An Ownership Question, was An Ethical Question

B

Thread Starter

Blunier, Mark

> If one pays attention to the drawings that come with > your equipment, they usually state that the drawing and everything > on it remains the property of the vendor. What rights does the 'owner' of my drawings (they were sold to me when I purchased the rest of my equipment) have in regards restricting my use of the drawings? Can I 1) Use them to make a copy of the equipment, so that I can sell one to my neighbor? 2) Use them to make a copy of the equipment, so that I have two? 3) Use them to make replacement parts to fix it when it breaks/wears? 4) Loan them to another vendor so that he can make replacement parts to fix the equipment when it breaks/wears? And similarly, same questions as above, but instead of having the drawings supplied by the vender that he 'owns', I make my own drawings by measuring the parts. Mark Blunier Any opinions expressed in this message are not necessarily those of the company.
 
R

Ramer-1, Carl

Mark Blunier wrote: > What rights does the 'owner' of my drawings (they were sold to me > when I purchased the rest of my equipment) have in regards restricting > my use of the drawings? Can I > 1) Use them to make a copy of the equipment, so that I can sell one > to my neighbor? > 2) Use them to make a copy of the equipment, so that I have two? > 3) Use them to make replacement parts to fix it when it breaks/wears? > 4) Loan them to another vendor so that he can make replacement parts to > fix the equipment when it breaks/wears? > Our drawings state "Prepared for and with unlimited rights to NASA by Space Gateway Support". Obviously we're a contractor to a government agency, but the ownership and rights are clear in this case. Those same drawings state "NOTICE---WHEN GOVERNMENT DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS, OR OTHER DATA ARE USED FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN IN CONNECTION WITH A DEFINITELY RELATED GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT OPERATION, THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT THEREBY INCURS NO RESPONSIBILITY NOR ANY OBLIGATION WHATSOEVER: AND THE FACT THAT THE GOVERNMENT MAY HAVE FORMULATED, FURNISHED, OR IN ANY WAY SUPPLIED THE SAID DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS OR OTHER DATA IS NOT TO BE REGARDED BY IMPLICATION OR OTHERWISE AS IN ANY MANNER LICENSING THE HOLDER OR ANY OTHER PERSON OR CORPORATION, OR CONVEYING ANY RIGHTS OR PERMISSION TO MANUFACTURE, USE, OR SELL ANY PATENTED INVENTION THAT MAY IN ANY WAY BE RELATED THERETO." That makes it fairly clear that no second generation use of the drawing contents is permitted. I doubt if most other houses have clear ownership statements and disclaimers on their drawings, but it would certainly clarify who owns what. Make it a condition of any contract you write and many potential problems should be avoided. Carl Ramer, Engineer Controls & Protective Systems Design Space Gateway Support, Inc. Kennedy Space Center, Florida Unsponsored professional posting
 
A

Al Pawlowski

I think Bob and Carl's opinions are pretty close to my own. I am not a lawyer, but everything I have read leads me to believe that marking a document to indicate that it is an creation of yours and dating it gives you copyright of the document. I believe that basically bars others from causing you any commercial/finanacial loss by duplication of the document or product it describes. In addition, I believe you have to explicitly give up any rights obtained through copyright. Some time ago I even added "copyright by:" above my firm name/logo, and "for original construction and O & M use only on:" above the project/system name, in my title block as a clarification of the use I provided the drawings for. This has occasionally been a point of discussion with clients (especially doing municipal work), but I don't remember losing any work over it. When a question has come up, I have always been able to work out an appropriate agreement. BTW, the same thing applies to software. Unauthorized copies and their use are not all right (both ethically and legally). ------------------------------ partial original post: > > ........................What rights does the 'owner' of my drawings (they were sold to me > when I purchased the rest of my equipment) have in regards restricting > my use of the drawings? Can I > 1) Use them to make a copy of the equipment, so that I can sell one > to my neighbor? > 2) Use them to make a copy of the equipment, so that I have two? > 3) Use them to make replacement parts to fix it when it breaks/wears? > 4) Loan them to another vendor so that he can make replacement parts to > fix the equipment when it breaks/wears? > > And similarly, same questions as above, but instead of having the drawings > supplied by the vender that he 'owns', I make my own drawings by measuring > the parts. partial Bob Peterson reply These are questions best answered by your favorite lawyer. BUT, keep in mind that honest/honourable companies would not engage in (1) or (2) above, but frequently do (3) and (4)............... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 13:26:35 -0500 From: "Ramer-1, Carl" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: ENGR: An Ownership Question, was An Ethical Question partial Carl Ramer reply ..........I doubt if most other houses have clear ownership statements and disclaimers on their drawings, but it would certainly clarify who owns what. Make it a condition of any contract you write and many potential problems should be avoided............ ------------------------------ Al Pawlowski, PE [email protected] dba ALMONT Engineering Baton Rouge, LA USA
 
W
Al, Technically, you have to claim the copyright by putting "copyright c. xxxx by <name>" on the material. This has been held up in court. The most visible case was Intel vs. NEC. Intel originally did not put a copyright notice on their 8086 chip, and the court decided that the copyright was not implied, they had to put some notice of intent to copyright the microcode. Regards, Willy Smith
 
B
Jeff, you are right! On rare occasions, courts look at all the facts, weigh the evidence and rule that an unmarked copyright indeed was extant. However, to get the courts to do this, it costs money and time; With the outcome not certain. Simply marking your work eliminates, or greatly reduces, the possibility of legal problems in the future. So legally, you are correct, but to rely on the notations you reference is pretty dumb (education without experience), unless of course, you like spending endless hours in court and fund the same.
 
W
Jeffrey, I stand corrected. The book I was referring to when I made that post was from the '80s, and so was out-of-date; it seems that things have changed. But it still looks to me that the notice and registration are important. I guess it depends on what you want the copyright for. From the page: http://www.benedict.com/basic/register/register.htm "Copyright protection attaches immediately and automatically upon fixation (reduction to a tangible form) of the work in question. So, why fork over the bucks and go to the trouble of filing a federal copyright registration? There are two fundamental answers: ability to sue; and statutory damages. Although copyright attaches upon fixation, you cannot actually sue someone for infringing your copyright until you have registered your work with the Copyright Office. And if you register your work within three months from the date of first publication, or at least prior to the date of infringement, you can collect statutory damages from the infringer. Otherwise, you are stuck with actual damages, which depending upon the situation, may be only nominal." Perhaps knowing that a work is copyrighted just by its being in existance can give one a warm fuzzy feeling, but if I wanted to protect something, I'd put the notice on it and go the extra mile to register it. I'm not a lawyer, so I don't claim to have definitive knowledge on this subject. And the laws and interpretations of the laws are changing, especially with the changes in technology. But my understanding is that the better you protect yourself up front, the better off you will be if there is ever a problem. Willy Smith Numatics, Inc. Costa Rica
 
J

Jeffrey W. Eggenberger

Agreed! I would never "assume" that MY work was safe. Marking it Copyright (c) and registering it would be the only way that I would go. Many people, however, feel that they can copy with impunity anything that does not have the magic mark, and claim it as their own. Where I work, we will not purchase "password protected" PLC equipment, as having access to the program is vital to troubleshooting and maintaining the equipment. Most of the engineering firms who do the programming of the PLC's understand that their expertise is needed more than the program itself. They engineer and program the new equipment, and in-house does minor modifications when necessary. Sometimes we look to them for aid, sometimes not. Many times I have even corrected their programming errors. No one is perfect. Jeffrey W. Eggenberger Electrician: Industrial, Commercial, and Residential
 
Top