I personally am happy to hear you consider the moral aspect of this. Don't hear that very often any more. I do think that you did design it and build it, even though you "Copied" it off a picture in your memory. We as carpenters are often building things we have seen else where, then put our own spin on the design. I see things in homes that I love and incorporate them in my builds but never take credit for them as an original thought! I feel if you put the plans out there for the public, you just need to be honest and say this is not an original idea, but you loved to design you decided to build your own version. I would love to build one!! Thankyou!! Scott; Twin Cities Wood Foundry
Nice design and desk! Nothing wrong with being inspired by others work or designs. I built a jukebox of my own design but inspired by other mix of designs. It not a copy right violation of you didn't set out to totally copy and mass produce. You made enough changes to your liking and inspired.
I think if you’re having doubts that means you already know what the answer is. Had you made substantial changes, like moved the legs apart at the top or the shape of the sides, or added features that didn’t exist in the original, no problem.
I think the problem occurs when you charge for it, bringing into a commerce issue. OpenDesk also has a similar design, with no reference to Mr Magg. Thanks for the diligence on the 'origin' ! Looks great Caleb!
what was your final decition? Very nice work! By the way, in my country if you take your plans to the laser, they will copy it anyway Anyone can "copy" the furniture (just as you did) just watching the finished one. What is the difference of doing it with the plans you extracted by your own? If the plans (original or not) are not copyrighted, then you dont have any problems. This is the general idea, but it depends of the country. In my opinion you should share it for the people who ask for it directly to you, then you decide. My case is that I am not a computer designer, but really like the furniture, so that would come just fine to me. Anyway, congrats for the excellent job and for your nice cat!
If it's common to leave the bottom edge then you should look for a shoulder plane(?) One that has a blade even with the bottom and rides over the edge. Like a round over or bevel only straight. As for the plans, let me say Tiffany vs Tiffany style has been around for a hundred years.
How much would it have to change to make you comfortable? I mean it looks similar but distinctly different to me. But my opinion is sure to be different than other people's. So who's option counts?
i do not know about the usa, but over here in germany, every asset/idea is released to public domain automatically after 70 years. so even if you had copied the original one by one i really would not see an issue here. however you are not going to monetize the release, aren't you? so all you really would do is "releasing a drawing" of an object nobody can buy anyways. seems legit to me.
I think you should share the file in way that beginners to cnc and autodesk can refer to the file and make their own modifications and built upon your design.
I think that its a perfect opportunity for people to try the same method as you did and consequently to NOT share the files. Make the whole idea to try to do this for yourself just like you did. This benefits everyone forcing people to learn how to copy a design and discover its inherent considered design features and decisions by having to do it for themselves learning fusion360 along the way as well.
I'd say a couple of things regarding the sharing of files: 1) If somebody else is profiting off of it (directly from his design) or selling copies, then I'd stay clear. 2) If you're not profiting , then there would be less of a point against you 3) If you want to be certain - ask him* or his family for permision.
The background audio was at a perfect level today and the voice was simple to hear. For my cnc router projects I have also found a oscillating tool such as the dremel multi-max with a thin flat blade works great for cutting tabs to separate from larger piece. Then a quick pass on router table with a flush trim bit removes the rest of tab and leaves a nice clean edge.
Well, honestly, I suggest you ask a copyright attorney or talk to Make attorneys. They do have a magazine division right? That is the only way you are going to find out for sure if there is any legal issues in sharing the files you created. You can also contact the publisher of book or magazine you were looking at and ask them their opinion on the matter. You could pull the book back out and check the overall angles and design to see what you did differently than the original. My personal opinion is that you own the copy right to the plans you created, even though the work was inspired by a picture you looked at, but talking to an attorney is the safest way to go.
This isn't really a grey area. Physical objects are protected by Patent Law. If they have not patented the design, then you are free to do as you wish. You could even sell these desks, if you wanted. If a patent was filed, then you couldn't sell them. You could probably still distribute the CNC files with a clear conscience, though. If a patent exists, then the entire design is a matter of public record.
I'd say you are good to go as far as sharing it goes, you obviously did not measure it out millimeter by millimeter and replcate that, so it is your design, you did the full amount of work to make it happen, so it is yours.
As many others also mention - as long as you don't sell the product your are fine. I'm personally against patents since the sales pitch "the little inventor's protection against the big bullies" is not really true. Patents are really expensive to buy and enforce - so it's mainly for the big companies to keep out competition. It also has the negative effect that the Monopoly holder don't optimize product and keep fair prices. One other really important thing is that ideas aren't as unique as people pretend they are. Most commonly they are inspired from other work - could be in another industry.
sk8rdad the original design is not in public domain so you can't diffuse a copy by any ways. Redesign a piece does not gives you any right. Nothing belongs to the copyist. You even dont' have the right to make a copy. Diffusing plans to help people to make their own copy of an original design is a huge prejudice to the owner of the rights. As you should know furniture editors pays a lot to have the right to produce a piece, even if the designer passed away. This is not a product, this is a design so it is covered by international laws about intellectual property. The copy does not need to be perfect in manufacturing or proportions, as far as it's recognised as mostly similar to the original desing it's conidered as a copy, not a new design. Until the original design falls into the public domain 75 years after the designer death, you can't copy or diffuse anything about the original design. Simple as that. There's two prejudices a tribunal may consider : a financial prejudice and a moral prejudice. This is serious.
