Making Wood Plans available

"Reverse engineering" has ALWAYS been done - is still being done.

Mom in her mid 50s finally came to a life situation where she could afford most anything she wanted - and she wanted a "schoolhouse clock" in the traditional pattern. So she went to several antique dealers looking for a clock.

Which after a short search she found a clock at a price she liked.

Brought home and set in motion the clock did VERY well at keeping time and being wound every 7th day - a traditional motion in that clock.

Or so we all thought. It was an original clock bought from an antique dealer wasn't it?

After Mom's passing I opened the clock and removed the face for lubrication. I found what looked like the usual Ansonia brassworks inside. But instead of the usual stamped clockworks, stamped large on the brass plates was "Ming Tay Co."

Those crafty chinese...the clock was a FAKE.

Mom never knew. None of the rest of us knew either. The clock was a GOOD fake. Maybe an EXCELLENT fake as the family prides itself on it's business acumen...

Or maybe those Chinese ARE smarter than us...

There will ALWAYS be those who will take your idea and reverse engineer it.

As to the Model A Wood Plans, their duplication cost is minimal compared to a clockworks or even the wooden parts which such plans might allow to be made.

But the key to the problem is stated above - the duplication cost of the wooden parts is greater than the plans. And this mobilization cost for making credible wooden parts is one's protection against infringement.

In the case of the Ming Tay clock, the Chinese mobilization cost to duplicate a 19th century schoolhouse clock was low enough to still be profitable.

So as there is little or no "intellectual property right" for reverse engineered wood plans, I say give them away free. One would have to be content to aid the hobby and consider his time well spent thereby.

And another wrinkle on the same cloth...

Ford, due to their "in depth" legal organization and active intellectual property defense, has secured for themselves a position for Ford Archive prints (where wood pattern drawings might be found as originals.) In this case one could approach Ford and pay for license to duplicate and distribute copies of the prints for those who wish to make their own wood. This a kind of a mid-way cost position between reverse engineering for sale your own prints, or making the wood parts from either Ford prints or one's own.

And in a way as seller of "Ford Authorized Prints" you "piggy back" on Ford intellectual property defense. Part of what you buy when you buy into Ford authorization.

And probably where the solution for us as hobbiests and restorers is best found.

I would pay $25 for a set of plans for the 82A CC pickup. I assume there might be 10 sheets in the set? At $2.50 per sheet I would assume any Ford license could be quickly amortized? There does seem to be demand.

Joe K
 
Last edited:
I know a complete wool kit for my 29 Tudor will run me close to a thousand dollars. I have all the hardwood I need and my dad has all the tools. I just need the sizes of each piece. What other choices do I have for my dad and I to make our wood kit? Not looking to go into business for myself just trying to get my dad in a model a and take my two girls for a ride in a parade.
 
Brent, I would abandon this idea. As far as the plans go, there's just too many body styles to accomodate them all. I believe you told me once that the Benson Ford Archive of the Ford Co. charged $25 per page, so the initial investment is large. As you say, how many people have the knowledge and tools to build their own wood? Or the outlets to aquire the wood. BTW you wouldn't happen to have a print or a good picture of the wood of front seat of a Town Sedan?
Terry
 
This thread is over a year old and someone brought it back from the dead. I am sure it is no longer a consideration of Brents by now. Rod
 
Plans are in the $25 PER PAGE(not per set) drawing range, if you are NOT using them commercially. They are MUCH more expensive per page if you indicate they are being used for a profit. a copy of the drawing is NOT construed as a license in any way (ask Brattons) and they already have a 'program' in place for dealing with those who mislead them. I am only posting this as I want my position perfectly clear if some one from the Benson Archives stumbles across this page series of posts and wants to think I proposed this idea to anyone. I have had my issues with them and do not want any more.

Wood sub frames for cars like a Bugatti, Rolls or Auburns are 8-12 times higher to make than a Model A. Keep it in perspective. I have had to learn that having a keen interest or a dedicated goal does not entitle me to free or cheap 'stuff'. I learned a number of years back that speed/success can be made up of three things. Fast, Cheap or Safe: Pick any two!
 
Last edited:
Yes, this idea was abandoned many months ago. In all likelihood, I probably would not have considered using original prints from Benson since I would have been drawing in CAD, and most of the vehicles I get in still have some of the original wood intact. Therefore I would reverse engineer and then dimension it to the vehicle. I'm like Will in that the 'hoops' are too high and the hassle too great.
 
Good morning Brent:

From my viewpoint, reverse engineering that results in an identical part would not prevent patent infringement or proprietary concerns from arising.

You and I have previously discussed the appearance of the fact that wood pieces on a drawing make it appear to be a 2-dimensional component, but quite a few wood pieces require 3-D developments, and that multiplies the work required to generate it on only a water jet or similar 2 axis machine.

What was the cause of issue in Gastonia? Figure anything out?
 
