ᐅ Building Plans for a Prefabricated House as a Template – Could This Cause Issues?
Created on: 16 Oct 2015 20:20
N
NOUSEFORANAME
We are currently in the detailed preliminary planning phase before consulting an architect soon.
At the moment, we are wondering if there could be any legal issues if we use prefab house manufacturer plans as inspiration. For example, we really like the exterior dimensions, layout, etc. We would only want to change a few small details such as the arrangement and size of the windows and doors.
Legally, the plans are apparently protected as stated in the printed material...
The question is, what exactly can be protected in such a design? If we only change a small portion, it wouldn’t be an exact copy anymore, or am I mistaken?
Even if we were to implement it exactly as is, the chance that the prefab company would ever find out seems low, doesn’t it?
At the moment, we are wondering if there could be any legal issues if we use prefab house manufacturer plans as inspiration. For example, we really like the exterior dimensions, layout, etc. We would only want to change a few small details such as the arrangement and size of the windows and doors.
Legally, the plans are apparently protected as stated in the printed material...
The question is, what exactly can be protected in such a design? If we only change a small portion, it wouldn’t be an exact copy anymore, or am I mistaken?
Even if we were to implement it exactly as is, the chance that the prefab company would ever find out seems low, doesn’t it?
Copyright can only be claimed by an architect if their design meets a certain level of individual creativity. This means the design must stand out from the mass of typical houses. A standard detached house with four walls and a pitched roof generally does not qualify. However, in individual cases, an expert opinion may be necessary in a dispute to determine whether copyright protection applies.
If a design is protected by copyright, you are not allowed to make alterations later without the architect’s consent. It is important to pay attention to the contract terms in this regard; otherwise, the copyright remains with the architect.
This can even go as far as prohibiting the publication of photographs of such a building. In a photography forum, we discussed a case where the owner of a mill invoked the architect’s copyright to have a photographer remove the image from their online gallery. The photographer chose to avoid a legal dispute, so I do not know if the claim would have succeeded. There is also something called freedom of panorama, but that is beyond the scope here.
For a basic, standard house, I would not worry much about copyright, but I would be more cautious with a more distinctive design.
If a design is protected by copyright, you are not allowed to make alterations later without the architect’s consent. It is important to pay attention to the contract terms in this regard; otherwise, the copyright remains with the architect.
This can even go as far as prohibiting the publication of photographs of such a building. In a photography forum, we discussed a case where the owner of a mill invoked the architect’s copyright to have a photographer remove the image from their online gallery. The photographer chose to avoid a legal dispute, so I do not know if the claim would have succeeded. There is also something called freedom of panorama, but that is beyond the scope here.
For a basic, standard house, I would not worry much about copyright, but I would be more cautious with a more distinctive design.
Similar topics