Using Copyrighted Arch. Drawings

XR250 said:

neither I nor the homeowners are permitted to use her drawings for construction or as backgrounds for my engineering work, as they are copyrighted.

Click to expand...

I don't think copyright offers protection against "use".

Copyright exists to protect against copying the original content.

Construction or background info gathering isn't copying the content; it's using the drawings for their interested purpose.

It's like a painter saying "you're not allowed to look at my painting."

The contract might be more restrictive.

Regardless, the prospect of getting drawn into a legal dispute = "no thanks" to the project.

jhnblgr said:

Any time I’ve seen any close to a true design build in residential work it was some of the most unethical work I had ever seen.

Click to expand...

That's less a function of the design/build nature of the work, and more a function of some sleezebag with a stamp. There's zero functional difference between a government design/build project and a private one. The potential ethical pitfalls exist in both. While I agree we should avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest, but at some point we need to recognize a practicable limit - I can think of potential appearance of conflict of interest in every job where I get paid, particularly if there's any chance of repeat business with that client. If I ever tell an architect something that he/she doesn't want to hear, or make a build more expensive than they think it should be, I'm risking a loss of financial gain in the future. That's all this situation is. If I'm hired by the builder, and I tell them something they don't like they might fire me or not hire me again. That's not a conflict of interest - that's doing business, and it's an inherent risk whenever I do my job. Whether or not I behave ethically has nothing to do with who hired me, it has to do with me.

This is, of course, different from something like taking a job at the city to review plans and reviewing things I signed. That's a clear conflict. Getting elected to city council and voting on a proposal that my firm put forward - clear conflict. Doing my job for fair wage and profit? NOT a conflict of interest.

Australia and USA have similar legal systems. Courts might throw out strange rulings.


Summary is architect 2 took over when customer terminated contract with architect 1. Architect 2 based work on architect 1's drawings but made changes. General understanding before this case was architect services were for purpose of building a building so fair game for customer to switch architects and not start over because implied licence to use architect 1's work until building finished. But court said in this case contract details meant architect 1's work up to termination was for purposes of planning approval not construction. Could easily be terms in design-build contract that mean can't switch designers/builders.

Structural is different from architect taking over another architect. But definitely don't copy anything from architect drawings. That is copyright infringement.

Smoulder said:

Australia and USA have similar legal systems. Courts might throw out strange rulings.

Copyright Infringement | ACA - Association of Consulting Architects Australia

What difficulties can ensue if client and architect fall out? Christopher Larcos from Moray and Agnew Lawyers has prepared a fascinating case note on a recent court decision that could affect architects who take over mid-project. Milankov Designs and Project Management Pty Limited v Di Latte...

aca.org.au

Summary is architect 2 took over when customer terminated contract with architect 1. Architect 2 based work on architect 1's drawings but made changes. General understanding before this case was architect services were for purpose of building a building so fair game for customer to switch architects and not start over because implied licence to use architect 1's work until building finished. But court said in this case contract details meant architect 1's work up to termination was for purposes of planning approval not construction. Could easily be terms in design-build contract that mean can't switch designers/builders.

Structural is different from architect taking over another architect. But definitely don't copy anything from architect drawings. That is copyright infringement.

Click to expand...

That would make every structural drawing illegal by definition you work within the confines of the architectural drawings. I would argue that industry standard would say this is standard operating practice and would throw out the case

No that was a specific case where architect no longer involved and was originally engaged to do more than ended up doing. Most projects don't go like that so actual or implied licence exists. Project in this discussion has distinct similarities IMO so licence might be revocable/revoked.

IMO - this is not your problem to deal with @XR250.
Homeowner hired architect to do x work. Homeowner then provided the work done by architect to you and hired you for a different scope of work. As long as you make your own drawing set from scratch, and dont use the architects file, I think you're good.

This seems like a dispute between homeowner and architect, not you and the architect

mikek396 said:

IMO - this is not your problem to deal with @XR250.

Click to expand...

I would have agreed, except the original architect told XR directly no to use them. At that point, it does become XR's problem, though perhaps not XR's problem to solve. It is up to the homeowner to resolve it.

jhnblgr said:

That would make every structural drawing illegal

Click to expand...

What? No it wouldn't. If the architect has produced a set of drawings that does not also contain the necessary structural information and has sold a client the rights to use those drawings to build a building, there is at least an implied consent to allow a structural engineer (and, potentially, a mechanical engineer, plumbing engineer, electrical engineer, civil engineer, and/or landscape architect) to use those drawings to do their work to make the entire project possible. The issue arises when the architect pulls out or is fired, and the terms of the contract prevent further usage of their work product.

mikek396 said:

As long as you make your own drawing set from scratch, and dont use the architects file, I think you're good.

Click to expand...

I am using their file for my backgrounds. They ended up working it out. Thanks for everyone's insight.