I'm not a lawyer and have no opinion as to whether it would be legal, but you asked whether it would be moral. I believe that it would be moral with attribution given to the design that inspired yours - just as you did in this video. I see people sharing their piano arrangements of popular songs on UA-cam frequently. I would think this would be similar to that. I'm considering a riff on your design to make a stand for my piano keyboard.
Hey Caleb, great re-design you have here! Curious, do you think it would be possible to break up this file so it can be cut on the average woodworker's cnc (approx 32"x32" cut area)?
I don't know about the legality, the other desk producer might have to prove that it's an original design. I think sharing it would be great, I'd buy the plans, also for those shelves. Good work.
what shelves? the ones behind me while I'm talking? they came with the house but I spent a while studying them recently because I want to build more to match.
I'd say it's morally fine so long as it's under the creative commons license, I would see it as allowing people to make their own piece of history (recreating something not available anymore) If it were still in production by the designer you might run into legal issues, but that's not the case.
good point. I wanted to reach out to Helmut Magg for his thoughts, but he has passed away. I didn't bother contacting any estate as their opinion would largely be more focused on selling things.
Even if you licenced it under, share alike, non commercial, you would be credited with making the design and you would be the one issuing the license. If you're struggling with the morals of it, you really need to figure out if the files are yours to do that with.
I know this is splitting hairs but, are you talking about the files of the desk? The files are probably pretty different than the original plans. I don't know but I doubt they used the type of CNC that you used back in the 50's. Could I not take these files and make it out of plexi, or some other material? That would use the same cut files but be a really different result.
there are legal implications, you must attribute the design to the original owner and if the design is licensed or has a copyright seek their permission to use or copy it, and if you spread the files without the owners permission, they could sue you for copyright infringement and seek damages from you or seek all profits associated from distributing the design.
ManCraftingTM sorry you're wrong mate. Because the design is protected not the product, this remake(?) is not an original but a counterfeiting. Ok to make your own "copy" in your garage like our host for personal use, but this is definitely not an original and you can't legally diffuse it by any ways.
david esktorp, please stop talking about things you know nothing about. This is ridiculous and embarassing. USA is member of the WTO since 1995, so the laws and rules about IP are the same as other member countries. Please learn : www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/456368/IP_rights_in_USA.pdf
Axel Sixtysix asking people on the internet to stop talking about things they know nothing about is like asking people to be civil and polite on the internet. It’s not going to happen.
I think you are forgetting you are "profiting" from the design by using it to promote your "business". I'm fine if you create something yourself and give that away - no issue! Cheers, David.
It is derivative, but exquisitely so. Honestly, I think you’d only need to be concerned about sharing the files if the original were still being manufactured.
As long as there’s no profit from the sharing then you morally clean. I would like the files so that I could have our wood shop students build these desks for our schools.
I think you are safe if you put it out with a non-commercial restriction. If you feel strongly, do mention it is a 'reimagining' of 'give reference to origional piece and wood-artist'. If it would be out of copyright, and since you did not directly copy it, you can do with it as you will. Personally I would feel funny about claiming it as a totally independant work, but it is yours, do with it as you will.
It is a nice looking desk. That said, my take is that you are actively encouraging people to also copy the design. If you had just made the desk for yourself and not promoted it in any way is fine. Giving credit to the original creator was good, but the design is Helmut Magg's IP. Making the plans available is not a good idea (IMO). Thanks for asking. Cheers, David
After tasting a very delicious proprietary soda flavor formulated by a big brand company, I managed to whip up a very similar tasting one at home and decided to share my recipe with the rest of the world for FREE and let everyone know where it was inspired from. How can this ever be morally or legally wrong in any way?
Very nice job. Love the design. However as far a giving the files away for free, i would not. Any honest woodworkers would just make something close if they really wanted one in my opinion. I do not see many non-professional woodworking having a cnc, which leads to giving the files to professionals. I would think most professionals would not make it exactly but you never know. If someone really wants to make it, let them put in some work to make it.
Seeing as how the original desk is no longer in production, there is no financial or other detriment to the original designer if you share the files. Of course it would be a nice gesture to give credit to the designer and maybe link to his wikipedia page too. It seems like there is little chance that reproductions of the design will be mistaken for the original given the age difference, but even if someone bought the reproduction thinking it was the original, the designer would not make any money off the resale of his original furniture.
Ehh. I see the conundrum here. I think if you are ethically strained about it, that should be your proper litmus test. If it is tugging at your moral heart strings then avoid it.
I think it would be of poor form to profit off of an obvious copy however sharing it for free I do not feel is ethically wrong unless one of the following are true: The original creator/maker is selling plans through the same delivery for profit OR the design/product itself has some known trademark and/or patent. In this case, the only way someone could turkey leverage your CaD design is if they had the equipment Which one could argue already enables them to do what you’ve done.
You made the file ............Based on what you liked of his work. Lots of folks make stuff in styles they like.You are not claiming his work as your work? Right so if you sale your file or give it away free for others to use.He did not make the file .So you can do what you like with it.As long as you say it is your copy of his style.Wood workers make their own copy of styles they like all the time.
