Copy right of Architectural Details

[jasonddd]

any one have the idea of whether architectural details are protected by copyright?
We are currently working on commercial projects, such as laundry facilities, which are new to our firm. In the process, we discovered reference drawings online and incorporated some of those details.
My inquiry is whether these details are covered by copyright protection.

 

[walker.t]

any one have the idea of whether architectural details are protected by copyright?
We are currently working on commercial projects, such as laundry facilities, which are new to our firm. In the process, we discovered reference drawings online and incorporated some of those details.
My inquiry is whether these details are covered by copyright protection.

To be safe you should assume all drawings you find online are copyrighted by someone. Not sure if you mean actually reproducing the drawing as-is or creating new drawings by referencing the details.

The following makes reference to “construction techniques” (which would probably apply to construction details) and says construction techniques cannot be copyrighted:

https://copyright.gov/circs/circ41.pdf

Something could be copyrighted but you might still be be able to reproduce them on your drawings, depends on who did the reference drawings you found. I think manufacturers allow their drawings to be reproduced if you specify their products, but you should check first. I contacted the Gypsum Association years ago about reproducing their details on a set of drawings, they said that was OK but I needed to add a note that the detail was copyrighted by them, I don’t know what their current policy is.

Assuming the drawings you are producing will be sealed by an architect, check with your state’s requirements regarding sealing standard details and prototypical drawings prepared by others.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Architectural drawings are copyrighted, whether they state it on the page or detail or not. You are allowed to copy them only by permission of the copyright holder (the architect or firm that originally produced them) unless it is clearly stated that they are in the public domain.

 

[Yikes]

any one have the idea of whether architectural details are protected by copyright?
We are currently working on commercial projects, such as laundry facilities, which are new to our firm. In the process, we discovered reference drawings online and incorporated some of those details.
My inquiry is whether these details are covered by copyright protection.

When you say "incorporated" do you mean:
1. You copy/pasted them onto your own plans?
2. You ascertained the salient features that made the design work, and then drew similar details with similar features yourself?
3. The detail had a distinct aesthetic flair that you copied exactly?

 

[jasonddd]

.

 

[jasonddd]

When you say "incorporated" do you mean:
1. You copy/pasted them onto your own plans?
2. You ascertained the salient features that made the design work, and then drew similar details with similar features yourself?
3. The detail had a distinct aesthetic flair that you copied exactly?

I'm attempting to import their PDF into CAD, aligning it with my corresponding layers in AutoCAD, and making edits to some notes. However, the soffit assembly detail and equipment elevation detail are likely to remain unchanged.

 

[mark handler]

United States copyright law, the creator is granted the exclusive right to reproduce the documents the creator creates.
This includes Drawings Specifications and Details. If anyone else copies these items without the creators permission, the creator is entitled to damages and other protections as set forth in the copyright law.
An actual copyright notice is no longer necessary for drawings, specs and details to be protected.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

I'm attempting to import their PDF into CAD, aligning it with my corresponding layers in AutoCAD, and making edits to some notes. However, the soffit assembly detail and equipment elevation detail are likely to remain unchanged.

You are an architect, or you work for an architecture firm? Do you use the AIA forms of agreement? Check out article 7 of the standard AIA Owner-Architect agreement, particularly paragraphs 7.1 and 7.2:

https://content.aia.org/sites/default/files/2017-04/B101_2017%20sample.pdf

Your work is copyrighted, and if you use standard AIA contract it is stipulated in the contracts that you do not transfer the copyright to the owner, you only grant a right to use the plans to construct one building.

Isn't it more than a little hypocritical to retain the copyright to your work while stealing someone else's work to use in yours? Not to mention that it's illegal. Most likely you won't get caught but, if you do, you can be sued for damages.

 

[jasonddd]

You are an architect, or you work for an architecture firm? Do you use the AIA forms of agreement? Check out article 7 of the standard AIA Owner-Architect agreement, particularly paragraphs 7.1 and 7.2:

https://content.aia.org/sites/default/files/2017-04/B101_2017%20sample.pdf

Your work is copyrighted, and if you use standard AIA contract it is stipulated in the contracts that you do not transfer the copyright to the owner, you only grant a right to use the plans to construct one building.

Isn't it more than a little hypocritical to retain the copyright to your work while stealing someone else's work to use in yours? Not to mention that it's illegal. Most likely you won't get caught but, if you do, you can be sued for damages.

Thank you. I'm currently employed at a firm, and I require additional details and notes for my work. The reason behind my question is that I've observed numerous identical details being disseminated within this industry. Examples include 1-hour wall assembly, fire penetration, and hanger details. I've noticed several firms incorporating the "exact same" details in their projects, prompting me to raise this question.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

The details of construction of rated wall assemblies are promulgated by U.L., the Gypsum Association, the NCMA (National Concrete Masonry Association, now re-branded as the Concrete Masonry & Hardscapes Association) and the major listing agencies. They expect and accept that their details will be either copied or reproduced. That's the point of promulgating them. They don't make their money from sales of the details, they make their money from the listing fees they charge the manufacturers of the products used in the listed assemblies.

What you should do is contact the source of the details you want to use and ask permission to use them. They might say no, or they might even provide the details in .DWG format.

 

[mark handler]

If the details are on a website that allows you to download freely there maybe a use policy is on the website. See the page.
Most manufactures provide their details with free use.
Most Architects/Engineers, do not allow free use.

 

[Yikes]

I would combine the responses in post #10 and 11 and say:

• If you are pasting a *.pdf that is coming form some other architect's set of plans, you are probably risking a copyright violation.
• If you are pasting a *.pdf that is coming from some the Gypsum Association, UL, etc. then there is probably some fair use mechanism, but you may have to read their website. You may need to purchase that book.
• If you are pasting a *.pdf that is coming from an architect's plans that in turn were copied from some the Gypsum Association, UL, etc. then you should go get that pdf directly from that trade association, to avoid the risk.

Jasonddd, if you are employed at the firm and are not a part of the firm ownership and are not the architect of record, my professional advice is to ask the firm ownership and AOR for their direction on this issue, and have them take full responsibility for the decision. Check your employee handbook to see if it offers and guidelines or restrictions on use of other people's work.

Thread drift:
I have a friend who has been an animator for several major Hollywood studios. Their legal teams require them to regularly certify that anything they draw is a "wholly original creation" and "not derived from any other work". This is important for them to avoid copyright claims, especially when millions of dollars of licensing fees and merchandising revenue is at stake.
When I asked him if he's worried about AI programs replacing him as an animator, he says no, not at all, because all AI and LLM programs are by their very nature deriving from other works and ideas scoured off the internet, and are therefore vulnerable to copyright litigation. The studios simply can't afford the litigation risk associated with AI in the creative arts.

 

[Paul Sweet]

You're probably OK redrawing a "standard" detail that is widely used. You shouldn't use unique details that were developed by another A/E or a franchise for their use. You shouldn't paste pdfs in any case.

Information remains on-line long after it becomes obsolete or the product is discontinued.