Copyright Designs? - CoasterBuzz

This may be a stupid question that has been asked before, but I am not sure. Do coaster manufactures copyright their designs? Say B&M wanted to make a coaster out of the SLC layout, could they? Is this something that varries from company to company?

Ooh an "Intellectual Property" question. I *guess* I'm the resident expert here (though really I dont know schitt either :))

Umm, first off, I dont think a "copyright" is what they would seek for protection. As best I could tell, they would have to apply for a "Design Patent". I dont know of any offhand, and since I'm not at work, I cannot readily check. But I *can* say that B&M do not have any "Design Patents".

However, I think it would be really short sighted for a coaster company to do such a thing. "Design Patent" are basically just drawings or snapshots of the product. Let's assume en arguendo that Vekoma *did* have a "Design Patent" on their SLCs. It would be quite easy for B&M to 'adapt' their version of the layout in such a way to avoid infringing on the "Design Patent". For example instead of that little 'dip & rise' into the brake run they could put in an S turn. Then the "Design Patent" would hold no jursidiction.

Moreover, seeing as though Maurer-Sohne, Arrow and Mack all have wild mice that are virtually identical, I think coaster companies dont even bother....
jeremy

-------------
"To get into this head of mine, would take a monkey-wrench, and a lot of wine" Res How I Do

I believe the law is some to the effect of "as long as it's different enough there's not an issue". This is why B&M was able to offer a flying coaster a few years after Vekoma - they changed Vekoma's design enough, adapted the technology in their own unique way enough to make it a non-issue. I do think the technology used is patented (in fact many people have referred to coaster technology patents on coasterbuzz) - however I'm not sure a track layout could be and even if it was, like Jeremy said, you'd just have to change one element slightly to make a different layout.

Bottom line if someone directly used a competitor's technology you can bet it'd be an issue but if they take the idea and adapt it in a way to make it "their own" then there's really nothing anyone can do about it.

-----------------
www.coasterimage.com
Dorney Park visits in 2002: 15

I'm surprised that layouts can be copied and sold to other parks outside of a franchise. This has happened with Raptor, and Mantis (but Chang is mirrored with an extra corkscrew instead of a spaghetti bowl at the end.

-----------------
LocoBazooka--Sevendust, Nonpoint, Stereo Vent, Mushroomhead
Korn Tour (With no name)--Korn, Puddle of Mudd, Deadsy

Well, the thing is, is well, if a park wants a ride, they get it. Cedar Fair could call up Intamin one day, and say, we want a SROS @ SFNE clone installed at Michigan's Adventure. Intamin would do it too, the main reason for parks using a design that works, is well, its ALOT cheaper, there isn't any R&D to it, Intamin just calls up their steel manufacturer, and tells them they need to have a mirror of say Millennium Force, and they send the plans for the supports over, and the coaster is produced, at a lower cost to the park, and you have a ride, that you know will do well, since the ride has been installed once already.

-----------------
Nessy: Ride of Steel
Webmaster of Digital Coaster - http://digital-coaster.com

Nessy, I know all about clones. I am saying that two different companys use the same design to build a coaster using the same layout. But it has been explained pretty well, thanks for the response everybody!

CPgenius said:
I'm surprised that layouts can be copied and sold to other parks outside of a franchise. This has happened with Raptor, and Mantis (but Chang is mirrored with an extra corkscrew instead of a spaghetti bowl at the end.

I think it's because the park (Cedar Point) doesn't own the design, the designer does (B&M) - I'd imagine they can do whatever they want with their designs. Perhaps there is some clause in the purchase to prevent this. If so then technically a mirrored clone would be a sneaky little way around this sort of clause.'

Anyone know more about that sort of situation?

-----------------
www.coasterimage.com
Dorney Park visits in 2002: 15

Lord Gonchar, I know that the companies own the designs, but the part that surprised me wasn't that they sold a clone out of franchise, but that the park didn't submit a clause into the contract that the ride couldn't be cloned out od franchise. In a business sense, if you build the best, wouldn't you try to prevent it from being cloned so someone else couldn't buy one of the same ride for less money? I should have been more specific...

-----------------
LocoBazooka--Sevendust, Nonpoint, Stereo Vent, Mushroomhead
Korn Tour (With no name)--Korn, Puddle of Mudd, Deadsy

Correct me *if* I’m wrong, I believe that the Raptor "clone" has actually slightly larger dimensions.

-----------------
The Other Siebert

What I don't understand is how 4-across seating can be copyrighted (by B&M). Is that actually true, or just a rumor?

If so, what is to stop someone from copyrighting 2-across seating? Its all so strange...

B&M don't hold the copyright for four across seating in its entirety. Nor can anyone. They can however copyright their train design and parts of their trains that are specific and original.

-----------------
The Other Siebert

Well Vekoma has used the 4 across seating, and technically the 4D does to...

-----------------
Im the #1 Canobie Lake Park Fan!!!These are my top 3 coasters:
1. S:RoS @ SFNE 2. Yankee Cannonball 3. Cyclone/B:TDK