When it comes to Morality questions of whether or not to sell or release something that was copied/heavily influenced from someone else’s work, my view is if you are asking yourself the question, you’ve got your answer.
yes absolutely. it might be a different story if you could get your hands on one for less than $4,000 but design should be democratic and freeing these plans is the right thing to do. selling them would be less noble but as a designer myself i understand the inclination to be rewarded for one's efforts.
If there is some kind of existing copyright on this design and you sell your files, then, yes you could get in legal trouble. If you just GIVE the files away, no. Of course, this is such a simple design (one reason why it is so timeless) and a person with the skill (and tools) to build it probably could design it from scratch, like you did, and not need the files (plans).
No this would not work. As photos, you cannot publish without the permission of the owner of the rights. Whatever you write or credit. The single alternative is if the design was open source (if reproduction is allowed) or public domain.
A lot of the responses concentrate on the question of selling it, of making money from the copy. In fact, copyright has nothing to do with profit or the exchange of money. When you create something and own the copyright to it, that means that you and only you have the right to copy it. No one else may make copies. It does not matter at all whether money is exchanged. It is the mere act of copying that is prohibited. If your own design is "sufficiently different" then you have the copyright for that design. The real question comes down to whether or not it's genuinely your own design or you really did copy the other design. And it may not matter whether you took actual dimensions from the original. If it's sufficiently similar, then you violated the copyright. Also, there's a difference between copyright, which applies generally to creative WRITING, and patents, which apply to THINGS. You can have a Design Patent, which is what most likely protects that table design. But again, it has nothing to do with the exchange of money. If you make a table according to that other fellow's design, you're violating his patent, even if you only make it for yourself and never sell it. Giving away the files you created on Fusion? Probably a patent violation. People USING those files to create their own tables? Probably a patent violation. Will you get sued by the patent owner? He certainly has the right to do so, since you do not have the right to copy his designs. But he "likely" will not unless (1) he finds out that you dis so and (2) he can somehow extract money from you. And that's the ONLY situation where money is involved. Oh, and one other thing, if you create some "literary work", i.e. write something, then you automatically own the copyright to it, there's no need to register it with the Copyright Office, there's no submission or evaluation of it. If you create some design or object or process and want it protected by patent, then you absolutely do need to submit it to the Patent Office, have it evaluated, and have a patent issued for it. That table is not a literary work, so it's not covered by copyright. It MIGHT be covered by a patent. If it's not, then you're perfectly free to copy it, make it, make design files, share the files, and whatever else you might want to do with it.
As far as I know most copyrighted material is only protected by copyright laws for 50 years, then it becomes of public domain in most cases, except in very specific occasions, which I doubt this would be. In my opinion: you gave the original creator due credit, it is a derivative work after all, and you're not trying to profit from this, so I'm betting you'd be OK. Now, bring on the files and keep up the great work! ;)
Can't comment legally, but otherwise: yes it's okay because it's reverse engineered rather than copied, and the original design is as old as it is. I do think it would be proper to attribute the inspiration, though.
They make reproductions of antique furniture without any legal ramifications so I don't see why this would be a problem. Additionally, you did change some things.
Anthony Burke sorry you're wrong. Like singing a copyright song under your shower, you can make a copy of a design in your garage. But, except in some open source licensing or public domain, crediting the autor does not allows you to diffuse plans of a design which is not yours.
Fiat 500 car now has many ' look alikes' Shaker ' style ' furniture sold everywhere, ok this is more specific, but is it even possible to patent a ' style '?
Free Saxon A Fiat 500 is a product, You can make an origimal product inspired by the Fiat 500, but your remake should be far enough or this is counterfeiting. The desk, before beeing a product made by a furniture editor or manufacturer is initially a design and the intellectual property of the designer. There's designers at Fiat's but they are employees, their work are not under individual IP, like it is for designers, artists or architects. It's a different thing.
Axel Sixtysix ..........Well it's not that simple, car designs are often designed by one individual, the British mini car is an example, some even carry a badge with the designers name ( itlalian, french German cars) with regards to cars it's the logo and badging, brand name that is definitely a no go. You can't claim a look, angle or style, it's the label, or if you try to sell it as the real item. I think this case is more applicable to shaker style furniture. Of course if large scale production of this table were to be considered perhaps legal advice might be an idea, but even then the design is almost 70 years old? Random chance could almost come up with the same design
Contemporary to the shaker's no laws was written about design protection. Actually, most countries, including USA and other WTO signatories countries protects design as IP. The original design is protected as IP and belongs to Helmut Magg or his assigns. Please make distinction on Product protection and Design protection. This is not the same. More info : en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_design_right#United_States
Axel Sixtysix interesting stuff no doubt, but I don't think the Chinese would be bothered too much, neither would the importers or retailers if in made enough money, Helmut himself might also make a few coins out of it because if his design just remains unused it's surly an insult or a museum artifact
First, let me say great job. Second i think its great that you are even asking the question. Don't know the legal answer, but I think you should probably not share the files. You provided the how, that's enough.
interesting. I actually decided in the very beginning that I didn't want a drawer so that I wouldn't clutter things. I have a tendency to do so. this design would look nice with a slim drawer under the desktop though, wouldn't it?