From my viewpoint, reverse engineering that results in an identical part would not prevent patent infringement or proprietary concerns from arising.
Click to expand...

So what of the "New" old Ford Model A replacement motor. This the ultimate in reverse engineering?

And an ultimate reverse engineering effort garner to it an ultimate intellectual lawsuit?

"If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck it might be a FORD duck?"

He has not ruled out profit in his venture.

Joe K
 
Let us not forget that the newest of these plans is 83 years old. Any patents have run out a long time ago. At what point does Ford reliquish control of the size and shape of a piece of wood?
Terry

RockHillWill said:
Good morning Brent:

From my viewpoint, reverse engineering that results in an identical part would not prevent patent infringement or proprietary concerns from arising.

You and I have previously discussed the appearance of the fact that wood pieces on a drawing make it appear to be a 2-dimensional component, but quite a few wood pieces require 3-D developments, and that multiplies the work required to generate it on only a water jet or similar 2 axis machine.

What was the cause of issue in Gastonia? Figure anything out?
Click to expand...
 
For whatever it's worth, I have firsthand knowledge of what I speak. you folks are welcome to pursue your thoughts at whatever rate and direction you choose. I just wanted my 'opinion' to be clear and present!
 
Right now Google puts written Intellectual Property at 91 years: any of the books viewable at books.google.com (or however they currently have the website configured) are only viewable in their entirety if printed before 1923.

There is much discussion (and some dissention) at wikipedia's entry at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property. Including a chart...




625px-Copyright_term.svg.png

Showing the expansion of intellectual property in recent years.

It would seem to me that items created in the 1930s should be subject to 1930 law. Expanding property rights amounts to "robbing society's Peter to pay originator Paul" and practice of "ex-post facto" law since Paul originally copyrighted his material in expectation of only a 56 year tenure (and reward) for his innovation.

Paul (Ford) was subsequently given a gift by society - a gift originated at everyone else's expense it would seem.

Just my humble opinion...

Joe K
 
All very cool stuff, assuming that Ford has made no changes or updates to their intellectual property viewpoints in over 80 years.
 
It seems to me that a lot of parts manufacturing companys make replacement parts for Fords without worry of infringement! When someone takes a picture of a tree and copyrights it does not mean that nobody else can take a picture of the same tree. Some people worry too much. Ron W
 
Sounds to me like He is afraid of the same thing He is doing to FORD. Taking Their patterns and copying them for $$$$.
Sure would be nice to have plans though for a 29 Tudor sedan header as I think $110 plus shipping is way overpriced.
 
If I had to skills to make them, I'd given the away free as a gift to the hobby. Not sure if the Gilmore museum is 501(c)(3), for historic preservation but you could make them, set a value and donate it to them (provide they make them publicly available and online).. and get a tax credit...)
 
Let me know when you r selling the pieces as I just need a few pieces for my Deluxe Tudor I just need the Belt rail above the doors and back windows.
It's a piece of wood I have tried to make them but I just can't get it right to fit in there I need a pattern or something because each side is different from the other side by about a 1" or a little more.
So when you get started up let me know but I just hope it's pretty soon like this coming summer or so but I would sure buy them from you if you do start up.
Reggie
 
My friend on the 'other project' that I am working on have been talking about purchasing a used 3D wood tracer. He has an abundance of broken and or cracked pieces and we have been using the West wood glue system to re-assemble them to the point that they fit, then using the powder additive to the West system, the pieces get 'body worked' to a smooth surface to be used as a pattern for the 'new' wood. These types of projects have few customers , and the 3D tracers are few and far between and are really expensive. I have found one locally, but it is buried 30 feet deep in used machine shop equipment and we have been unsuccessful in getting the owner to help us look at it.
 
Old post, but still interesting to discuss:

Sophisticated "copying technology", whether typewritten, or done with pencil or ink on paper, or "any" CAD drawing, is a World-Wide sophisticated service offered everywhere today.

I get several emails each month from India, Pakistan, China etc., for services to inexpensively electronically translate, alter, compose, and/or reproduce any conceived design on any media in 2D, 3D, B&W, and color.

The Third World now has the all Top-Secret, well guarded "printed" information on how to make the "H" Bomb.

If anyone ever has a very strong desire, (today), to reproduce Model A wood plans, can anyone imagine how easy it would be to obtain and black-market these copies.

One (1) Problem: Demand from enough Model A owners, with willingness to purchase same with cash-in-hand, usually dictates supply.
 
Having spent a considerable amount of time I was able to come up with enough patterns to make 15 of the pieces for my delivery. Bought the rear door and rear subfloor prints from the Benson. Still have 9 pieces of structural wood and the floor decking to go. So far I have incomplete info for the decking. I can see from some of the pics I have it is lap jointed. Have been they have an exposed face of 7 1/2" although I have not verified that yet. No info on the original thickness to this point. Will probably send to the Benson to get more prints this summer so I can put the wood in the done file. Rod
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top