Market Perspective: Emerging Copyright Case
The Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act provides protection to original designs of architecture in virtually any form, including architectural plans, drawings and buildings. These designs have historically been treated as intellectual property belonging to the design firm that created it.
The concept that the design professional retains this right is plainly stated in standard form contracts such as those published by the American Institute of Architects (AIA) and the Engineers Joint Contract Documents Committee.
The standard AIA provision provides that the drawings are “Instruments of Service” and the license to use them can be withheld by the Architect in the event of a dispute between the Owner and Architect.
There have been a number of cases in which an architect’s drawings were used to complete a project when the original project developer transferred the project. In several of these situations, the original architect successfully sued the new developer for the unauthorized use of his design documents. A recent decision from an Ohio court bolstered this principle and extended the risk of copyright infringement to the contractor and subcontractors.
In Eberhard Architects v. Bogart Architecture, an architect terminated the owner’s use license after failure to pay. The architect also notified the contractor and subcontractors that the license to use the drawings had been terminated. The architect sued the owner for breach of contract (due to non-payment), and also the contractor and subcontractor for copyright infringement (for continuation of work utilizing the Architect’s plans). The court held that the contractor and subcontractors could be liable for copyright infringement by continuing to work on the project.
The plain language of the AIA contract was paramount to the architect’s success.
By way of contrast, the provisions of the Construction Owners Association of America (COAA) contract form grant the owner of the project all rights to any “documents or electronic media prepared by or on behalf of the professional for the project.” Such a clause effectively releases the design professional’s intellectual property rights irrespective of the Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act.
Although Eberhard may have little impact on Colorado design professionals, it is an excellent illustration of the importance that all construction professionals must analyze and understand the project contracts and educate themselves on the risks involved – whether those risks be waiver of intellectual property rights or potential liability for copyright infringement.
Photo courtesy of Casey Quillen