I think that would be nice yes. Here are my ideas for that. 1. Place the front vertical cross piece horizontal. Either flush with the desktop or below where the drawer would be placed. This way you would not lose the support it provides. 2. Angle the front of the drawer to closely mimic the current angles of the side pieces. 3. If you were NOT going to use drawer hardware, try the tongue and groove method on the side of the drawer and interior of the desk to provide support for the drawer. (groove on the side of the drawer and tongue on the inside of the legs/side pieces) If you were to add drawers to this piece I believe it would make is significantly different enough to avoid difficulties in releasing your design.
Did you ever heart something of copyright and respecting authors/designers ? Copying a product and publish the plans is more than illegal. If it would be my product, i would make you more problems than you think.
Copy or inspired? copyright is 50 years after original authors death? (iirc) I see no issues in paying 'homage' to a design you like if your open and honest about it, and you have been. great production work on the video also.
I don't feel you improved the design. For your own use I think it is OK but I don't think you have the right to make someone else's design public domain.
Files or you didn't make it. Helmut did not make his files public. If you do and give him credit, you actually enhance his work. (obviously, that is a moral, not a legal assessment) although I would prefer this Table in a parametric form. I do this kind of stuff with openscad. let me know if you are interested in that. on the legal thingy: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geschmacksmuster www.gesetze-im-internet.de/geschmmg_2004/index.html
I learn intellectual property at college. This is not your design, it's too much inspired so sharing the files would be illegal except : 1. you have the right to do it from the owner of the rights, 2. you whait until 75 years afler the death of the designer so the design falls into public domain. Simple as that. So you'd rather copy Macintosh or Rhullmann. OR design an original which cannot be attributed to a copyrighted designer.
You can't share something you don't own. It's a basic principle of legality... Chinese copiers consciously ignore. While they sell mounted copies of apparels and other devices, they have not yet as far as I know, shared the slightest plans with details and quotes to their customers. You're going to put yourself in some trouble sharing plans to your viewers. Great job though.
50 year old original design is okay to copy, though I'd say your is inspired by, not copied. It would be as if I saw an Ansel Adams photograph and then mimicked it. Not everything is the same, and I'm perfectly fine with taking my own photograph that would be similar to his.
Look at anyone in the watch industry that has paid homage to the submariner. They even sell blatant copies with their own name and logo on it. Worse case scenario, you get a dmca takedown notice for copyrighted work although you are not trying to sell an exact copy or trying to brand this as an original. My opinion is you should have a clear conscience, but ianal.
I wouldn't distribute it just to avoid any potential for a legal issue. People can make their own files if they want a personal one, just like you did.
He says fender guitars (like genuine other brands are mostly counterfeit) but once again a guitar is a product, here this is a design. It is not the piece of furniture which is under IP but the design.
I personally am happy to hear you consider the moral aspect of this. Don't hear that very often any more. I do think that you did design it and build it, even though you "Copied" it off a picture in your memory. We as carpenters are often building things we have seen else where, then put our own spin on the design. I see things in homes that I love and incorporate them in my builds but never take credit for them as an original thought! I feel if you put the plans out there for the public, you just need to be honest and say this is not an original idea, but you loved to design you decided to build your own version. I would love to build one!! Thankyou!! Scott; Twin Cities Wood Foundry
Awesome! Love it! Looking forward to what people have to say about sharing the files!
thanks! should be interesting
Nice design and desk! Nothing wrong with being inspired by others work or designs. I built a jukebox of my own design but inspired by other mix of designs. It not a copy right violation of you didn't set out to totally copy and mass produce. You made enough changes to your liking and inspired.
I think it would fine. This is a tribute with modern joinery. Woodworking magazines publish such tribute designs all the time
I think if you’re having doubts that means you already know what the answer is. Had you made substantial changes, like moved the legs apart at the top or the shape of the sides, or added features that didn’t exist in the original, no problem.
I think the problem occurs when you charge for it, bringing into a commerce issue. OpenDesk also has a similar design, with no reference to Mr Magg. Thanks for the diligence on the 'origin' ! Looks great Caleb!
thanks!
what was your final decition? Very nice work!
By the way, in my country if you take your plans to the laser, they will copy it anyway
Anyone can "copy" the furniture (just as you did) just watching the finished one. What is the difference of doing it with the plans you extracted by your own?
If the plans (original or not) are not copyrighted, then you dont have any problems. This is the general idea, but it depends of the country.
In my opinion you should share it for the people who ask for it directly to you, then you decide.
My case is that I am not a computer designer, but really like the furniture, so that would come just fine to me.
Anyway, congrats for the excellent job and for your nice cat!
If it's common to leave the bottom edge then you should look for a shoulder plane(?) One that has a blade even with the bottom and rides over the edge. Like a round over or bevel only straight.
As for the plans, let me say Tiffany vs Tiffany style has been around for a hundred years.
How much would it have to change to make you comfortable? I mean it looks similar but distinctly different to me. But my opinion is sure to be different than other people's. So who's option counts?
i do not know about the usa, but over here in germany, every asset/idea is released to public domain automatically after 70 years. so even if you had copied the original one by one i really would not see an issue here.
however you are not going to monetize the release, aren't you? so all you really would do is "releasing a drawing" of an object nobody can buy anyways.
seems legit to me.
very good points. I did not plan to sell the files at all.
