WHAT TO DO…WHAT TO DO?
by Ralph Liebing, RA, CSI
Cincinnati, OH
A young married couple walks into the building code agency. They asked to see the drawings for a house project at a given address. The agency clerk retrieves the drawings at which point the couple asks if they can take the documents out of the office and copy them. They say that they like the house so much, they want to build one just like it.
What to do?
When the copyright law was changed, a number of years ago, this exchange came into focus much more clearly. The documents in the files of the code agency were then and still are public documentsi.e., for use by the general public.
To a point!
By an opinion from its legal counsel, the code agency was advised that the physical copying of the drawings was NOT permitted-- other copyright consideration took precedence. The couple could look at the drawings [in the presence of an agency employee] could make their own notes and drawings [but no overlays or tracings]. They were free to take as log as they needed to gather the information they sought.
The overriding precedence was the copyright held by the design professionalwhile unseen and perhaps not even insinuated, its there . While the standard indication is not required, nor any expression of copyright, the law was written so the work of the design professional was protected. No re-use of the documents for any reason could be made without written permission of the copyright holder [or author].
Copyright problems exist in other areas of professional practice. For example, copyrighted material may be reproduced and use for educational purposes, but mass re-reprinting for general distribution is prohibited [without proper permission]. In fact, it is as illegal to merely copy a copyrighted piece [i.e., like a Kinko clerk making a copy for you], as it is to distribute [in mass] the material.
There have been cases where unscrupulous persons have gotten hold of documents by design professionals [not now involved], removed the originators identity, etc., and tried to pass the documents off as their own. usually this re-issuing failure merely because of inadequate refining of the information.
The AIA has addressed much of this, if not all, in Article 1.6, of Document A201, General Conditions of the Contract. Here it is explicit as to hard copies and electronic documentation, and the various possible scenarios involved. Owners often have a hard time understanding this, and it is a very good point for up-front, early-on explanation. The Owner pays for the services involved to produce the document, NOT for the documents themselves. The Owner-Architect [similar for engineers] Contract is for professional design and other services, including the process of documentation as a vehicle to producing the desired project-- it does not convey ownership of the documents from the design professional.
Two good references by attorneys give added light to this topic:
www.aepronet.org/ge/no8.html and www.mslawyer.com/rwise/articles/Copyrights_for_Design_Professionals.html
