4 ms·
Boat hulls and decks have specific laws which make them patentable. In 1988 Florida tried to make a law protecting boat hull designs and was shot down by the U
by jws 10y ago
Boat hulls and decks have specific laws which make them patentable.
In 1988 Florida tried to make a law protecting boat hull designs and was shot down by the US Supreme Court. Legislators got involved and so part of the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act includes protection of hull designs.
The rationale is: As a boat maker you have experts do a lot of very expensive work with thinking, simulation, real world modeling, building and testing full sized prototypes sweating all the little fiddly details. You finally stumble upon a good hull for some market. Then you spend dump truck loads of marketing money to convince people that it is a good hull for their boating needs. Success! So some clown then borrows one of the boats, makes a mold, and starts selling them cheaper with no R&D expenses and customers flock to him because they can tell its "just like" your boat.
Fun legal/programmer note: The law had to be fixed in 2009 because some of aforesaid clowns figured out that "hull" was defined to be the hull and the deck, so they were making molds, copying the hull and changing an irrelevant detail on the deck and counting as a different design. The 2009 law splits hull and deck, fixes a bunch of AND and OR logic, and closes that bug report on the law.
- mc32 10y agoSo that piques my curiosity, why don't car manufacturers go the same route? Apparently in some parts of the world some new car MFGs copy the look and feel of more expensive cars and other than complain a bit, the other manufacturers don't seem to enter into litigation with each other over design much --given the very similar designs some models have.
- Zak 10y agoProbably because car manufacturers haven't lobbied the relevant governments successfully. I suspect in many cases, the companies doing the copying are local and therefore have more influence over the relevant government than the foreign company that originated the design. We also see a lot of cases where the copying isn't really copying. The first generation of Lexus IS300, for example was a compact rear wheel drive luxury sedan with an inline six engine and sporty handling. Most car people reading that description would immediately think "BMW 3-series", and that was, of course the best-known entry in market the IS300 was intended for. It's hardly a clone though; no component was directly copied from BMW, the styling was clearly not intended to be mistaken for a BMW product, the engine was already used in other Toyota products, etc....
- Animats 10y ago"Why don't car manufacturers go the same route?" They've tried and failed. The third-party auto parts industry fights back, and has consumer backing.
- nradov 10y agoThe blatant car design copying is pretty much only done in China, and happens with tacit government approval. So lobbying and litigation are unlikely to be very effective there.
- 1gn1t10n 10y agoIt doesn't cease to amaze me how stupid IP laws can get. Better said, how much power money can buy you. As the parent is saying, this is nothing new. See here [1] how F1 cars have adapted to reduce drag. I simply cannot see how this is patentable given the prior art. [1]http://www.caranddriverthef1.com/formula1/blogs/angelesf1/aerodinamica-2-en-busca-la-eficiencia http://www.caranddriverthef1.com/formula1/blogs/angelesf1/ae... (ES, but look at the pictures)
- jloughry 10y agoYou just made my day with that comment. Just thinking about applying static analysis to the law makes me happy.