Rule 87

Originally posted by JimC Originally posted by Peaky it would be better for someone to take the lead and create a LAZOR class, based very heavily on the Laser, but allowing freedom of manufacturer. You can't actually replicate the Laser hull shape, there's intellectual property restrictions about that, but there have been any number of near Laser classes introduced in the past. They've all flopped dismally.

Isn't the 8.1 an example of that?

Originally posted by Peaky Why should only the hull be subject to IPR?  Why not the sail too?  Or the rudder?

It's a complicated area - and I'm not a lawyer but I necessarily have some professional interest in intellectual property law. It is, in general, legal to produce "spare parts" despite the original object being subject to copyright. See http://www.ipo.gov.uk/pro-types/pro-design/d-policy/d-policy -spareparts.htm

Sails would certainly be an example of a "spare part".

The law in this area was designed to prevent a supplier abusing a monopoly position in after-sales spares supply. It's common to sell a base product at or near cost but sell spares at a high price e.g. inkjet printer cartridges, razor blades, car spares and maybe even SMOD sails. 

Edited by Stefan Lloyd

Originally posted by Guest#260 Someone told me at the dinghy show that they were making fake/replica Laser hulls now

I hope they have a good lawyer then.

assymetry? Please explain

The laser moulds have all been taken from the original mould which for one reason or another had some assymetry in it. Effectively the port side of the boat is not quite the same shape as the starboard side. Unfortunately so many boats were made from the original moulds that they were unable to correct future moulds and retain the exacting one design standards expected in the class and therefore all the boats are wonky!
Many different people have used laser scanners to accurately computer model the LASER dinghy and all show the same assymetry.


Edited by craiggo