Copyright has no place in Architecture: Part V - Record Drawings and As-Built Drawings

For those of you who are just joining us now, here's how we got here:

Part I

Part II

Part III

Part IV

Record drawings and as-built drawings. It seems like everyone is confused by their distinction and everyone argues over who is responsible for them. What should be clear by now in these series of articles is that this is another messy area for copyright. Let's begin by clarifying their distinction. The American Institute of Architects defines as-built drawings as:

As-built drawings are prepared by the contractor. They show, in red ink, on-site changes to the original construction documents

Meanwhile, record drawings are defined as:

Record drawings are prepared by the architect and reflect on-site changes the contractor noted in the as-built drawings. They are often compiled as a set of on-site changes made for the owner per the owner-architect contract.

These terms should be eliminated. But that is a topic for another day. Speaking to the point of copyright, and again in a strict application of the definition, these actions are inherently copyright infringements in every sense of the word.

in the same way that I cannot go print Green Eggs and Ham at Staples without infringing that copyright, the same is true for a contractor printing drawings.

Let's begin with as-built drawings. They are prepared by the contractor. They show, in red, in the on-site changes to the original construction documents. Those construction documents are likely a reproduction of the construction documents produced by the consultants (which discussed in our previous article are a copyright infringement in their own right). How can that be true? Well the contractor likely had the documents printed. So in the same way that I cannot go print Green Eggs and Ham at Staples without infringing that copyright, the same is true for a contractor printing drawings.

As part of the contractors contractual obligations, they are asked to infringe on the designer's copyrights. This is subject of course to any license for this purpose, but for the sake of simplicity, let's assume that license does not exist or was not contemplated.

This means that each time a contractor redlines a drawing (or in other words, reproduces the work of a consultant in part, they are guilty of copyright infringement. To phrase this another way, a contractor engaged on a project with a team of consultants cannot perform their duties without violating a Federal Law, absent an agreement to the contrary. To align with the common theme in these articles, this is entirely absurd.

The architect (and consultants) must then translate these redlines into a record drawing (or model for us progressive practitioners), for the owner's use absolutely. I'm not aware of any legal decisions on this point, but I would submit that the reproduction of these redlines into a record drawing also can be classified as the reproduction of someone else's work (the contractor's redlines) into the consultant's work (the record drawings or model).

If it isn't clear by now, let me state it simply. Copyright has no place in architecture.

If it isn't clear by now, let me state it simply. Copyright has no place in architecture. With a small caveat on the artistic expression. So much of this profession relies on a back and forth between parties who all contribute to the same end work product - a physical building. Moreover, in order for this profession to progress, we must share individual work product for the greater good of all parties. This includes better coordination (as the prime consultant), informed engineering (as the design consultants), better constructability (as the contractor and trades), and better ownership (as the owner). Copyright in this profession only seeks to frustrate these purposes.

This article is provided for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal or other professional advice of any kind. Readers are advised to seek specific legal advice by contacting their own legal counsel. Roddy Handa and holo-blok Architecture does not warrant or guarantee the quality, accuracy or completeness of any information in this article. The content should not be relied upon as accurate or fit for any particular purpose.

Roddy Handa is an architect and lawyer who specializes in digital project delivery. He is the key founder of holo-blok - a collection of architectural problem solvers specialising in building solutions.