• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Site Plan Copyright Infringement

G

Glennman CBO

Silver Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
441
I have in front of me a site plan drawn by a designer from 15+ years ago being utilized for a current project by a different designer. The original designer's name is sill on the plan. I don't know how he got it, except that I know he used to work for the guy.

Would this be considered copyright infringement? I'm thinking of contacting the original site plan's author to inform him that the accessible parking is not compliant and see if he can deal with it.
 
I would not contact the original designer. If the date on the drawing is 15 years old just tell him it does not meet today's requirements and submit a new drawing which includes... name it..... drainage calculations, current accessibility parking requirements and whatever else you need.
 
I'll discuss with the legal department, and I was only kidding about contacting the original designer on a 15 year old plan (he, he). If there are not "automatic copyrights" then it is probably not a issue. Thanks all!
 
Glennman CBO said:
If there are not "automatic copyrights" then it is probably not a issue.
Click to expand...
Isn't there a note on all RDP plans that they are the property of the RDP's firm? Just blowin smoke?
 
I don't believe site plans need to be copyrighted, they tend to be unique to the parcel that they are designed for. IMO

Pc1
 
Pcinspector1 said:
I don't believe site plans need to be copyrighted, they tend to be unique to the parcel that they are designed for. IMO Pc1
Click to expand...
The original designer's name is sill on the plan.
Click to expand...
I don't think the Original designers name is "unique to the parcel "
 
I asked a similar question in the past about submissions. The consensus was that copyright issues are outside the purview of building codes and building regulation.

So I countered with the "what if I see stolen tools on a jobsite, is that out of my purview too?"

I don't remember exactly but I came away with the understanding that it is not my issue.

Where is ole' Brugers to put folks in their place?

:)
 
If the drawings are stamped and sealed by an architect and/or engineer of record; Authorization will need to be obtained for any/all certified professionals that have stamped the plans.

If the drawings are not stamped and sealed by an architect and/or engineer, they may be reproduced with the property owners permission.
 
mark handler said:
If the drawings are stamped and sealed by an architect and/or engineer of record; Authorization will need to be obtained for any/all certified professionals that have stamped the plans.If the drawings are not stamped and sealed by an architect and/or engineer, they may be reproduced with the property owners permission.
Click to expand...
And where is that in the building code or statute? Building departments do not enforce federal copyright law, anymore than they enforce immigration, ADA, or OSHA law.
 
conarb said:
And where is that in the building code or statute? Building departments do not enforce federal copyright law, anymore than they enforce immigration, ADA, or OSHA law.
Click to expand...
Dick

I wish you would do minimal investigation before you make these pronouncements

This is One of many statues I as a Building Official am empowered to enforce

CA BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE

SECTION 5535-5538

5536.3. No homeowner or any other person shall use any copy of plans obtained pursuant to subdivision (a) to rebuild all or any part of the residential real property without the prior written consent of the architect or other person who prepared the plans.

There are many others
 
Heres another for you Dick

California Health and Safety Code Section 19851

19851. (a) The official copy of the plans maintained by the building department of the city or county provided for under Section 19850 shall be open for inspection only on the premises of the building department as a public record. The copy may not be duplicated in whole or in part except (1) with the written permission, which permission shall not be unreasonably withheld as

specified in subdivision (f), of the certified, licensed or registered professional or his or her successor, if any, who signed the original documents and the written permission of the original or current owner of the building, or, if the building is part of a common interest development, with the written permission of the board of directors or governing body of the association established to manage the common interest development, or (2) by order of a proper court or upon the request of any state agency.

(b) Any building department of a city or county, which is requested to duplicate the official copy of the plans maintained by the building department, shall request written permission to do so from the certified, licensed, or registered professional, or his or her successor, if any, who signed the original documents and from (1) the original or current owner of the building or (2), if the building is part of a common interest development, from the board of directors or other governing body of the association established to manage the common interest development.

© The building department shall also furnish the form of an affidavit to be completed and signed by the person requesting to duplicate the official copy of the plans, which contains provisions stating all of the following:

(1) That the copy of the plans shall only be used for the maintenance, operation, and use of the building.

(2) That drawings are instruments of professional service and are incomplete without the interpretation of the certified, licensed, or registered professional of record.

