Copy Rights to a design being made

Hi Guys and I really welcome this site it's about time that something like this was done for us homebuilders of all designsJ
The question I have to impose on someone who has the answer is this:
I am about to order a foam mock-up of an aircraft that sorta looks like the Velocity but is totally new in many of the features, this will be a once off copy once I finish I will pass on what I have learn including the moulds, it will be carbon-Kevlar and honeycomb and like the Velocity it will be lighter. Could I get into copyright infringement with Velocity if I proceed with this build or should I keep the dimensions and change the shape so it doesn’t look like their Canard?
I could really use some real honest input getting real close to making the order for the mock-up foam for the master mold.
Thank you for your input

The only way to be sure would be to ask Velocity first. If this is a personal project, not competitive with Velocity's business, I doubt they would object - particularly as their own design was itself inspired by the work of Burt Rutan. If they object to your project, you'd probably want to take some professional advice.

Oh no this is strictly personal project, but I am willing to share all I have learn with Velocity since I am sure they would like to Pressurized one of their models in the future, also I want to lighten their design but going with Carbon/Kevlar also I am changing some of the dimensions and location of landing gear to outside of the wing away from the prop line as it is in the Velocity major changes to the design in many ways. Improving on a already great design.

It really depends on how much you're truly "copying" the Velocity design. Just because you design a four-seat canard aircraft doesn't mean it's a copy of a Velocity. A layman might look at a Piper Cherokee and a Beech Musketeer and think they are copies of one another, but of course they aren't. A Velocity looks a lot like a Cozy, a lot like an SQ-2000. Your design could be in that family without being a copy of a Velocity.

The devil would be in the details. If you copy truly Velocity-unique features, such as the doors, you might be in a grayer area.

Copyright/patent infringement is a mine field of extraordinary complexity. Inspired by is great for hangar talk. But if it is close enough for you to raise the issue, I would suggest that you contact a patent attorney in your area. In my thirty years of legal practice, I have always referred such issues to patent attorneys; they are a special breed. For possibly a few hundred dollars they may be able to save you thousands if litigation is initiated. There is a tremendous amount of litigation in this area of the law. A consultation would provide either peace of mind or a reason to do something different.

The only airplane I know of that was patented was the McDonnell-Douglas DC-10. Using the phase "looks like" is what you need to avoid. That can get you a takedown notice. A patent lawyer will do a search for similar technology, though until Google that might be quite weak. (about $250 in 1969)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2ndsegment

The only airplane I know of that was patented was the McDonnell-Douglas DC-10.

---

There was a patent on a flying machine back in 1906 by two obscure brothers.......

A "Design Patent" can be used to protect a particular appearance. They've been used on a number of aircraft.

IIRC, Barnaby has a Design Patent on the Facetmobile. Seem to recall he invoked it on a company selling RC versions of the plane without his permission. Couldn't find it, but did find another of his Design Patents on an aircraft design....

https://patents.google.com/patent/USD365545S/en

You'll note it refers to "The ornamental design for an airplane, as shown and described. "
Attachment 8374
Ron Wanttaja

That’s too funny. Enforcing patent rights on a design of one and I don’t think it’s even flown since it’s crash. Not sure it was worth the effort and cost to acquire a patent...it doesn’t appear to have any appeal that would drive financial or technical demand. I guess it looks good on a resumé though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Airmutt

That’s too funny. Enforcing patent rights on a design of one and I don’t think it’s even flown since it’s crash. Not sure it was worth the effort and cost to acquire a patent...it doesn’t appear to have any appeal that would drive financial or technical demand. I guess it looks good on a resumé though.

---

I think once you're familiar with the process (and Barnaby has a number of patents) it's not that onerous. Guys with a lot of brain cells (and Barnaby Wainfan certainly qualifies) like to protect the process of their cogitation.

BTW, for those who haven't heard, EAA Chapter 292 in Independence, Oregon is building a new Facetmobile with Barnaby's blessing. They just had the first engine run.

https://www.eaa292.org/fmx-4

https://static.wixstatic.com/media/f...358d81~mv2.jpg

Ron Wanttaja

I hold a aircraft related Design Patent... In general, a Design Patent
protects the appearance of an item regardless of how it works, whereas
a Utility Patent protects the way an item works regardless of what it
looks like... Broadly speaking Copyright can be used for almost any
artistic or written creation... either way I recommend Nolo's book...
be sure to buy the most up to date version due to changes to our laws...

Attachment 8378

Design patent is more than "how it looks." It covers specific ornamentations. You can get a design patent, but what it protects is quite limited in scope.

Curtiss: It's a whole new thing - I call it the aileron. The Wright Brothers can pound sand.

Wright Brothers: It's the same thing we did with wing warping.

(Lawyers go crazy)

I'm not a Lawyer but as an inventor and Patent holder myself I'm in the Wrights corner...

In 1903 the Wrights applied for a patent not chiefly on wing warping
but more broadly to provide means for maintaining or restoring the
equilibrium or lateral balance of the apparatus...

Quote:
"The object of our invention are to provide means for maintaining or
restoring the equilibrium or lateral balance of the apparatus, to
provide means for guiding the machine both vertically and horizontally
and to provide a structure combining lightness, strength, convenience
of construction, and certain other advantages which will hereinafter
appear."

1906 Patent 821,393 Flying Machine was awarded to the Wrights...

The patent's importance lies in its claim of a new and useful method
of controlling a flying machine, powered or not. The technique of
wing-warping is described, but the patent explicitly states that other
methods instead of wing-warping could be used for adjusting the outer
portions of a machine's wings to different angles on the right and
left sides to achieve lateral roll control.The concept of lateral
control was basic to nearly all airplane designs. Without it they
generally could not be easily or safely controlled in flight.


Between 1904 and 1907 the Wright Brothers were the *only* humans on
this planet up in the air flying on a daily bases... they were up to
the duration of 1.2 hours and could fly figure 8s... true masters of 3
axis control flight which inspired Curtiss to have a go...

1908 Curtiss aileron equipped June Bug flew 5,080 ft in a straight
line to win the Scientific American Trophy and its $2,500 prize

In 1908, the Wrights warned Glenn Curtiss not to infringe their patent
by profiting from flying or selling aircraft that used ailerons
(French for little wing) because they believed whether lateral balance
was by means of wing warp or hinged aileron it was covered by their
broad interpretation. US courts initially ruled in favor of the
Wrights that ailerons were covered by their Patent...

Glen Curtiss holds 72 patents... one champions the aileron...

1909 Bleriot bought into the Wright Brothers lateral control patent
and crossed the English channel with his model 11 winning a £1,000
(equivalent to £115,000 in 2018) prize awarded by the Daily Mail.

Wright Patent that opended the world to the possibility of control flight...
Attachment 8382

1904 Wright Flyer Huffman Prairie...
Attachment 8383

1908 aileron equipped June Bug...
Attachment 8384

https://www.nytimes.com/1972/04/29/a...ment-of-3.html

I have the Wright Brothers work in ebook form as well as their licensing of the Hispano-Suiza V-8. What you inspired me to seach out is "Birdflight as a basis of Aviation" by their hero Otto Lilienthal. It has their gliders in the preface and then what I wanted for my own work with derivatives and equations, actual analysis of how much work it takes for a bird to fly. As the flurry of activity at Douglas Long Beach died down in the early 70's I tried to sell my house and move to Goettingen, Germany and study at a Hochschule or Universität for an advanced degree just to experience the atmosphere that Euler, and Bernoulli and Lomenosov created in. That was then looking for fundamentals. Now I am here for a more practical form.