put on a tangible medium (a napkin, etc.) it is copyrighted, even if it doesn't have the little copyright symbol. Therefore, as a third party Drafting Service (that's what i am), if my Client gives me drawings with someone else's title block, then I need to confirm with the author of the drawings that I can use his drawings. Even if the drawings come from the Owner of the property, because according to the Law the Owner doesn't have the copyright of the drawings that he has in his possession (it's like buying a book). Yes, there may be instances of contractual agreements that give the Owner the copyright, but as a third party Drafting Service I'd need to confirm that with the author of the drawings. ...With this in mind, then in any dealings between an Engineer and an Owner, the Eng should also verify that he can copy from the drawings, or make copies of them. ...A simple indemnification clause would be nice to simplify dealings, but that doesn't really protect one from getting sued or from being responsible. ...There are many variables that can effect the second hand use of plans. ...It really is easier just to check with the Author of the plans, but that could turn a client off. ...life aint easy.
cedarbluffranch
Mechanical
To the OP:
First, congrats for being concerned about ethics. Your employer should be pleased your concerned.
As far as your question, here's my take. Copyright violations are separate from being a licensed engineer. Everyone is America is required to follow copyright law, regardless of profession or education. So I disagree that only the PE signing on the drawings need to be concerned about copyright. I think everyone needs to be concerned.
Second, the only person/entity that can release the copyright is the copyright owner. Most likely this is the firm or individual that originally drafted the prints, not the firm that provided you with a copy. So I don't think that simply placing a note in your contract with the construction firms covers you.
My suggestion would be to require any company that provides you with a copy of drawings to also provide you with a letter from the copyright owner allowing to copy the drawings and add your details to their drawings. What you are describing sounds like standard practice so I don't think they should be concerned.
First, congrats for being concerned about ethics. Your employer should be pleased your concerned.
As far as your question, here's my take. Copyright violations are separate from being a licensed engineer. Everyone is America is required to follow copyright law, regardless of profession or education. So I disagree that only the PE signing on the drawings need to be concerned about copyright. I think everyone needs to be concerned.
Second, the only person/entity that can release the copyright is the copyright owner. Most likely this is the firm or individual that originally drafted the prints, not the firm that provided you with a copy. So I don't think that simply placing a note in your contract with the construction firms covers you.
My suggestion would be to require any company that provides you with a copy of drawings to also provide you with a letter from the copyright owner allowing to copy the drawings and add your details to their drawings. What you are describing sounds like standard practice so I don't think they should be concerned.
cedarbluffranch
Mechanical
The other comment is if you don't want to be seen impratical by your clients, you can directly request that from the architect. They should be reasonable since what you are asking is not significant. They may want to charge a small fee, which would also be reasonable.
By the way, reverse engineering of a product is both legal and acceptable. I did my first two years out of college in aerospace.
By the way, reverse engineering of a product is both legal and acceptable. I did my first two years out of college in aerospace.
- Thread starter
- #26
Want to hear something interesting that should be taken into consideration when determining how to use existing drawings, in light of Copyright Laws? There is an interesting ruling by the AIA on this matter. The ruling can be found at:
As a licensing board, they made a decision about a similar situation as mine. (Keep in mind that the disciplines I deal with are primarily Structural Eng and Architectural.) They judged the situation in question based on what standard practice within the industry is. The copyright Laws also mention how the Laws are to be interpreted by the spirit of the Law and what standard industry practice is, whatever that industry may be. ...If you read the responses to this thread, you may notice how people exposed to different industries may have a different take on my situation.
All of your comments have been so helpful, and I’m truly grateful for all of them. It’s amazing how this thread has remained pretty focused. It has DEFINITELY helped me make some immediate decisions that were needed. I also have food to chew on in considering the decisions I made. ...You live, and you learn (from others!).
p.s. The AIA also has another interesting ruling of a similar situation at:
As a licensing board, they made a decision about a similar situation as mine. (Keep in mind that the disciplines I deal with are primarily Structural Eng and Architectural.) They judged the situation in question based on what standard practice within the industry is. The copyright Laws also mention how the Laws are to be interpreted by the spirit of the Law and what standard industry practice is, whatever that industry may be. ...If you read the responses to this thread, you may notice how people exposed to different industries may have a different take on my situation.
All of your comments have been so helpful, and I’m truly grateful for all of them. It’s amazing how this thread has remained pretty focused. It has DEFINITELY helped me make some immediate decisions that were needed. I also have food to chew on in considering the decisions I made. ...You live, and you learn (from others!).
p.s. The AIA also has another interesting ruling of a similar situation at:
DonPhillips
Structural
AIA is not a licensing board, but a professional organization. NCARB, like NCEES, write tests that the states use to license architects.
Don Phillips
Don Phillips
- Status
