In article ,
Bill wrote:
I've got an interesting question that I have been thinking about for a
little while. I have built a piece from plans I got from a woodworking
mag for myself. I also made the same thing as a wedding gift. The
couple liked it so much that they said they would tell a few people about
them and they may have a few orders for me.

Now the question. Is it permissible to make money of a plan from a mag?
Do they retain some sort of copyright on anything made from those plans?
I think I have the potential to make a few bucks here but I don't want to
without checking on the ethics.

Thanks for all replies,


OH, boy! You *do* like to ask complicated questions.

The _first_ thing to to is to check what the plans themselves say.
Many plans come with an express 'limited license', allowing you to
construct a limited number of the object -- might be one only, might
be five, might be as many as 25 -- for your own purposes. *IF* there
is such a statement, it _does_ govern what you can/cannot do.

If there is no such 'license' with the plans, then the 'statutory'
provisions apply.

This gets "messy".

The plans, themselves, _are_ copyrighted. Copying the plans for your own
'personal use' is allowed. Copying the plans for 'someone else' to use
is not.

Building the thing represented by the plans is considered a 'derivative
work'. Which does fall under the purview of copyright law. Absent any
other considerations, O.K. for personal use, *not* O.K. to give/sell to
others. Immediately after construction, _or_ 'later'. Needs to remain
in your possession, or be destroyed. The single exception, if you transfer
ownership of the 'original' of the plans from which it was built, the
'derivative work' objects must be destroyed, *OR* be transferred to the
same party -- at _no_ cost.

HOWEVER, general copyright law protects the 'expression' of a given idea,
_not_ the underlying 'ideas' themselves. And, copyright protects _only_
the 'unique' creative elements introduced by the author of the particular
'expression'. There is a separate kind of copyright, called a 'design
copyright', that plays by different rules. However, unless you're talking
about a 'design' that is 'identifiable' as being from some well-known
artist -- e.g. a Sam Maloof rocking chair -- it is unlikely that this
category of copyright comes into play.

Separating the 'ideas' from the 'expression', is one of the *murkiest* areas
of copyright law, =particularly= where a 'derivative work' is involved.

Design elements that are 'common' to any similar object, are obviously
not unique to that particular 'expression' of the concept of whatever
kind of object is represented by the plans. The manner/style in which
those various elements are _combined_ to make up the whole, on the other
hand, _may_ well be a 'unique' creative effort, and thus be protected.

Trying to get an 'authoritative' answer as to what are the 'unique'
elements in any specific set of plans, is likely to be impossible.

A couple of examples, taken from some woodworking magazines within
the last year or so: 1) plans for a intarsia teddy bear. 2) plans
for decorative boxes.

The intarsia teddy bear is almost entirely 'unique' creative effort.
The only 'non-unique' component is the 'intarsia' concept itself.
The copyright on the teddy-bear object doesn't extend to a, say,
intarsia monkey object, nor even to a 'different appearing' teddy bear.

In the 2nd case, obviously copyright doesn't apply to boxes as a whole.
The only (potentially) 'unique' element in these plans was the 'mitered
spline' accent used in joining the box corners. Even then, if a similar
appearance was accomplished by a different methodology than espoused in
the accompanying article, copyright does not come into consideration.
Furthermore, with the 'unique' element being the -method- of constructing
the accent, as separate from the 'accent' itself, copyright is side-stepped,
because copyright does *not* apply to processes or methods (that is the
realm of 'patents').

How any/all of this swamp applies to 'whatever it is' that you have made
is a question _only_you_ can attempt to answer.

As a 'practical matter', it is *highly* unlikely that a copyright owner
would act against you for anything less than 'production line' quantities,
unless we're talking 'big ticket' item construction. plans for a decorative
weather-vane are one thing. Plans for a house, or a boat, or an airplane,
are something else again. grin

The 'ethics' of the situation are a completely different matter from the
'legalities'.

Ethically, it's clearly OK to make the thing for your own 'personal use'.
Or in _small_ numbers for gifts to others. What constitutes a 'small'
number does depend on what the 'thing' is.

The situation is different when you start talking about taking money
for the things. Obviously, setting up a production-line, and wholesaling
them, to say Toys-R-Us or K-Mart, is an entirely different issue than
"onesie-twosie" construction for individuals who ask you for one. _IF_
there is 'money to be made' in it, then the producer of the plans deserves
to share in those profits. Consider buying a set of plans for _each_
copy you make. You can then transfer the plans _and_ the 'derivative
work' to each buyer. Alternatively, contact the producer of the plan,
and see if there is a 'quantity discount' available.