Putting a "Copyright Notice" on your Design Plans is it enough?
James Paul Pilande
General Manager of EXSTO Philippines Inc. Architect, Singapore Accredited Interior Designer, Indoor Air Quality Specialist and Editor-in-Chief of TheOfficeDesigner.com
As an Architect and Designer, we often put a copyright notice in our plans to prevent others from using our creative ideas without our consent. But is this enough to serve its purpose? After all, copyright on plans is very difficult to prove in court given its complexity.
Our customers can use our ideas even without paying us a single cent!
Just recently we encountered a customer who did just that. They asked for a test-fit of a recent space they have leased here in Singapore. After a few rounds of changes then requested for a 3D visual and a quote. Unfortunately, they never came back to us afterward. Our company made some calls, send follow-up emails and left whatsapp messages with no reply.
Fast forward a few months after that incident. A new project came up at the same building a few floors down. We decided to check out the place and there it is. Our concept and idea on full display with a few minor tweaks and that's it. We tried to have a word with the manager but was not allowed to speak to anyone after introducing ourselves. We left frustrated and helpless, this isn't the first time. Fighting for our rights may cost even more than the design fee we can charge this customer. It's not worth the hassle, therefore we just need to be wiser moving forward.
How can we protect the designers?
Providing a test-fit with artist impressions to customers has become a normal practice in Singapore. Furthermore, potential customers can call for an (RFP) Request for proposal complete with a layout plan, 3D visuals, material specifications and quotation. What more can you ask for?
During the selection process, copyright infringement may already be at play. The customers may like the designs but are not happy with the price. Because of this, the potential customer may be tempted to use their preferred design and appoint the job to a much cheaper contractor. This rampant practice has raised the question of the effectivity of the copyright notice which is mostly located on the drawing title block. Is this sufficient to cover our intellectual property on our drawings?
Gone were the days of manual presentations where the designers can keep the plans after initial customer discussions. Subsequent meetings mean the designer can already charge for the next meeting up until the project is awarded. With the onset of technology copies of the proposal are sent through emails or uploaded to the cloud before the presentation date to meet the RFP deadline. From this point onwards the designer has minimal control over the creative work and has already given the idea for free.
The roles of governing bodies on copyright
Based on the IPOS website (Intellectual Property Office of Singapore) there is no specific mention of Architectural or Interior Design plans on the list. Thou copyright protects the expression of ideas e.g. drawings, models of buildings and aggregate visual images. For starters, you can download the copyright info pack for more information.
There is no union or organization strong enough to enforce a robust mandate to protect the designers. Singapore may be a small place to start putting in place an "Architectural Copyright Law", hence I am sure it can just adapt simple international guidelines and integrate it with its current framework to safeguard Architects, Designers, and small design and build firms here.
"Copyright infingement carries the risk of enhanced damages, attourneys fees and court cost"
An interesting article about architectural copyrights can be found at Archdaily.
What is our best course of action?
The Architect, Designer, and Contractors can all initiate change from within. it is difficult to resist temptation once a potential customer calls for a meeting with a design on hand which can possibly be from another company.
"If given plans from others, ensure that you have the right to construct, copy and or modify those plans before using them"
It is in everybody's best interest to politely ask if there has been permission granted to use the drawings for the customers' purpose. This may turn off the customer at first but after a while, they will be taken aback and realize that what they are doing may be a copyright infringement and be impressed by the sincerity. A small gesture that can have a profound effect if practiced by everyone in the industry.
Times are hard and most of us struggle to survive to make an honest living. In this highly competitive industry with minions of clients spoiled for choice. The answer to the question above is a big "NO" putting a copyright notice is not enough. It needs proper laws, cooperation and implementation than just a mere space in your title block.
Update on 2 May 2018
Architect and Accessibility Advocate
4 年Very helpful article. I practice in Ghana and similar things happen here too. I rather find the trend of RFP's asking for initial concepts and layouts troubling. Especially since there is no guarantee of they not using your ideas even if you are not selected. Is there a fee paid for the effort put into generating those initial ideas? For me that is a good percentage of the work right there that needs compensation. Can't a firm be selected based on their previous jobs? I think design professionals may have to look at that perspective too. Because other consultants do not have to do a percentage of their works before they are deemed capable. It is usually based on the previous experience. I think the same can be done in design fields.
Intermittent Test Administrator at US Army
6 年This a very helpful article for me. As a new graduate from design school this is extremely important topic for me. I know your article mainly focused on Singapore. If you have any info on US practices please share it. I know of a recent instance where this happened I'm my area with a furniture design that was used without any compensation for the license holder after initial deal fell through. Instead of being manufactured here the plan was taken out of country to be made cheaper.
It is an important topic for all creative professionals. Thank you, James Paul Pilande for bringing it up. If Singapore IP laws do not provide sufficient protections for architects - by all means push for them. On the other hand, there was no reference in the post to a professional legal opinion on this subject. Is it possible that the law is there, but not all architects are aware of it or use it properly? I am in the USA, not in Singapore, and I am a photographer, not an architect. Being in contact with architects, it is easy to see that the challenges of staying in business are the same. People do give away, literally, their work. And, even when remedies are available to them, they often abstain from fighting the infringement for various reasons. This only emboldens the infringers. As to black listing clients, this may backfire big time. Nothing is “privately accessed” forever. If a “client” is an unethical sonofabitch, what is there to stop him from filing a defamation law suit? Some posters of negative opinions to yelp.com have found this to be the case. Word of mouth may work better. Just like the way many of us get new clients...
Project Management Information System Delivery | Digital Transformation Advisor | Technology Partner | Solution Oriented Problem Solver
9 年I think you have started a very interesting discussion James Paul Pilande. This is a problem that is faced worldwide. I agree that this issue need to be fixed from the ground up, starting with legislation and strengthened by ethics and best practice by the design industry as a whole. That being said there are techniques and technology that can be used to deter intellectual property theft, for example, the use of a cloud storage solution that allows prospective clients to view but not download your designs.