I think you should share the file in way that beginners to cnc and autodesk can refer to the file and make their own modifications and built upon your design.
I do like to help people learn, that's for sure
I'm the guy in the video. I'm also senior editor for Make. Who are you?
Morally you're fine! You cited your source and you gave credit to your inspiration. Legally? Who knows...
I think that its a perfect opportunity for people to try the same method as you did and consequently to NOT share the files. Make the whole idea to try to do this for yourself just like you did. This benefits everyone forcing people to learn how to copy a design and discover its inherent considered design features and decisions by having to do it for themselves learning fusion360 along the way as well.
great idea
I'd say a couple of things regarding the sharing of files:
1) If somebody else is profiting off of it (directly from his design) or selling copies, then I'd stay clear.
2) If you're not profiting , then there would be less of a point against you
3) If you want to be certain - ask him* or his family for permision.
Nice build, your free to borrow and copy as much as you like, just don't steal.
The background audio was at a perfect level today and the voice was simple to hear.
For my cnc router projects I have also found a oscillating tool such as the dremel multi-max with a thin flat blade works great for cutting tabs to separate from larger piece. Then a quick pass on router table with a flush trim bit removes the rest of tab and leaves a nice clean edge.
haha, I made the background music in garage band on an old broken iphone. I knew someone would comment.
Caleb Kraft ha. I forgot all about that program. Had to uninstall it when I had a 16gb phone and needed that space
How about a chisel? If your toolpathing is correct that's all you should need
Well, honestly, I suggest you ask a copyright attorney or talk to Make attorneys. They do have a magazine division right?
That is the only way you are going to find out for sure if there is any legal issues in sharing the files you created.
You can also contact the publisher of book or magazine you were looking at and ask them their opinion on the matter.
You could pull the book back out and check the overall angles and design to see what you did differently than the original.
My personal opinion is that you own the copy right to the plans you created, even though the work was inspired by a picture you looked at, but talking to an attorney is the safest way to go.
This isn't really a grey area. Physical objects are protected by Patent Law. If they have not patented the design, then you are free to do as you wish. You could even sell these desks, if you wanted. If a patent was filed, then you couldn't sell them. You could probably still distribute the CNC files with a clear conscience, though. If a patent exists, then the entire design is a matter of public record.
About sharing the files: some type makers have taken inspiration from old typefaces to make their own similar typeface. I'd figure it's like that.
I'd say you are good to go as far as sharing it goes, you obviously did not measure it out millimeter by millimeter and replcate that, so it is your design, you did the full amount of work to make it happen, so it is yours.
As many others also mention - as long as you don't sell the product your are fine. I'm personally against patents since the sales pitch "the little inventor's protection against the big bullies" is not really true. Patents are really expensive to buy and enforce - so it's mainly for the big companies to keep out competition. It also has the negative effect that the Monopoly holder don't optimize product and keep fair prices.
One other really important thing is that ideas aren't as unique as people pretend they are. Most commonly they are inspired from other work - could be in another industry.
As long as you not selling it I think you will be fine.
yes, considering giving away the plans
you're both wrong, this is illegal.
No it's not
sk8rdad the original design is not in public domain so you can't diffuse a copy by any ways. Redesign a piece does not gives you any right. Nothing belongs to the copyist. You even dont' have the right to make a copy. Diffusing plans to help people to make their own copy of an original design is a huge prejudice to the owner of the rights. As you should know furniture editors pays a lot to have the right to produce a piece, even if the designer passed away. This is not a product, this is a design so it is covered by international laws about intellectual property. The copy does not need to be perfect in manufacturing or proportions, as far as it's recognised as mostly similar to the original desing it's conidered as a copy, not a new design. Until the original design falls into the public domain 75 years after the designer death, you can't copy or diffuse anything about the original design. Simple as that.
There's two prejudices a tribunal may consider : a financial prejudice and a moral prejudice. This is serious.
There is always one person who needs to be the internet lawyer er I mean troll.
I'm not a lawyer and have no opinion as to whether it would be legal, but you asked whether it would be moral. I believe that it would be moral with attribution given to the design that inspired yours - just as you did in this video. I see people sharing their piano arrangements of popular songs on UA-cam frequently. I would think this would be similar to that. I'm considering a riff on your design to make a stand for my piano keyboard.
Hey Caleb, great re-design you have here! Curious, do you think it would be possible to break up this file so it can be cut on the average woodworker's cnc (approx 32"x32" cut area)?
I don't know about the legality, the other desk producer might have to prove that it's an original design. I think sharing it would be great, I'd buy the plans, also for those shelves. Good work.
what shelves? the ones behind me while I'm talking? they came with the house but I spent a while studying them recently because I want to build more to match.
Yes, those. I dont know whether this reply landed in the right place, but those are nice shelves.
It is inspiration. Many things look alike and obviously someone was inspired by a previous design.
when does something cross over from inspiration to a copy?
I never knew that cats loved mid century modern so much.
they're nuts for it. The dogs seem to like a more victorian style though.
