Legality of “Borrowing” Lines from Existing Hull Design

First you've got to know someone has ripped you off! If somebody takes a few lines of a common boat style, rehashes 'em somewhat and turns out a slightly different vessel (go faster stripes in a different place!) it ain't yours, and more to the point would you know, and not only that is it worth the expense?

Now if some thirty of these appear for sale and they are exactly the same, your loosing pennies so THEN it's time to kick butt!

And that 'aint just in the marine world (talking of which you pinched the idea of having soldiers at sea - marines - from us (they aint quite the same, more of em but not as good - good - but not THAT good)! We ain't crying foul or suing are we? In fact we even like yours (?) consider em younger brothers (guess they are)!

That'll get a few bites I'll bet

 

You will have to look long and hard to find much in hull design that is novel enough to warrant a patent. Most of today's patents are very limited and apply only to some detail of the hull. If proper searches were made, it's likely that a lot of patents that are granted would be invalid since they are already covered in prior art.

Just what about the C Dory hull could be worth a patent? Its hull is almost the same as a Simmons Skiff which is like countless others built over the years in somebody's back yard. Same goes for your drift boat which is probably not novel either (but you should check). Patents are often just for the designers ego or a sales gimic. Splashing is another matter though and both illegal and immoral.

Enforcing a narrow patent is often counterproductive. Wilbur and Orville as well as Hickman and Sony wasted their efforts trying to control and enforce their ideas with patents while technology raced blithely on. Good patents on really novel ideas that are broad enough to place a locked door on a technology are worth the effort to control. Minor stuff that can be leapfrogged or circumvented is a bother to both parties.

 

You are far from the thruth.
Ask to a lawyer knowing patents rights... you will be surprised.
I'm paying because I'm legally protected even if a person copy my patent for personal use BECAUSE HE IS USING MY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY!!!! and for this reason I'm paying!!!!

Take informations from reliable authority....

 

Hey Ranchi Otto your right of course, but......

If somebody builds only one little copy and uses it himself, and you don't find out about it, 'cos its in a foreign land; as I said above, what you going to do about it?

And when you do, you'll spend a fortune and try and get it back but I ain't got nothing so you loose out bothways!

see what I mean?

 

I agree with you of course...I will never spend money for that.

The starting question was if a patent protects the owner from a copy even for private use...

My opinion is YES!

 

Otto, I tried to find out what INACO wrote in the text next to your design - but this is not the apropriate way to answer this query.
Will mail you privately. After D'dorf. Have this weekend a shipment to you know where..... must prepare docs.....

 

Please pay particular attention to Tom Lathrop's comments above.
I met a fellow years ago who had been involved with several patent disputes and cases. His opinion was that if you have a really novel idea you should make sure that it is placed in the public domain as quickly as possible so that no one else could patent it and you would not have to spend large amounts of money and effort protecting your patent rights.
Of course your patent attorney is going to say you must patent your idea and pay him to pursue any infringement. And he is going to say no one can copy your boat design even for his own use. How else would he make his living? Why would you need him if he didn't tell you that?

 

The patents rights are protected not by my lawyer but from the International Patent Agreement signed by practically all countries in Paris on 1958.

I have been charged from a tribunal in Switzerland as expert in a process concerning patent.

One of the two parts was convicted.....

 

You don't pay your lawyer but the Patent Office in the corresponding country where you have deposit your patent

 

There are international laws for many items, not for all.

There is a difference btw. patent and intellectual property...

For have a patent today you have to demonstrate that there is nothing similar in his field. You have to answer to a lot of technical questions and the Patent Office send to you previous similar patents. You have to explain why your is different.

Intellectual property is referring to a shape and for this reason wellknown watchesmaker have hundreds of shapes with very small differences deposited at OMNI in Geneva Switzerland..

They don't have any patent concerning shape but it is possible to have patent concerning movement.

 

It is clearly not legal to build more then one boat from a set of plans without permission. It also is not legal to "splash" a hull, even if minor changes are incorporated to hide the splashing efforts.

That said, it's highly unlikely you will be pursued by the designer for a single copy.

Designers routinely plagiarize each other's work for ideas, concepts and innovations. The burden is placed on the copyright or patent holder to "defend" their rights, which generally isn't done, unless several examples get noticed and a clear path to the theft of intellectual or other wise protected property can be proven. It's very difficult to prove this type of theft or to defend against it's high jacking.

In the real world, you'll probably not get caught, but if it was my idea and I ran into you one night, you better hope it wasn't a poorly lit alley.

 

If you do it and change ANYTHING from the original lines it would seem to me you have a legitimate claim to say yours is not the same. So then it would seem to me you're not illegal until someone takes you to court and proves it, and realistically, what sort of a fool would someone have to be to do that. The costs would be prohibitive, the outcome uncertain, and there would be no reward in it, as you have done no harm to the "production" people. Sam

 

Without pending patent or OMNI (intellectual proprety office) registration it would be very difficult, practically impossible to demonstrate that someone has copied your design

 

I am not a lawyer but I have many years experience with intellectual property and attorneys. Caldera has a sound basis for what he is saying. you guys who are paying attornies should listent to him. Caldera is giving you some inside info. Knowledge is only owned when it is secret. Distributing knowledge and owning it has inherent philosophical problems. Attorneys are also business men and they have to sell their services. Protecting "intellectual property" once you have it is a very difficult thing to do as some of you have touched on. Ultimately, the law is only what is enforcable. The attornies are aware that the public's belief sways what the courts will rule and thus will publiclly make statement to promote the philosophy which promotes their profession. Law is not cut and dry and it sure is not justice.

 

I congratulate you for this since you appear to lack basic understanding of legal matters and apparently like the idea of using other people's property without paying for it and without their conscent, which is equivalent to stealing from them.
Theft is theft even if the motive is 'personal use' and the question of monetary gain is irrelevant to this definition.
Owners of any property can have various motives for suing, including deterrence, and merely getting sued can be a very costly business for someone who just wanted to build a boat for himself after a design he liked.

You obviously find it amusing to try and convince innocent boat builders that it's OK and safe to try stealing other people's intellectual property for personal use.
I wonder - have you ever stolen this way?
If you're so sure it's OK why do you hide behind your anonimity?

Yoav