Date: 10/13/2001, 2:50 pm
Hi there.
Certainly you can sell any boat you build.
My understanding is that any given set of plans you purchase usually entitles you to build one boat with them, depending on the 'small print' that often comes with the plans. You may be obligated (legally or otherwise) to pay an additional amount for each additional boat you build with them. This is usually much less than the original set, so it's a small amount compared to the total cost of the boat.
Publishing plans is quite a bit of work, and no one likes to see their hard work 'ripped off', and uncredited, by someone who is out to make money for themselves by converting it to their own business.
More than that, though, this gets into the arena of intellectual property, and it is murky, indeed, where pretty much ALL kayak designs are derivatives from SOMEWHERE else. There have been discussions, or fights, on this Board over how much deviation from an existing set of plans qualifies as a 'new' design.
Maybe this will help:
I build the occasional boat for pay. My customers are interested in a particular design of boat, say a Pygmy Coho. They are NOT particularly interested in my boat design skills, but rather in my boat assembly skills. I could, I suppose, use a router with a template bit to make many copies of the Coho parts. The final result would be indistinguishable from a boat purchased from Pygmy, but I think we can (generally) agree that Pygmy will have been unfairly cut out of the monetary-rewards-for-work-done loop.
If I replace the Pygmy coaming with my own, prettier, all-cedar coaming, have I created a new boat design? No, I have made a small modification to an existing design.
If I were to remove 1" from the center panels, and make a 17' 5" boat instead of the 17' 6" Coho, then I think I'm still using the Coho design.
If I were to use the Coho hull design while installing my own strip-built deck, I think I'm still using the Coho design.
If I wanted to modify the Coho 8-panel multi-chine hull design into a 6-panel hull, and then put a strip deck on it, then MAYBE I'm arguably coming up with a 'new' design. Maybe.
What if I start from 'scratch', and I end up with a boat that looks like a cross between a Pygmy Coho and a CLC West River 180? Who knows? I've been in both, so does any resemblance to these designs require credit (and fees) be given? That's one for the lawyers, I'd guess.
So, yeah, I'd say, "Give credit where credit is due." If someone is asking you to build a CLC-designed boat, then CLC should get a couple of bucks. While I doubt very much that if you did not then the CLC lawyers would be descending upon you, for a couple of bucks the issue would be settled: your customer gets a CLC-designed boat, you get to build it, and CLC is rewarded for their popular design work.
Pete Roszyk,
in Snohomish, WA
Messages In This Thread
- designs and the law
Peter Z -- 10/13/2001, 1:22 pm- Re: Intellectual Property
Chip Sandresky -- 10/15/2001, 1:34 pm- The Law vs. What is Right
Pete Roszyk -- 10/13/2001, 2:50 pm- Re: The Law vs. What is Right
Ken Finger -- 10/13/2001, 4:40 pm
- The Law vs. What is Right
- Re: Intellectual Property