I'd say it's morally fine so long as it's under the creative commons license, I would see it as allowing people to make their own piece of history (recreating something not available anymore) If it were still in production by the designer you might run into legal issues, but that's not the case.
good point. I wanted to reach out to Helmut Magg for his thoughts, but he has passed away. I didn't bother contacting any estate as their opinion would largely be more focused on selling things.
Even if you licenced it under, share alike, non commercial, you would be credited with making the design and you would be the one issuing the license. If you're struggling with the morals of it, you really need to figure out if the files are yours to do that with.
I know this is splitting hairs but, are you talking about the files of the desk? The files are probably pretty different than the original plans. I don't know but I doubt they used the type of CNC that you used back in the 50's. Could I not take these files and make it out of plexi, or some other material? That would use the same cut files but be a really different result.
there are legal implications, you must attribute the design to the original owner and if the design is licensed or has a copyright seek their permission to use or copy it, and if you spread the files without the owners permission, they could sue you for copyright infringement and seek damages from you or seek all profits associated from distributing the design.
If you are using a free version of F360- you should open source it. Carl Bass- Seems like the right thing to do (regarding free F360)
You created a model that’s inspired by his. Free... no problem. Selling them.... may want to avoid.
copyrights expire
ManCraftingTM sorry you're wrong mate. Because the design is protected not the product, this remake(?) is not an original but a counterfeiting. Ok to make your own "copy" in your garage like our host for personal use, but this is definitely not an original and you can't legally diffuse it by any ways.
It would never hold up in court, Axel. Somebody would have to extradite him first anyway. Drop the Smarmy European Devil's Advocate routine.
david esktorp, please stop talking about things you know nothing about. This is ridiculous and embarassing. USA is member of the WTO since 1995, so the laws and rules about IP are the same as other member countries. Please learn : www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/456368/IP_rights_in_USA.pdf
Axel Sixtysix asking people on the internet to stop talking about things they know nothing about is like asking people to be civil and polite on the internet. It’s not going to happen.
It's called iteration. Release for free and your good to go. Selling would be questionable.
can you iterate on someone elses design? I do agree, free is the way to go.
I think you are forgetting you are "profiting" from the design by using it to promote your "business". I'm fine if you create something yourself and give that away - no issue! Cheers, David.
It is derivative, but exquisitely so. Honestly, I think you’d only need to be concerned about sharing the files if the original were still being manufactured.
VERY nice desk Mr.! :)
thank you!
As long as there’s no profit from the sharing then you morally clean. I would like the files so that I could have our wood shop students build these desks for our schools.
Sharing wouldn't be an ethical issue unless you sell it, since you were inspired by it and made a very similar design.
I think you are safe if you put it out with a non-commercial restriction. If you feel strongly, do mention it is a 'reimagining' of 'give reference to origional piece and wood-artist'. If it would be out of copyright, and since you did not directly copy it, you can do with it as you will. Personally I would feel funny about claiming it as a totally independant work, but it is yours, do with it as you will.
It is a nice looking desk. That said, my take is that you are actively encouraging people to also copy the design. If you had just made the desk for yourself and not promoted it in any way is fine. Giving credit to the original creator was good, but the design is Helmut Magg's IP. Making the plans available is not a good idea (IMO). Thanks for asking. Cheers, David
The CNC installation is DIY or commercially available? a link pls?
I need that octopus on the shelf!!!
After tasting a very delicious proprietary soda flavor formulated by a big brand company, I managed to whip up a very similar tasting one at home and decided to share my recipe with the rest of the world for FREE and let everyone know where it was inspired from. How can this ever be morally or legally wrong in any way?
can you make portable table for study’s and the hight is nearly to ground ,like japanese style. i enjoy your video...... thanks
I absolutely could design one for floor sitting
Very nice job. Love the design. However as far a giving the files away for free, i would not. Any honest woodworkers would just make something close if they really wanted one in my opinion. I do not see many non-professional woodworking having a cnc, which leads to giving the files to professionals. I would think most professionals would not make it exactly but you never know. If someone really wants to make it, let them put in some work to make it.
Ideas should be freely exchanged and laws need to change to allow this
Seeing as how the original desk is no longer in production, there is no financial or other detriment to the original designer if you share the files. Of course it would be a nice gesture to give credit to the designer and maybe link to his wikipedia page too.
It seems like there is little chance that reproductions of the design will be mistaken for the original given the age difference, but even if someone bought the reproduction thinking it was the original, the designer would not make any money off the resale of his original furniture.
i think the chair is to tall for that desk, im right? how do you feel after a few hours working sitting there?
Ehh. I see the conundrum here. I think if you are ethically strained about it, that should be your proper litmus test. If it is tugging at your moral heart strings then avoid it.
I think if there's still a copyright on it, don't release the plans. If there's not, let 'em rip. Nice job on it, btw.
I don't think copyright covers furniture designs. I should probably research a bit.
I think it would be of poor form to profit off of an obvious copy however sharing it for free I do not feel is ethically wrong unless one of the following are true: The original creator/maker is selling plans through the same delivery for profit OR the design/product itself has some known trademark and/or patent. In this case, the only way someone could turkey leverage your CaD design is if they had the equipment Which one could argue already enables them to do what you’ve done.
