Lamp copyright issue

[Douglas Robinson]

I am an intellectual property attorney. As other have mentioned furniture (and lamp) designs are usually best suited for design patent protection. A design patent lasts 14 years. If the claimed design is very particular it may be easy to design around. There is an art to drafting strong design patents. Part of iit is knowing what should be included in the design and what should be shown in broken lines, indicating that that portion forms no part of the claimed design.

From a design point of view there are a lot of differences between your lamps. His shade is octagonal while yours is square, his column is mostly square while yours is a "+" and your bases are different. Not knowing whether he has a design patent or not makes it impossible for me to tell if he has any design patent rights to his design.

From a copyright point of view, the issues are a little different. It does not take a great deal of effort or expense to register a copyright. The copyright lasts a lot longer than a design patent (life of the author plus 70 years). HOWEVER, a copyright protects the expression NOT the idea.

What this means is that I can make a movie about a mafia family set during the 40's through today, but I cannot take the literal expression (dialog and images from the Godfather). So assuming Mr. dewy4 does have a copyright on his design, the question is how different is yours from his and when did he obtain his copyright.

If your lamos closely follow the WOOD design, then his design may infringe their copyright. While, I wish I could give you clearer advice, without more facts its impossible.

[Michael Gabbay]

Threaten him with a counter suit!


You designed a lamp. Your lamp basically does what all lamps do. The design may be somewhat similar but as long as you did not use his plans to build from then I don't see where he has a claim.

I've done some work in intellectual property rights for my company. I'm not a lawyer but after having dealt with so many it is hard to really stake a claim on an unregistered pantent or copyright. I also did not stay at a Holiday Inn Express!

my 2 cents.
MIke

[Chris Daigh]

You guys are great and think the way I do. I'm thinking of building 25 more of these lamps just because he has tried to take advantage of me.

[Chris Daigh]

I talked to the editor of Wood Magazine where I got the plan. He told me that I should reference Wood in my description, not sell more than 25 and that Wood owns the design rights for their lamp. So I feel better now.

[Richard Wolf]

Talk about apples and oranges. What a jerk this guy is. I would email me back and say "Listen, I own the copyright on the wheel, don't let me catch you driving around in your car or I'll sue you"
Very nice lamp by the way, I would'nt be surprised if he starts copying you!!!

Richard

[Chris Daigh]

Richard, that is exactly what I thought. The more I think about it I want him under that wheel. Sorry, I was just so mad that someone thought they patented the entire mission style.

[Karl Laustrup]

Chris,
First, if you bought plans from Wood magazine, check their policy on selling the finished product. They probably have a copyright on the plans but not on the finished product, so you can't resell the plans but the product is yours to do with as you like.

Second, if you bought plans then you have no obligation to even respond to to the guy sending the e-mail. If the plans were free, then they are in the public domain and you still have no obligation to anyone other than the supplier of the plans.

Third, my law license expired last week. But I would not respond to the guy unless he has an actual connection to the plan supplier (like a representative of Wood magazine.)

Ray

What Ray said and I don't even have a law license, but I did stay at a HOLIDAY INN last night.

[markus shaffer]

The irony of this situation is that this guy himself claims to be "inspired" by others... Here's a quote from his "about me" page..

"Many of our styles and designs were inspired by some of the more famous wood crafters who once flourished in the Grand Rapids area around the turn of the 20th century."

Funny how he goes on to say,

"No one really knows who first started building Mission Style Furniture. Some say the California missionaries liked its simple form. Others say a few master craftsmen embarked upon a mission to build a simple, sturdy design in contrast to the ornately carved furniture styles. Or, that Charles Rene McIntosh adapted the style from ancient Chinese methods of furniture making over a thousand years old. In conclusion, mission furniture is a little like Jazz music in America. No one really knows where it came from, but one day it was there, and some say it's there to stay."

Copyright on something that comes from nowhere?

While his work is nice, I'd wager to say that there's not an absolutely original idea in his work. Looking at his website and it's all basic Mission style stuff.. Can't say that I've seen anything really innovative and new there. As a matter of fact, his descriptions claim "reproduction" on several pieces..

I offically call this guy a knucklehead.. (am I allowed to do that?)

[Jim Becker]

I offically call this guy a knucklehead.. (am I allowed to do that?)

That would be a safe bet since you unlikely cannot use some of the descriptions you've undoubtedly heard and used (and maybe have been unjustifiably called in NYC!!)

[Frank Pellow]

I offically call this guy a knucklehead.. (am I allowed to do that?)

You certainly have my backing.

[Frank Pellow]

I talked to the editor of Wood Magazine where I got the plan. He told me that I should reference Wood in my description, not sell more than 25 and that Wood owns the design rights for their lamp. So I feel better now.

That certainly sounds fair.

[Bob Borzelleri]

Well... I'm not an attorney, but my wife is and one of her areas is intellectual property. I'm going to pass on any mention of the fact that one would think that any intellectual property claim should have to be grounded in at least some intellect.

I mentioned this situation to my wife and she rolled her eyes. The advice offered on this forum sounds pretty much on point. There might be a bit of metaphor mixing going on from your accuser. Patents, copyrights, and design rights are not simple synonyms.

Generally speaking, patents apply to inventions and industrial processes. I don't think the lamp is covered here.

Copyrights are generally applied to recorded work such as music, literary efforts, movies, plays, photos and the like. I don't think the lamp, itself, fits in here either.

Design rights apply to unique designs and copyrights can apply to the design as they are claimed for the documentation of specific plan details. This (copyright of his plan) is probably where this fellow is making his assertion. Whether his assertion holds water is another issue as the actual design appears to be pretty well established and produced by a multitude of folks over the past century.

Your real issue is probably with Wood magazine as you are citing their rights to the design of the lamp you are offering for sale.

It seems to me that you might want to consider a couple of options. 1). Come up with your own variation of this otherwise ubiquitous design and divorce yourself from the Wood design sales limitation; and 2) Raise your price. Your lower price is probably what got this thing going in the first place.

...Bob, the un-attorney.

BTW, you are producing a very nice looking lamp.

[Keith Christopher]

Just sounds like he's trying to scare off the competition.

[Ted Asher]

Chris,

If this guy persists forward a copy of his threat to eBay.
I don't think they would look too favorably on this.
They might even delete his account.