On Mar 26, 2:46 pm, Bob Morrison wrote:
In a previous post Pat wrote...

What a fundimentally stupid law. You can take a set of plans and send
it over to a drafting shop and have them redraw it for you and email
you the file so you can print it, but you cannot "buy" an identical
set of plans where the original drawer emails you the exact same
building. Does that strike you as weird?

That's not what I said. In the example you cited the originals were drawn
by one person (FLW) and you asked if a now living architect (or engineer)
could seal those drawings and get a permit.

Let's not kid ourselves, FLW's buildings were largely uncomfortable to
live in and the drawings themselves would sell for more than any house
built from them.

I answered no. Only if the original drawings were redrawn by the
"architect [engineer] of record" are they considered "prepared under the
direct supervision of the design professional."

You are speaking theoretically, Bob. In most of the building
departments around here, if the drawings are stamped, the building
department doesn't play cop and investigate who prepared them. That's
not really their function. Their view is that the designer of record
is responsible, and if they're responsible and the building department
isn't, well, hell, that's fine. There was one building department in
a local village that refused to accept drawings prepared by an
engineer, even though that is allowed in NY.

Of course, if FLW sealed and signed the drawings then you might have an
interesting story to tell and case to argue with a local building
official.

Maybe tell the story on Oprah or something, but if the guy is not
currently registered, I don't think it would fly. You may know more
about the technicalities on that front.

In the example you cite above, you could "buy" the drawings from the
original drawer and that person can even apply his/her seal to those
drawings. Depending on the jurisdiction prints of those electronic
drawings may or may not have to have an original signature singed in ink.

This last has gotten to be a somewhat contentious issue. I generally
argue that if I send you a PDF version of the drawing with my stamp and
signature which was produced in my office then there is no difference
between that and me sending you via snail mail a print of the original
sealed and signed document. In this case I typically apply "print only"
security to the PDF in order to prevent anyone from copying the seal and
signature electronically. Some jurisdictions require an original signature
on every drawing submitted. That's not too bad if there are only 2-3 sets
of 3-4 drawings, but it's not very much fun if the jurisdiction wants 5
sets of 150 sheets. prints of the sealed and signed original should be
sufficient.

I don't think Adobe's PDF security is as secure as you may think:
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Adobe/Gallery/
There are a whole host of "password recovery tools" that will strip
the encryption and open up the file to editing.
Send me one of your drawings and I'll show you what I mean. {Pat, you
still have those FLW drawings you told me about last year...? I think
I have a workaround.}

And on another PDF security issue, potentially more damaging for a
much larger group of people:
http://news.com.com/2100-1002_3-6147428.html

R