You made the file ............Based on what you liked of his work. Lots of folks make stuff in styles they like.You are not claiming his work as your work? Right so if you sale your file or give it away free for others to use.He did not make the file .So you can do what you like with it.As long as you say it is your copy of his style.Wood workers make their own copy of styles they like all the time.
How much would a CNC machine like this cost?
Ragni Archize between 15000 to 35000 €
When it comes to Morality questions of whether or not to sell or release something that was copied/heavily influenced from someone else’s work, my view is if you are asking yourself the question, you’ve got your answer.
yes absolutely. it might be a different story if you could get your hands on one for less than $4,000 but design should be democratic and freeing these plans is the right thing to do. selling them would be less noble but as a designer myself i understand the inclination to be rewarded for one's efforts.
If there is some kind of existing copyright on this design and you sell your files, then, yes you could get in legal trouble. If you just GIVE the files away, no. Of course, this is such a simple design (one reason why it is so timeless) and a person with the skill (and tools) to build it probably could design it from scratch, like you did, and not need the files (plans).
FANTASTIC
It would be ok to share your files, if you mention/honor the original design in your description :)
that's a possibility
No this would not work. As photos, you cannot publish without the permission of the owner of the rights. Whatever you write or credit. The single alternative is if the design was open source (if reproduction is allowed) or public domain.
As long as you dont sell the plans for it, it should be fine for free release.
that seems to be the consensus
A lot of the responses concentrate on the question of selling it, of making money from the copy. In fact, copyright has nothing to do with profit or the exchange of money. When you create something and own the copyright to it, that means that you and only you have the right to copy it. No one else may make copies. It does not matter at all whether money is exchanged. It is the mere act of copying that is prohibited. If your own design is "sufficiently different" then you have the copyright for that design. The real question comes down to whether or not it's genuinely your own design or you really did copy the other design. And it may not matter whether you took actual dimensions from the original. If it's sufficiently similar, then you violated the copyright.
Also, there's a difference between copyright, which applies generally to creative WRITING, and patents, which apply to THINGS. You can have a Design Patent, which is what most likely protects that table design. But again, it has nothing to do with the exchange of money. If you make a table according to that other fellow's design, you're violating his patent, even if you only make it for yourself and never sell it.
Giving away the files you created on Fusion? Probably a patent violation. People USING those files to create their own tables? Probably a patent violation. Will you get sued by the patent owner? He certainly has the right to do so, since you do not have the right to copy his designs. But he "likely" will not unless (1) he finds out that you dis so and (2) he can somehow extract money from you. And that's the ONLY situation where money is involved.
Oh, and one other thing, if you create some "literary work", i.e. write something, then you automatically own the copyright to it, there's no need to register it with the Copyright Office, there's no submission or evaluation of it. If you create some design or object or process and want it protected by patent, then you absolutely do need to submit it to the Patent Office, have it evaluated, and have a patent issued for it. That table is not a literary work, so it's not covered by copyright. It MIGHT be covered by a patent. If it's not, then you're perfectly free to copy it, make it, make design files, share the files, and whatever else you might want to do with it.
As far as I know most copyrighted material is only protected by copyright laws for 50 years, then it becomes of public domain in most cases, except in very specific occasions, which I doubt this would be. In my opinion: you gave the original creator due credit, it is a derivative work after all, and you're not trying to profit from this, so I'm betting you'd be OK. Now, bring on the files and keep up the great work! ;)
I think that you would be OK to share your files, although yours is similar it's not exact so it is your design👍
Can't comment legally, but otherwise: yes it's okay because it's reverse engineered rather than copied, and the original design is as old as it is. I do think it would be proper to attribute the inspiration, though.
They make reproductions of antique furniture without any legal ramifications so I don't see why this would be a problem. Additionally, you did change some things.
Nice shop!
Release the files... sharing knowledge is better then safe guarding it.😃
I tend to agree
It's a cool desk!
I have no opinion on the legal matters though...
Yes, share the files, it’s yours and just looks similar to his.
I think if someone really wants a desk like that, they can go ahead and sweat over it. Great job on the desk
since you're not selling it, and are acknowledging and giving credit, i believe it to be morally ok, legally i have no idea
As long as your giving credit to the original designer and not making money off it.
Anthony Burke sorry you're wrong. Like singing a copyright song under your shower, you can make a copy of a design in your garage. But, except in some open source licensing or public domain, crediting the autor does not allows you to diffuse plans of a design which is not yours.
lets try it out you give me the plans and we see what happens
I wonder if there is anyone holding rights to his designs today that may object? Otherwise release under a creative commons license seems appropriate.
Not sure, I did fine one for sale for $4,700
Fiat 500 car now has many ' look alikes' Shaker ' style ' furniture sold everywhere, ok this is more specific, but is it even possible to patent a ' style '?
Free Saxon A Fiat 500 is a product, You can make an origimal product inspired by the Fiat 500, but your remake should be far enough or this is counterfeiting. The desk, before beeing a product made by a furniture editor or manufacturer is initially a design and the intellectual property of the designer.
There's designers at Fiat's but they are employees, their work are not under individual IP, like it is for designers, artists or architects. It's a different thing.
