Vessel Hull Design Protection Act Amended!

On October 16, 2008, President Bush signed into law the amendments to the Vessel Hull Design Protection Act which finally stipulates that there is a difference between a hull design and a deck design in boat design, and all are protected. I attach copies of the original Act, plus a copy of the Amendment as passed, in .pdf format.

I was the expert witness in the first case tested under this law on behalf of the plaintiff, Maverick Boat Company, in 2003. Maverick accused another boat company of buying one of its boats, splashing it, and selling it under its own name. In addition, a third boat company acquired one of the splashed boats, splashed it in turn, and also started selling it under its own name. Maverick filed suit against the third boat company as well. The paper trail was very conclusive, and my expert analysis showed that the first splashed boat from the sheer down was an exact duplicate of the original, save for a slight revision in the style line. However, the deck had been completely reconfigured. I also pointed out in my testimony that the number one design criterium of any boat design, and the number one selling feature, is its performance, however that may be defined. And performance is directly dependant upon and defined by the boat's hull shape. Never mind the deck shape; that is of much lesser importance. Since the hull was not changed in any essential way, the defendants contravened the Act.

Unfortunately, the wording of the Act was vague in that it did not delineate differences between hull design and deck design. That is, hull and deck were treated as one and the same. So, if you splashed a boat and changed the deck and not the hull, you were considered to have created your own new boat design and therefore did not contravene the Act. This is precisely what happened. The federal court in West Palm Beach, FL, found in favor of the defendants in that they had made enough significant changes to the deck to constitute a new boat design. That is, Maverick lost the case, and they lost it again on appeal.

This precipitated the action, now successful five years later, of revising the Act to delineate differences between hull design and deck design. So now hull designs, deck designs, combinations of hull and deck designs, including plugs and molds, are protected under the Act.

Eric

 

Thank you for your part in getting this law corrected. It seems so obvious that the hull design and deck design should be considered separately, with the hull being the main determinate of performance. But, of course, when you get politicians involved in science and technology what can you expect.

"Global warming" in the hands of politicians scares me. Can anyone tell me in what year was the temperature exactly right, not too cold or too warm?

 

Hear Hear