Liability and Intellectual Property with BIM

[crl_arch]

I've been wondering about something recently and hoping to get some disucssion/responses for this. Traditionally, architects would produce drawings that are stamped and have limited ability for others to access, revise, etc. since they are intellectual property and the architect is then liable for the information shown on the drawings. It seems to me with BIM, that the model is created by the architect and engineers and then gets passed down to the contractor and then passed on to the owner. So it seems that the architect and his team put forth all the effort and expense of creating/producing the model (intellectual property) and then it just gets passed on to be used by others. So, I suppose my question is: how to architects maintain rightful liability as well as intellectual property of their services with BIM. It just seems like the value of the architect gets lost in BIM. What do you guys think?

[cliff collins]

I think this issue is best left to an up-to-speed digital intellectual property law
attorney, the Principals of the firm, and with strong consideration of the latest
AIA documents/contracts which relate to BIM and IPD.

cheers.......

[crl_arch]

Don't you think we as architects are losing out at all here? Right now, I'm more playing devil's advocate, but there's something about BIM that gives me the impression that we will be losing out on a component of our services that makes us unique and valuable to the process. The legal matters don't so much matter to me, its more core about who we are as architects. Like BIM will convert our role in the process into somehting that's not so desirable, not as unique and valuable. Does that make sense?

[robert768019]

I've been wondering about something recently and hoping to get some disucssion/responses for this. Traditionally, architects would produce drawings that are stamped and have limited ability for others to access, revise, etc. since they are intellectual property and the architect is then liable for the information shown on the drawings. It seems to me with BIM, that the model is created by the architect and engineers and then gets passed down to the contractor and then passed on to the owner. So it seems that the architect and his team put forth all the effort and expense of creating/producing the model (intellectual property) and then it just gets passed on to be used by others. So, I suppose my question is: how to architects maintain rightful liability as well as intellectual property of their services with BIM. It just seems like the value of the architect gets lost in BIM. What do you guys think?

I'm not sure thats quite correct, it depends very much on your fee agreement with your client.
For me the use of BIM software is very much a means to an end and the client has no right to use it beyond the initial project. Certainly I avoid giving the client the actual files unless that was part of the initial agreement. If the agreement does require you to hand over the files then, in Australia at least, they can be issued as uncontrolled documents, after all, you don't know what they are going to do with it after. Its been argued that just by opening a file on a computer with a version of a program different to that on which it was created fundamentally changes the file and can't be used to acertain liability. I think people on this forum might agree to that given that the file changes on their own computers sometimes quite randomly!

[Scott Womack]

HAving worked on Projects for a corporate client in the US required the Revit model to be turned over (In fact the initial floor planning from the client is delivered to the Architect in Revit to start the project from). We simply reloaded a version of the titleblock family at the end of the project that has certain information missing, beyond the seal/ signature. We also deliver a set of PDF's with electronic signatures, and the Unchangeable item set in Adobeacrobat Professional. In a couple of cases, rereloaded a couple of families that had additional information the firm developed into the project, prior to transmission as well.

[crl_arch]

Yes, it seems that if we hand over the file, we're giving them all of the details, drawings, etc. that we have developed. We've run itno this with ACad as well, but have been able to simply send PDFs instead fo the CAD files. Some clients want the whole set back in .dwg format, but we are unwililng to send them our details, notes, etc. that they could turn around and use on other projects that we're not involved in. With Revit, it sounds like it would be more difficult to hang onto the propreiatery items and pass on the stuff that we don't care about sharing. Thanks, Scott, for your input. Has anyone else had to figure out a workaround to maintain ownership of the Revit model and/or drawings?

[cliff collins]

If you have ever been in a deposition or arbitration hearing, or worse a court room
to testify, and have seen the amount of time and dollars spent just to demonstrate your innocence--you will change your point of view drastically when it comes to intellectual property.


Word to the wise--get legal counsel, THEN implement a delivery system for granting ownership of intellectual property ( BIM models, paper drawings, specs, PDFs, you name it.)

cheers...............................