Is it OK resell my Survey?

[TeddyDiver]

Originally Posted by SURV69

So, in essense, a surveyor's work(and mistakes), will live on forever, along with the liability, through owner, after owner, after owner, until the boat is ground up or the surveyor dies?

Rubbish, after a while the boat isn't in the same condition the it was during the survey, actually the survey is valid only for the day it was done.. Thou most parties presume detoriation and such doesn't happen too fast so a survey has some merit for some time..

[SURV69]

Okay ... so the survey is dated and certified to certain "named", parties. I would think the results/opinion of the survey are equally limited.

I don't know this industry(marine surveying), but I would hope that if a surveyor performed a survey on Monday, that a request for a survey on Friday, would result in the surveyor visiting the boat a second time ... is that the industry standard?

Or does a marine surveyor generally take the lazy way out and simply regurgitate old information for less money?

[TeddyDiver]

Originally Posted by SURV69

I don't know this industry(marine surveying), but I would hope that if a surveyor performed a survey on Monday, that a request for a survey on Friday, would result in the surveyor visiting the boat a second time ... is that the industry standard?

Nope, but there's no liability just reputation in question.

[meirriba]

Originally Posted by Pelagic

Can you clarify.....what (Legally) is that responsibility?

To do my work with the diligently, use proper skill and reasonable care...
I can be sued if not, and carry professional indemnity insurance, which I would not need if the work can done with no responsibility at all.

The contract I give to a client specifies exactly the scope of my work, what shall I do and what I am responsible (or not) for. If I fail to do what I have contracted to do - you will have a legal claim against me.

I do not claim to find everything but you certainly will be entitled to sue me if I fail to see major issues that can reasonably be found by a professional person within the scope of time allocated for the survey.

It would be similar to any hired professional - what is the responsibility of a lawyer or a CPA?

BUT - this is not the issue of the thread. The issue is the right to re-sell the report, which I do not forbid in my contract with the client.

[meirriba]

Originally Posted by SURV69

Okay ... so the survey is dated and certified to certain "named", parties. I would think the results/opinion of the survey are equally limited.

I don't know this industry(marine surveying), but I would hope that if a surveyor performed a survey on Monday, that a request for a survey on Friday, would result in the surveyor visiting the boat a second time ... is that the industry standard?

Or does a marine surveyor generally take the lazy way out and simply regurgitate old information for less money?

Nonsense questions will get nonsensical answers...
No one will ask for a survey within one week period of time if he has access to the week-old survey (and nothing important happened to the vessel in between).
For instance, I did a full survey of a boat for a guy who commissioned a full survey of the same vessel a year ago (previous survey was done by a different surveyor). The boat spent the year in a marina and belongs to a marine professional who lives on board.
I advised the client that he does not need a new survey. The client said that he wants a new survey anyway - so I prepared one (without seeing the old report). Spent two and a half days for survey and report.
This means that a case should be judged upon its circumstances.

[dwoodall]

It might also be worth noting that copyright law is in enforced unilaterially. That is you don't have to agree to the copyright. Your posession of the copyright material is recognition of the copyright. It is not different from any other copyrighted material in that regard. Yes, you may give it away or resell unless there are local prohibitions against it. You may not retain a copy however.

If you don't think there are aren't armies of lawyers that enforce this, then look up ASCAP, BMI, and the Harry Fox Corporation. (All companies in the music publishing business). Coming at this from the music publishing side, those guys are ruthless in their protection of copyright material. For example, Joe's Watering Hole, has to have a contract with BMI to play the juke box or radio in their bar or face the BMI lawyers. This also extends to live bands performing covers of copyright materials. The fees are not cheap and based on an percentage of the income the bar makes, as determined by BMI, not the IRS, not your accountant, not your mother-in-law doing the books. Interestingly, and not at all relevannt to this dicussion, BMI does this by simply counting the the number of barstools, tables and chairs you have then presents you with a bill. More small bars are shut down over BMI issues that anything else I know of. One trend we see locally, a more and more bars not allowing any cover bands, over this reason. They have to perform original work. The house music is Indie bands that are willing to put their music in the public domain. (Incredibly stupid idea, IMHO).

Public lending libraries and the Library of Congress are specifically exempted from these laws.

The large rental companies like Netflix and Redbox have agreements with the distrubution companies to allow them to rent their products. Otherwise they would face the full wrath of the publishers. Similarly, Pandora and Spotify have agreements with BMI and ASCAP, which explains the incessant commercials or rather high subscription rates.

You want to record a cover of a song and put it on your next CD? Pay up to Harry Fox. Their fees are higher than most artists will make on the entire CD for just one song. (It's called mechanical licensing).

As a creative person, it infuriates me when someone steals and distributes my work. Violating copyright law is just like violating any other law as far as I am concerned. I am sure some of us remember the twelve million dollar settlement ASCAP got against some kid for putting all her music on a server and allowing her friends to access it. It was eventually settled for a lower value, but I bet her parents or someone is still paying that bill. It was in the hundred of thousands of dollars.