Axel Sixtysix ..........Well it's not that simple, car designs are often designed by one individual, the British mini car is an example, some even carry a badge with the designers name ( itlalian, french German cars) with regards to cars it's the logo and badging, brand name that is definitely a no go. You can't claim a look, angle or style, it's the label, or if you try to sell it as the real item. I think this case is more applicable to shaker style furniture. Of course if large scale production of this table were to be considered perhaps legal advice might be an idea, but even then the design is almost 70 years old? Random chance could almost come up with the same design
Contemporary to the shaker's no laws was written about design protection. Actually, most countries, including USA and other WTO signatories countries protects design as IP. The original design is protected as IP and belongs to Helmut Magg or his assigns. Please make distinction on Product protection and Design protection. This is not the same. More info : en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_design_right#United_States
Axel Sixtysix interesting stuff no doubt, but I don't think the Chinese would be bothered too much, neither would the importers or retailers if in made enough money, Helmut himself might also make a few coins out of it because if his design just remains unused it's surly an insult or a museum artifact
Share it and then also give credit to the inspiration that drove the design...
First, let me say great job. Second i think its great that you are even asking the question. Don't know the legal answer, but I think you should probably not share the files. You provided the how, that's enough.
I think there has only been one other person who has suggested I not share the files so far. It has been interesting hearing the opinions.
Keep it....We have enough Edisons in history. Awesome desk though.
I'd like the desk more if it had a drawer
interesting. I actually decided in the very beginning that I didn't want a drawer so that I wouldn't clutter things. I have a tendency to do so. this design would look nice with a slim drawer under the desktop though, wouldn't it?
I think that would be nice yes. Here are my ideas for that.
1. Place the front vertical cross piece horizontal. Either flush with the desktop or below where the drawer would be placed. This way you would not lose the support it provides.
2. Angle the front of the drawer to closely mimic the current angles of the side pieces.
3. If you were NOT going to use drawer hardware, try the tongue and groove method on the side of the drawer and interior of the desk to provide support for the drawer. (groove on the side of the drawer and tongue on the inside of the legs/side pieces)
If you were to add drawers to this piece I believe it would make is significantly different enough to avoid difficulties in releasing your design.
It’s not 100% copy of the original. You WERE inspired by the original. If you don’t make money from it, you should be fine.
Did you ever heart something of copyright and respecting authors/designers ? Copying a product and publish the plans is more than illegal. If it would be my product, i would make you more problems than you think.
Epic!
I would share.. I'm pretty sure he did use a CNC
So, can you make me one and mail it?
haha, in theory yes, but then we're back to the question of whether or not mine is ethical
It's Defiantly not a copy! It is an inspired piece
Copy or inspired? copyright is 50 years after original authors death? (iirc)
I see no issues in paying 'homage' to a design you like if your open and honest about it, and you have been.
great production work on the video also.
thanks!
Tudo que um humano faz se torna parte da humanidade
Sheppard Fairy comes to mind... Watch his latest movie, then make your decision, lol.
I don't feel you improved the design. For your own use I think it is OK but I don't think you have the right to make someone else's design public domain.
Files or you didn't make it.
Helmut did not make his files public. If you do and give him credit, you actually enhance his work. (obviously, that is a moral, not a legal assessment)
although I would prefer this Table in a parametric form.
I do this kind of stuff with openscad. let me know if you are interested in that.
on the legal thingy:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geschmacksmuster
www.gesetze-im-internet.de/geschmmg_2004/index.html
Share the files? You don't need to. I'll just screen shot your video and make them, and sell them. :p
go for it!
I learn intellectual property at college. This is not your design, it's too much inspired so sharing the files would be illegal except : 1. you have the right to do it from the owner of the rights, 2. you whait until 75 years afler the death of the designer so the design falls into public domain. Simple as that.
So you'd rather copy Macintosh or Rhullmann. OR design an original which cannot be attributed to a copyrighted designer.
You can't share something you don't own. It's a basic principle of legality... Chinese copiers consciously ignore. While they sell mounted copies of apparels and other devices, they have not yet as far as I know, shared the slightest plans with details and quotes to their customers. You're going to put yourself in some trouble sharing plans to your viewers. Great job though.
Go with your gut.
Ver y nice
50 year old original design is okay to copy, though I'd say your is inspired by, not copied. It would be as if I saw an Ansel Adams photograph and then mimicked it. Not everything is the same, and I'm perfectly fine with taking my own photograph that would be similar to his.
Share them.
Look at anyone in the watch industry that has paid homage to the submariner. They even sell blatant copies with their own name and logo on it. Worse case scenario, you get a dmca takedown notice for copyrighted work although you are not trying to sell an exact copy or trying to brand this as an original. My opinion is you should have a clear conscience, but ianal.
I wouldn't distribute it just to avoid any potential for a legal issue. People can make their own files if they want a personal one, just like you did.
that is pretty true.
Love standing desk_!-!! Have any DIYer know about DIY SmartDesk Kit from ►Autonomous?
cool
Agree with everyone else... just don’t sell it
2 words: Fender Guitars.
I don't understand what you are saying. sorry
He says fender guitars (like genuine other brands are mostly counterfeit) but once again a guitar is a product, here this is a design. It is not the piece of furniture which is under IP but the design.