Architect Denied Recovery of Copyright Infringer's Profits
In Bonner v Dawson, Download file, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed a jury verdict awarding an architect actual damages against a customer who copied his design without also awarding profits the infringer allegedly made from use of the design.
Under United States copyright law, architects and other design professionals have a copyright in their original building designs and drawings, which protects their design from unauthorized copying. In this case, the architect was hired to design a company's new customer service center. The architect's contract did not specify who owned the rights to his design, but each page of the design proposal bore his copyright seal. Without the architect's participation, the company later constructed an adjacent second building similar to the first for use as a computer center.
The architect sued the customer seeking an award of actual damages plus profits made by the customer. The Copyright Act contains an evidentiary presumption that the infringer's profits are equal to its gross revenues when the evidence shows some causal link between the infringement and the profit stream. The architect was entitled to the benefit of this presumption because he introduced evidence showing the profits sought derived from the building.
The Fourth Circuit found the architect was not entitled to judgment as a matter of law, however, because the infringer introduced evidence the profits were attributable to factors other than the copyrighted work. This evidence created an issue for the jury to decide, and the jury decided it against the architect.
The lesson-- rebuttable presumptions can be rebutted.
To assure protection of their copyrightable works, design professionals should register them. For a primer on the registration process, see this post at the Construction lawyers Blog published by Sabo & Zahn.