Bruce Kirby: "It's the Boat That Matters, Not the Name"

is that there are many ways to not pay intellectual property rights, the largest is to copied.
90% of the boats in circulation are copies of those who have had commercial success.
About B. Kirby, when he designed the laser? How long does the right to intellectual property?
I know that even the patent after a set time lose the rights.
And yes, the world is full of dishonest,.
And also people slow on the uptake

 

Thank you for your reply David. The only questions remain surround the significance of Kirby designing the boat in Canada.

In Kirby's situation, when he set up the contracts back in the 1970s, he awarded himself 2% of the wholesale cost of the boat. Originally, that would have been in the region of $10 per boat, and now that has grown to around $60 per boat, and with sales of around 3000 per year is a tidy sum. I doubt that he ever conceived that the class would grow to the extent it has, nor been as influential as it was. With these contracts being in the public domain, it's plain that he not only designed the boat, but designed the 'system', the relationships between the builders, the ILCA/ISAF and the trademark holders.

Now these rights are under attack from a licensed builder and trademark holder, who somehow convinced the class association via a highly controversial vote to drop the rule that required the builder to have an agreement with Kirby. That builder is saying that when Kirby tried to sell his rights as part of estate planning, the contract was somehow voided. Kirby has not received royalty payments from that builder for a few years. The case will be heard in early 2015.

Bottom line is that this situation wouldn't exist if boat designers were protected via legislature that protected their rights in the same way that writers are protected with copyright.

 

My understanding is the location of the sale determines the applicable intellectual property law, not where a designer happened to be when he designed the boat. So for Lasers sold in Canada the applicable law is Canadian, for Lasers sold in Australia the applicable law is Australian, for lasers sold in Lithuania the applicable law is Lithuanian, for lasers sold in the United States, the applicable law is U.S. Federal, etc.

My understanding is the current suits are over contracts and commercial relationships, not intellectual property rights. The applicable law for contracts and commercial relationships depends on where the case is litigated. Currently the case is being litigated in in the U.S. Federal Court District of Connecticut so the applicable law is U.S Federal law.

EDIT There are actually three sets of litigation involving Bruce Kirby and Lasers. One is Kirby v. LP Lawsuit (3:13-cv-00297) in the U.S. Federal Court District of Connecticut and it involves contract and commercial relation disputes. http://ia801604.us.archive.org/30/items/gov.uscourts.ctd.99988/gov.uscourts.ctd.99988.docket.html

The other two are requests to cancel the Laser trademark in the US and do not involve not the Laser boat design itself. One, Karaya LASER TM Cancellation Proceeding (92/057,167), has been dismissed with prejudice. The other, Velum LASER TM Cancellation Proceeding (92/057,217, continues.
http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?...name=&pop=&pn=bruce kirby&pop2=&pn2=&cop=&cn=

 

My question relating to this is more global, with people talking about setting up the manufacture of a highly successful boat: The Laser, and at least two who already have. My wishful point was that if the boat design was recognised as writers are recognised for their books. If that were so, then the contracts would be written to accommodate that. (They aren't so my point is mute.)

The current action before the court is definitely over contracts: specifically: Kirby's right to terminate these licenses to build his boat; the termination conditions; and unpaid royalties.

It is being held in the Connecticut District Court, so you are right in that US laws apply. (Details of the case are here: http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/sr...t-al-v-laserperformance-europe-limited-et-al/)

It just seems wrong that designers lose their rights after a short few years. And it's a shame that Kirby is embroiled in this dispute rather than enjoying his retirement.

I guess you have answered my question. What you are saying is that boat designers have no rights outside their own country - that a Canadian design can be built for sale in the US or other countries with no legal concerns.

EDIT. (Responding to David's edit). The link I provided shows a slightly more up to date information, where the only counterclaims relating to the contract and royalties remain. (The conspiracy counterclaim has been dropped). Also the application to cancel the Laser Trademark has been withdrawn. (I thought both had but your link just shows one).