(3) That subdivision (a) of Section 5536.25 of the Business and Professions Code states that a licensed architect who signs plans, specifications, reports, or documents shall not be responsible for damage caused by subsequent changes to, or use of, those plans, specifications, reports, or documents where the subsequent changes or uses, including changes or uses made by state or local governmental agencies, are not authorized or approved by the licensed architect who originally signed the plans, specifications, reports, or documents, provided that the architectural service rendered by the architect who signed the plans, specifications, reports, or documents was not also a proximate cause of the damage.

(d) The request by the building department to a licensed, registered, or certified professional may be made by the building department sending a registered or certified letter to the licensed, registered, or certified professional requesting his or her permission to duplicate the official copy of the plans and sending with the registered or certified letter, a copy of the affidavit furnished by the building department which has been completed and signed by the person requesting to duplicate the official copy of the plans. The registered or certified letters shall be sent by the building department to the most recent address of the licensed, registered, or certified professional available from the California State Board of Architectural Examiners.

(e) The governing body of the city or county may establish a fee to be paid by any person who requests the building department of the city or county to duplicate the official copy of any plans pursuant to this section, in an amount which it determines is reasonably necessary to cover the costs of the building department pursuant to this section.

(f) The certified, licensed, or registered professional's refusal to permit the duplication of the plans is unreasonable if, upon request from the building department, the professional does either of the following:

(1) Fails to respond to the local building department within 30 days of receipt by the professional of the request. However, if the building department determines that professional is unavailable to respond within 30 days of receipt of the request due to serious illness, travel, or other extenuating circumstances, the time period shall be extended by the building department to allow the professional adequate time to respond, as determined to be appropriate to the individual circumstance, but not to exceed 60 days.

(2) Refuses to give his or her permission for the duplication of the plans after receiving the signed affidavit and registered or certified letter specified in subdivisions © and (d).
 
mark handler said:
DickI wish you would do minimal investigation before you make these pronouncements

This is One of many statues I as a Building Official am empowered to enforce

CA BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE

SECTION 5535-5538

5536.3. No homeowner or any other person shall use any copy of plans obtained pursuant to subdivision (a) to rebuild all or any part of the residential real property without the prior written consent of the architect or other person who prepared the plans.

There are many others
Click to expand...
Mark:

These are administrative statutes, they say "no homeowner shall use", they apply to the homeowner not to the building department. This is the same as the building department enforcing all other state statutes, like checking the contractor licensing or workers' comp certificates of every worker on the jobsite. If an owner decides to violate a copyright it is between the owner and the architect, a civil matter. I've never looked them up but there has to be a stature empowering the building department to verify contractor licensing and Workers' Comp insurance at the issuance of the permit, as I recall that started in the late 60s, in fact don't most permit applications cite the relevant sections for licensing and insurance? If you think a copyright is being violated I guess you have the right to call the holder, but then too you may be sued.

Let's see if you can come up with a statute or ordinance empowering the building department to enforce copyright law. Let's say an inspector goes on a building site and see's trucks parked with expired license tags on them, is it his duty to enforce the Vehicle Code?

As a matter of fact when I get multiple proposals from architects, I set a maximum fee and an assignment of copyright, in case my owner chooses one of the architects but wants to incorporate the ideas of another, it also protects against more than one architect coming up with the same concept. Since you have taken it upon yourself to protect the civil copyrights of architects I guess I'd have to present you with my contract waiving copyrights. I've never had an architect refuse to waive his copyright to compete, they are all more than happy to be paid for their proposals.
 
Dick

Do your homework

I am enforcing state codes, of which I am required to do. I am not enforcing copyright law.
 
mark handler said:
DickDo your homework

I am enforcing state codes, of which I am required to do. I am not enforcing copyright law.
Click to expand...
Specifically which state code are you enforcing? In Post #12 you stated:

Mark said:
Authorization will need to be obtained for any/all certified professionals that have stamped the plans.
Click to expand...
Name the statute or local ordinance that gives you the right to demand authorization.
 
The reference to B&PC 5536.3 is incomplete since subsection (a) makes it clear that this applies only to “…damage to residential real property caused by a natural disaster declared by the Governor.”

The referenced section only applies to Architects. If the work was signed for by a professional engineer in California one would have to check what statutes apply to professional engineers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top