Exactly.
'Can we have the point cloud of the job you did for us?'
'Sure, we'll send it over.'
'All we can do is view it. How do we do anything else with it?'
'Pay for a software license.'
'Well that's not really satisfactory.
'Ok...'
Exactly.
I think it has a lot more to do with intent then methodology. If you're using a scan to create a piece of art you can almost certainly copyright that. If you're making a "digital twin" maybe not. If you read the Meshwerks case their methodology involved a lot more decisions that affected the output than you would make in the course of a scanning project. That didn't matter though because their intent was to make an exact copy of an existing object.jamesworrell wrote: ↑Sat Jun 27, 2020 3:57 am Then again, comparing a scan with a photo - I can’t say I see a difference. Start with the spherical image - surely this is equivalent to a normal photo with respect to copyright?
Why would therefore a scan be different? The location was chosen, the settings were chosen. The subject matter was chosen. This is how a photo is taken?.
One of the tools we added to SCC some years back was to create a report that listed all the delivered files with a CRC checksum so it is easy to check whether any version of those files has been modified subsequent to delivery. This report then became a delivery note signed by the customer with both parties keeping a copy.stutosney wrote: ↑Mon Jun 29, 2020 5:00 am There is a simple way to solve this and protect yourself from any unnecessary come backs. Just include a small paragraph in the offer of service outlining what is intellectual property and who owns it. Get it in the signed contract. If it isn't time heavy,m I also see no issue with handing the point cloud to the client, as long as it doesn't tie you up from other billable work obviously. They have paid you to acquire that data and register it, so there is no harm in handing it to them...just make the aware that if they start 'fiddling' with it, it is their responsibility!
They would for infrastructure jobs here in Ireland, I say this having chaired a working group tasked with improving standards and consistency for survey works delivered to Dublin City Council. I've been involved in a few other big survey frameworks over the years and it is normal to look for all observation and control data and QA reports for any major works. This is particularly true where you've multiple survey companies involved in a big job and the possibility of sharing control and potential changes of site grid.landmeterbeuckx wrote: ↑Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:13 pmI could measure it traditionally and with a total station no one would ask for the raw data.
Indeed for certain jobs like pipeline works they would ask for the data. I never had the question asked for this data with a boundary survey or so. I must say the raw data comes in handy when years later it seems i mistyped an offset for a tree + instead of - which lead to permit problems.smacl wrote: ↑Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:44 pmThey would for infrastructure jobs here in Ireland, I say this having chaired a working group tasked with improving standards and consistency for survey works delivered to Dublin City Council. I've been involved in a few other big survey frameworks over the years and it is normal to look for all observation and control data and QA reports for any major works. This is particularly true where you've multiple survey companies involved in a big job and the possibility of sharing control and potential changes of site grid.landmeterbeuckx wrote: ↑Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:13 pmI could measure it traditionally and with a total station no one would ask for the raw data.
In the OP's case I believe he is right in this instance, the observations are owned by him, if the client wants extra information, extra money should follow.If you don't have it in writing, then you don't have it at all.