Description Of Legal Dispute
I am the sole proprietor of building design company in Nova Scotia.
I earned my Masters in Architecture in 1990 and have practiced professional design internationally and domestically for approximately 25years, generating a respectable untarnished reputation.
In June of 2013 I was approached by Acadia University (Nova Scotia, Canada) and asked if I would be interested in designing a significant addition to the existing Alumni Hall. I was advised that there was no budget for the project, however, there was a pending meeting two weeks hence with a very good prospect in Hong Kong for the necessary $1.5 million,
I was asked how much it would cost to provide a presentation drawing for this pending meeting. I agreed to provide this drawing for $4000.
I created a concept consistent with the ideas described by Marcel Falkenham and Dr. Morrison.
We met and reviewed, continued working. I felt there was a more appropriate design solution.
Prior to the next meeting I developed an alternative concept, which the Acadia adopted.
I was advised that the donor meeting was delayed.
I continued to work on the concept so that the presentation drawing could represent more detail.
I presented the final presentation drawing as the deadline approached.
I was asked to introduce new features to the presentation drawing.
I asked and received an additional $700.
In good faith, I offered my working drawings as supporting documents for the presentation to the Wu family in Hong Kong. I acknowledged that these ” instruments of service” were void of detail, but for the purpose of explaining the project to the prospective donors, they would be helpful.
The fees charged and received did never reflect the extensive speculative work I invested in this project.
I learned that my very preliminary copyright protected drawings, were submitted to Town of Wolfville for development permit.
My drawings were also conveyed to competing designer, Architect Troy Scott.
These same drawings were published at a Public Information Meeting ; as per the newspaper article attached.
I became aware of all of these indiscretions after reading this newspaper article with my uncredited drawing featured alongside Architect Troy Scott.
I loaned these drawings to the university solely to secure funding through donor. Permission was niether sought nor granted to transmit, publish, copy or any other copyright protected action.
My preliminary drawings, (instruments of service), were now in the public domain, exposed to scrutiny and criticism in realms for which they were not intended.
Troy Scott was compensated $10,000 to present my drawings at the Public Information Meeting, and was compensated at least $55,000 through the next phases of design.
My request to discuss the apparent plagiarism and copyright infringement with Acadia resulted in them replying that my drawings were “not copyright material” and that Acadia had “acquired all rights becasue I did not claim any limitations for use.
I was advised that if I were to pursue the “issue” that I should contact their lawyers.
In 2014 I sought legal counsel and ultimately retained very capable lawyers. They unsuccessfully sought copyright fees from Acadia and/or Troy Scott, followed by a “Cease and desist” order.
Acadia’s lawyer, claimed that Acadia owned my copyright, erroneously describing me as an employee of Acadia.
This impasse led to me abandoning litigation as I was advised by my legal counsel, that enforcing copyright protection would require a Supreme Court Application. The estimated costs were $25,000 and I was advised that copyright infringement cases are extremely complicated and expensive. Enforcement was inaccessible.
A year later, I was working on a project for an Acadia U. professor who acknowledged that he was advised by Acadia not to hire me.
It was at that point that I decided that I had no option but to restore my reputation through self-represented litigation.
The building in question is now complete. The development permit for its construction was acquired through the submission of my drawings.
Troy Scott’s contract specified that his work was to utilize PIER101 drawings.
Troy Scott’s lawyer admitted that PIER101 drawings were copyright protected,
Troy Scott’s expert witness claimed that my drawings lacked originality and that the design was simply the result of interpretation of Municipal design criteria. Further he claimed that because I am not a Licensed Member of the Nova Scotia Association of Architects, Troy Scott did not have to seek my permission to use my drawings.
Acadia’s lawyers claimed that my drawings did not posses the originality required for copyright to exist.
Justice Chipman (alumni of Acadia University) determined that copyright was not infringed and dismissed all claims and awarded costs to both respondents, Acadia University and Troy Scott.
I would never have believed how expensive financially, mentally, and emotionally such an undertaking could be.
I am still processing the unconscionable manipulations and damning efforts of the legal team and Respondents to diminish my credibility and professional reputation.
My design ability was ridiculed and criticized based on scrutiny of preliminary drawings which were unjustly shared, published, and exploited.
I was victimized many times over. My previously untarnished reputation which I built over 30 years with honesty and integrity is in absolute ruins.
I am now responsible for legal costs to both Acadia University and Troy Scott.
Acadia’s lawyers offered a token settlement of $1,500 during the proceedings, which I did not accept; thus allowing them to multiply costs by a factor of up to 75% which is estimated at $22,000. I have not heard from Troy Scott’s lawyer re costs yet.
Username
|
| |
PIER101
|
E-mail Address
|
| |
laura@pier101.ca
|
Country Where Your Dispute Is Located
|
| |
Canada
|
How Much Litigation Funding Do You Want To Raise?
|
| |
$50,000.00
|
Headline For Your Litigation Crowdfunding Campaign
|
| |
University infringed my copyright protected drawings
|
Description Of Your Legal Dispute
|
| |
I am the sole proprietor of building design company in Nova Scotia.
I earned my Masters in Architecture in 1990 and have practiced professional design internationally and domestically for approximately 25years, generating a respectable untarnished reputation.