Sorry for the rant. Yes, you may give or sell the survey as long as you don't make a second copy. As soon as you have done that, you have violated the copyright laws. If I was the surveyer, and I got wind of you selling it and keeping a copy, or selliung multiple copies, I would have my lawyer pounding on your door the next morning. Whether surveyors would, or instead write it off to good will or accepted practices, I have no idea, but they would be in the right to do so.

Best of luck to you in selling your boat.
Doug

[SURV69]

Originally Posted by meirriba

Nonsense questions will get nonsensical answers...
No one will ask for a survey within one week period of time if he has access to the week-old survey (and nothing important happened to the vessel in between).
For instance, I did a full survey of a boat for a guy who commissioned a full survey of the same vessel a year ago (previous survey was done by a different surveyor). The boat spent the year in a marina and belongs to a marine professional who lives on board.
I advised the client that he does not need a new survey. The client said that he wants a new survey anyway - so I prepared one (without seeing the old report). Spent two and a half days for survey and report.
This means that a case should be judged upon its circumstances.

The time frame is COMPLETELY inconsequential ... it can be hours, days, years or decades ... the time frame is completely unimportant. The only important issue is that the various parties are artificially extending/expanding the original surveyor's findings/opinion ... who knows ... forever? ... potentially for everyone?

[farm sail]

Originally Posted by meirriba

Nonsense questions will get nonsensical answers...
No one will ask for a survey within one week period of time if he has access to the week-old survey (and nothing important happened to the vessel in between).

I can see the real possibility with a boat for sale of a person a prospective buyer backing out after their survey and another buyer unbeknownst to the problems found by the first surveyor commissions a second survey in a very short period of time. Maybe even from the same surveyor only a week down the road.

[PamlicoTraveler]

A survey is a "work for hire" product, meaning the time and the report were paid for. You didn't buy a license to view his/her work. You hired them to perform the job. It's yours.

[hellosailor]

"Copyright is vested with the author,"
Sorry, Mike. It ain't that simple. When there is a correspondence, as opposed to a copyrighted publication, both the author and recipient have reproduction rights. And further, there are other rights like "compilation copyright" which is how forums like this one have a right to sell "The Best of CF" and republish all of your postings in it--without your permission.
If I pay a surveyor or other person to give me a written work, that's also different again. It was his work--but it was his work product done for hire to me, and *I* own the copyrights, not him, unless there was a prior and mutually negotiated contract stating elsewise.


Sounds like a clever bit of foolishness where some surveyor posted something on the internet with no legal training and said "Hey, if we all do this they can stop re-suing our work and we'll all get richer faster!"


Ah, no.


Copyright is pretty simple, but no, it doesn't work that way. A survey is a "work for hire" and the author normally transfers over ALL rights and control to the party that hired them to do it. Surveyor, artist, whatever. Especially if he tries that crap "on delivery" instead of asking for it up front.

[Mike OReilly]

A work-for-hire contract is a specific form of work contract. It must be specifically specified in the work contract. As far as I know, surveyors do not traditionally work under those terms, so if that's what you want, then you better specify it in the contract. Commissioning a work does not mean you own it. Copyright can be transferred by contract.

Yes, copyright is this simple. You create it and it's yours. There are exceptions, like employment contracts and work-for-hire arragements, but these are specific exceptions. The creator of a work is the first copyright owner.

HS, I don't know what you mean by "a correspondence". And "publication" happens when one other party receives the work.

I've spent much of my professional career fighting copyright theft. I've fought cases big and small, including being part of a seminal case heard by the Canadian Supreme Court (we won). So I know something about the law here. I think this specific thread is rather silly, but much of the "sell it now" comments illustrate how poorly too many people understand copyright and contract law.

Here's what is simple. You want to do something with someone else's work? Then ask them for permission.


Why go fast, when you can go slow

[hellosailor]

Bravo, Delancey.


Mike, if I have a printed survey report and I resell the report, how is that any different from me reselling my Picasso or my First Edition Superman Comic?


If copyright was as simple as you suggest, there must have been a lot of incompetent or corrupt underlings that did your client wrong before the Canadian Supreme Court got around to it.


Or perhaps the international nature of that, or the international variations in copyright law (including the US's late adoption of the Berne Convention) added somewhat to that?


Alexander Hamilton writes a letter to John Adams. Adams subsequently publishes it as part of his war memoirs. Guess what? Hamilton has no copyrights that would prevent that. The letter was sent to Adams, Adams has the rights to reproduce it. That's the way it always has been in the US.


And why the many emails ending with a "don't you are disclose this, if ..." are always such a laugh.

[TeddyDiver]

It's not a literacy work as understood in the definition of copyright. Instead it's a literal product of the findings which could be presented in many other forms as well, as vocabularly, as a drawing or video, whatever one prefers. As such it's resembles more a medical examination done for a person than an creatitive art or literature. Without the context of the specific boat it was done upon it has no value what so ever to nobody, never...

[MarinerJo]

I am so glad we don't have to do a survey on motor vehicles. Can you guys imagine
how much fun THAT would be?
After reading seventy three posts, I am still no closer to understanding the answer. You think my shopping list for the market are copyrighted too?

[farm sail]

Man how many days later and you guys are still talking about this. shouldn't you be out sailing or something?