Who's a legal Boffin - Photos

[silentC]

I guess Norm himself would be in trouble there as he spends his time frequenting museums and ripping off designs. Presumably he seeks permission from the curator but what about the person (or the estate of the person) who designed them in the first place? Not only is he making them himself but he is also encouraging millions of people to make a copy too.

If you make an exact copy of a piece of antique furniture and attempt to pass it off as the original, there's no doubt that is fraud. If you make a copy as near as possible to the original because you admire that style and want to use the original construction techniques, is that the same thing? Don't thay say that imitation is the greatest form of flattery?

[arose62]

One of the newspapers had an article on this, and suggested that phone manufacturers would need to include warning labelling on the phones, covering the users risk if using the phones for voyeuristic purposes.

I know that at my defence-related work, they are currently chewing over what phones will be allowed on site, and how to check for sneaky pics, as cameras are confiscated, and photography banned.

Cheers,
Andrew

[Rocker]

There is some basic information on copyright law here

http://www.copyright.org.au/page3.htm

It seems that a general style is not protected by copyright, but you can protect a particular design. To do so, however, you have to actually register that design; it is not automatically protected by copyright in the same way that a work of art or literature is. Copyright in Australia generally expires 50 years after the death of the work's creator.I believe the expiration period is longer in the US, but Norm may not be breaking the law by measuring Shaker works in museums, since the copyright on these works has presumably expired.

Rocker

[silentC]

How would you prove unique design (original art) though? So much of furniture design is borrowed or evolved from past work. Most chairs have 4 legs, somewhere to sit, somewhere to rest your back... Can you register the shape of the legs, or the curve of the seat? You may be able to register the joinery if it is novel. I guess it would be difficult and would cost a fortune in patent lawer's fees.

Rocker, you could probably have patented your morticing jig but it's too late now because you have published it and encouraged people to build it

[PAH1]

You only really have to show that you have substantially modified the original to alter copyright. Getting back to Mr Rockers set of drawers, all he would have to show was that the plans were not an exact copy and than internal modifications had been made. This could be as simple as using a different glue or jointing system to construct the cabinet.

If you think copyright is complicated do not go anywhere near Intellectual property law.

[bitingmidge]

My copy also is not an exact copy

Rocker,

I think what you meant to say was yourinterpretation was not/is not an exact copy!

And herein lies the grey bits of which the quantity is huge....published material, when it is published for the purpose of assisting people to make a copy of work designed by the author, gives the reader of the material a licence to copy the design.

Hence your own gadgets are in the public domain once published...I suspect that if one had the money and the desire to test the law to it's extent, there could be an argument that the licence to construct them only goes as far as people who have actually purchased the magazine, not to those who have photocopied the article from their dentist's waiting room.

Fascinating!!

On the intellectual property front, it is now possible for a designer (and at least one architect has done this) to sue an owner of a building for making unauthorised alterations which impact on the original design!!

About now I am thinking of retraining as a lawyer!

Cheers,

P

[Rocker]

Rocker,


And herein lies the grey bits of which the quantity is huge....published material, when it is published for the purpose of assisting people to make a copy of work designed by the author, gives the reader of the material a licence to copy the design.

Cheers,

P

Biting,

I think you are probably right, but N.S., who sells plans through the Australian Woodworker, prints on them a clause to the effect that purchasing the plan does not confer the right to make the piece for sale. I suspect that he is trying to double-dip here, and that he could not in fact successfully sue if you did so. But I am not sure.

A couple of years back I asked Sam Maloof for permission to refer to my rockers as "Maloof-style". I had thought that this was just a courtesy and that he would agree. Rather to my surprise, he refused, which I thought was rather ungenerous, since there is no way that my rocker CD is impinging on his market. He sells to celebrities for whom a price-tag of over US$20000 is not a problem.

Rocker

[silentC]

What a paradox: anyone who would pay $20,000 for a rocker is off theirs and is therefore in need of one.

Sorry...

[bitingmidge]

I think you are probably right, but N.S., who sells plans through the Australian Woodworker, prints on them a clause to the effect that purchasing the plan does not confer the right to make the piece for sale. I suspect that he is trying to double-dip here, and that he could not in fact successfully sue if you did so. But I am not sure.

It all gets down to "licencing" and his right to a royalty if someone else is profiting from his work. If the plans were sold on the conditions stated then I reckon I would rather be on his side in the court case! I am sure that if one wanted to sell a range of furniture to those designs, an amicable royalty could be arranged!

A couple of years back I asked Sam Maloof for permission to refer to my rockers as "Maloof-style". I had thought that this was just a courtesy and that he would agree. Rather to my surprise, he refused, which I thought was rather ungenerous, since there is no way that my rocker CD is impinging on his market. He sells to celebrities for whom a price-tag of over US$20000 is not a problem.

You did the right thing absolutely, and while his reply may sound uncharitable, rather than taking your request as a compliment, he obviously had the view that your plans could result in a flood of "cheap" copies (remember he has no control over the number produced) which could ultimately devalue his own work.

Sunday looks like being an even more interesting day!!



Cheers,

P

[Rocker]

Biting,

There are a couple of questions with regard to N.S.'s plans. 1. Has he registered the design? If not, he has no right to prevent anyone using it; and 2. The purchaser of his plans is not warned in advance of buying them that he is seeking to restrict the rights of the purchaser to do what he likes with the plan.

By the way, I see that you have just sold your shed on Mooloolah Island for $3.75 million; I shall expect to see you in a Porsche on Sunday.

Rocker