Ethics of reselling plans for a custom design?

[fish]

edit

[RWL]

Don't know what your original contract called for, but usually the architect owns the documents for his/her projects. You may work for others, but the documents are merely provided to them as part of the service.

Do the orignal owners feel strongly about being "exclusive"? Even a change of location which is "non-competitive" with them may bother them.

Your point about needing changes is most valid, and you would be improperly serving the new clients if those changes were not made.

Would advise against passing along documents with name of original owners on them.

Understand need for money, but modifications are needed, as I see it, both for the names and the climatic changes.

[fish]

edit

[Orkblork]

I think you should define what you think is the RIGHT way to handle the situation and put a price on that, rather than seeing how far you can bend to accommodate this couple's request. IMHO, this would mean telling the couple that you design houses specific to their users and their site, that there are a thousand reasons why an old design transferred to a new site won't work, and that you would be happy to work with them just as you worked with the previous couple. In fact, I think you should explain to them that a major reason they like the existing house is that it responded specifically to the design problem of THAT site and THAT couple -- even if they do not recognize that as their basis for liking it. In fact, if the built house design had been recycled from a past project, it is perhaps unlikely that they would have liked it enough to have approached you!

All that said, sophistication levels vary greatly, and they may lack the ability to have such a conversation.

BTW, years ago I worked for a home designer (not an architect) who put every house he designed into a pile of stock plans, which he then allowed new clients to browse through and purchase cheaply. This is a horrible way to make architecture, but as far as I know it is legally permissible.

[fish]

edit

[RWL]

How much were you paid for the orignal design? When?

Now take that price, and add an inflation factor of 5-8% per year since, and see how much you come up with.

Might be too much for the new folks, then you are out but ethical[?]

If you are as much in need as you note, then negotiate from the price you
come up with, to see what the new folks will go with.

If they agree, then I'd tell the oringal owner, being sure to explain that the new use is legal, why you are doing it, and that it is not competitive with them [now you're more ethical]

[RWL]

Oh-- and make sure this is a fee for re-use of the drawings, not for the sale of or change of ownership of the drawings.

Reduce this information to writing-- i.e., a formal contract

Most important that you retain owenrship.

[Orkblork]

Fish, thanks for responding to my comments. Prostituting oneself is a fact of life for many in the architecture profession, at least until (hopefully) one gets to the point in his career where he can do things the way he believes right.

That said -- and I hope you will forgive my moralizing -- I believe there is a difference between momentarily selling oneself to subsist (e.g., pay the rent) versus doing it to raise cash for a pet project. It seems in your case that it is more the latter example, although I may have misunderstood. IMHO, you seem to be seeking external permission to do something that you really are not comfortable doing. I think there is a far greater price to pay for that in the future... At the very least, it means you didn't put a stake in the ground as to how you believe an architect should work, and therfore you will face the same dilemma again in the future, and you won't have gained the benefit of having previously practiced holding your ground.

Beyond that, I suspect that when an architect willingly compromises his principles and waits for a future opportunity to be principled, he smells to other potential clients like an unprincipled architect. Hence, he grows invisible to those who WANT to hire a principled architect. Long story short, having principles doesn't mean holding them in abeyance until a more convenient opportunity arises.

Again, I apologize if this is heavy-handed. But so many architects today sell out their principles in order to cash a check, I tend to get on my soap box rather quickly. I would appreciate any additional comments you have.

[fish]

edit

[fish]

edit

[RWL]

Isn't it constantly amzaing at how the human animal can miss the bigger points of communication, and yet pick up on those small issues and words that favor their point of view!