Looking for service to create house plan in X7

[Geyatautsilvsgi]

 I was told "change 20-25% of the plan...it won't be the same

 

Jacquilla:

 

all depends on the judge as to whether it is derivative

 

Lew

Lew, probably so, but since I don't "copy" I am ok. I just found it interesting what the A & E folks had to say.

[Chieftmbm50]

Wow, that really started quite the thread.

 

To help clarify, the sample plan I provided is just that.  A sample of a design we like.  And this design (or a very very similar) one is actually found on at least 4 different websites under different authors.

 

You'd have to judge for yourself if its unique enough to be a copyrighted creation or simply covered under prior art.

 

Either way, thank you to all the people that send me a PM.  I literally have dozens of responses and will be going through them over the next few weeks.  I'll try and get back to everyone.

[vincekunasek]

    There is no percentage that applies For those of us who sell plans the ignorance of those copying them all the all the time is astounding. PHDESIGNS is incorrect and please don't be miss led by his statements . If he has done it a thousand times  he has ripped off us a thousand times. You can't change the name of the characters in Gone With the Wind and republish it as Gone With the Breeze. Please honor are investments and simply purchase from us the "Right to Modify" and then draw away. It's about integrity and playing by the rules.

[DRAWZILLA]

Sorry Vince, sue me and find out the truth, you will learn. I never copy anything. Purchase "right to modify", you have to be kidding. No one does that. Most of my projects, remodels, have no one alive to purchase from. There is also no way to find out who did the original and how to contact. I would never do that anyway b/c it my design now.

[Northriver]

The majority of the home building industry up in the PNW are building "Craftsman" style home on lots the are 40 to 45 feet wide and 60 to 70 feet deep. The designs are substantially similar inside and out. There is not much of a footprint left for the home after the setback requirements from the property line. The builders are not suing each other over design. I am sure the same thing is happening in California along with other parts of the country. You cannot get a patent just because your home is a Craftsman, Prairie, Contemporary or what ever type design. The burden is always on the plaintiff not the defendant.

[lbuttery]

Perry:

 

you are wrong that it is legal to copy and make changes

 

you are right that there is little enforcement

 

but the point is - that someday - someone COULD sue

 

will it ever happen ???

 

Lew

[DRAWZILLA]

Lew, You just don't get it.

[vincekunasek]

Easily resolved, post 5 of the hundred you have copied, the floor plans/ renderings along with the publishers name that was supplied to.  Also post what you have modified them to, and let's find out . I'll forward them to the original designer  for you and let's see what they say. Deal?

[lbuttery]

Perry:

 

I have to say that you are the one who doesn't get it

 

go back and read my prior posts and maybe you will ???

 

Lew

[DRAWZILLA]

Lew, wish you the best.

[lbuttery]

Perry:

 

you too

 

Lew

[Chieftmbm50]

Its kinda of a mute discussion as I'm more than willing to pay the original designer for the plan.  As I noted, I have already tried to contact them for modifications.

 

While I am not a copy-write guru at all, I do work for a large software developer and deal with software patents all the time.  So there is some resemblance.

 

I suspect there has probably never been a successful legation for this type of usage.  Imagine the following scenario.

 

I find a plan online and blatantly copy it to build a house.  The original designer just so happens to be vacationing in my state and drives by my house.  He says "He that looks like my house".

He hires a lawyer and he will need to hire an architect.  To proceed with the case he has to get a judgment for discovery and warrant so the interior of my house can be evaluated by an expert witness.

It now goes to court and he has to convnce a jury his design is orginal, despite the volumes of prior art for nearly identical designs that pre-date his. Now lets assume after all that, the Judge/Jury finds in his favor.  His damages are limited to the cost he was selling his plan for online....a measly couple hundred bucks.

 

Its simply not worth the cost nor is it likely someone will random pick out a house they designed from the millions of homes across America.

 

Remember, this is not copying for the sake of mass distribution or sale.  Damages are limited to the lost sale.

 

The law is really only useful when someone designs a plan that is not intended to be publicly for sale, or it designed to be an "original".  In this case, the "loss" would be a bit more in tangible as an original creation is no longer original.  But when a plan is available for public sale, by its very nature its designed to be used to built and modified (all homes get modified at a minimum by onsite contractors).

 

Would I suggest someone copy a design thats truly original like a world recognizable museum? Or copy a design and then try and sell the design online to hundreds of people as your own?  No.

Nor would I suggest not buying form the original if possible and it fits ones needs.  But I suspect that building a plan for an owner/occupier from rough pictures online is quite safe.