In June of 2013 I was approached by Acadia University (Nova Scotia, Canada) and asked if I would be interested in designing a significant addition to the existing Alumni Hall. I was advised that there was no budget for the project, however, there was a pending meeting two weeks hence with a very good prospect in Hong Kong for the necessary $1.5 million,
I was asked how much it would cost to provide a presentation drawing for this pending meeting. I agreed to provide this drawing for $4000.
I created a concept consistent with the ideas described by Marcel Falkenham and Dr. Morrison.
We met and reviewed, continued working. I felt there was a more appropriate design solution.
Prior to the next meeting I developed an alternative concept, which the Acadia adopted.
I was advised that the donor meeting was delayed.
I continued to work on the concept so that the presentation drawing could represent more detail.
I presented the final presentation drawing as the deadline approached.
I was asked to introduce new features to the presentation drawing.
I asked and received an additional $700.
In good faith, I offered my working drawings as supporting documents for the presentation to the Wu family in Hong Kong. I acknowledged that these ” instruments of service” were void of detail, but for the purpose of explaining the project to the prospective donors, they would be helpful.
The fees charged and received did never reflect the extensive speculative work I invested in this project.
I learned that my very preliminary copyright protected drawings, were submitted to Town of Wolfville for development permit.
My drawings were also conveyed to competing designer, Architect Troy Scott.
These same drawings were published at a Public Information Meeting ; as per the newspaper article attached.
I became aware of all of these indiscretions after reading this newspaper article with my uncredited drawing featured alongside Architect Troy Scott.
I loaned these drawings to the university solely to secure funding through donor. Permission was niether sought nor granted to transmit, publish, copy or any other copyright protected action.
My preliminary drawings, (instruments of service), were now in the public domain, exposed to scrutiny and criticism in realms for which they were not intended.
Troy Scott was compensated $10,000 to present my drawings at the Public Information Meeting, and was compensated at least $55,000 through the next phases of design.
My request to discuss the apparent plagiarism and copyright infringement with Acadia resulted in them replying that my drawings were “not copyright material” and that Acadia had “acquired all rights becasue I did not claim any limitations for use.
I was advised that if I were to pursue the “issue” that I should contact their lawyers.
In 2014 I sought legal counsel and ultimately retained very capable lawyers. They unsuccessfully sought copyright fees from Acadia and/or Troy Scott, followed by a “Cease and desist” order.
Acadia’s lawyer, claimed that Acadia owned my copyright, erroneously describing me as an employee of Acadia.
This impasse led to me abandoning litigation as I was advised by my legal counsel, that enforcing copyright protection would require a Supreme Court Application. The estimated costs were $25,000 and I was advised that copyright infringement cases are extremely complicated and expensive. Enforcement was inaccessible.
A year later, I was working on a project for an Acadia U. professor who acknowledged that he was advised by Acadia not to hire me.
It was at that point that I decided that I had no option but to restore my reputation through self-represented litigation.
The building in question is now complete. The development permit for its construction was acquired through the submission of my drawings.
Troy Scott’s contract specified that his work was to utilize PIER101 drawings.
Troy Scott’s lawyer admitted that PIER101 drawings were copyright protected,
Troy Scott’s expert witness claimed that my drawings lacked originality and that the design was simply the result of interpretation of Municipal design criteria. Further he claimed that because I am not a Licensed Member of the Nova Scotia Association of Architects, Troy Scott did not have to seek my permission to use my drawings.
Acadia’s lawyers claimed that my drawings did not posses the originality required for copyright to exist.
Justice Chipman (alumni of Acadia University) determined that copyright was not infringed and dismissed all claims and awarded costs to both respondents, Acadia University and Troy Scott.
I would never have believed how expensive financially, mentally, and emotionally such an undertaking could be.
I am still processing the unconscionable manipulations and damning efforts of the legal team and Respondents to diminish my credibility and professional reputation.
My design ability was ridiculed and criticized based on scrutiny of preliminary drawings which were unjustly shared, published, and exploited.
I was victimized many times over. My previously untarnished reputation which I built over 30 years with honesty and integrity is in absolute ruins.
I am now responsible for legal costs to both Acadia University and Troy Scott.
Acadia’s lawyers offered a token settlement of $1,500 during the proceedings, which I did not accept; thus allowing them to multiply costs by a factor of up to 75% which is estimated at $22,000. I have not heard from Troy Scott’s lawyer re costs yet.
|
Featured Image For Your Litigation Funding Campaign
|
| |
|
End Date Of Your Litigation Crowdfunding Campaign
|
| |
2016-07-31
|
How Much Compensation Can You Receive If Your Case Wins?
|
| |
$175,000.00
|
Percentage Of Future Potential Compensation You Are Offering As A Reward (Success Fee / Contingent Fee)
|
| |
40% Of Amount Recovered
|
| AUTOMATIC CALCULATIONS |
Potential Return Of Investors (Percent)
|
| |
140
|
Estimated Total Reward Offered To Investors
|
| |
$70,000.00
|
Estimated Remaining Compensation For Litigant
|
| |
$105,000.00
|
Role
|
| |
Litigant
|
|
International arbitration case analysis is provided to Invest4Justice by the lawyers of the International Arbitration Attorney Network. All other legal advice is provided by Aceris Law LLC.
Estimated 140% Returns: University infringed my copyright protected drawings
