## Facts

- Jones Associates designed and sold custom homes and commissioned complete architectural drawings for a house model called the “Aspen,” based on concepts generated by its owner.
- Jones Associates built two Aspen model houses in Michigan subdivisions and distributed promotional brochures containing abridged Aspen floor plans to potential buyers.
- A potential customer told Jones Associates that a competitor was building very similar houses; Jones Associates obtained Nino Homes’ filed building plans and concluded the Aspen plans had been copied.
- Nino Homes marketed a similar house model called the “Riverside” and denied copying; Jones Associates sued.
- After discovering the alleged copying, Jones Associates registered both the complete Aspen drawings and the abridged brochure floor plans and sent a cease-and-desist letter.
- Evidence at trial supported that Nino Homes used the abridged brochure plans to design the Riverside and that its architect was instructed to duplicate them; the architect had access to Jones Associates’ copyrighted work.
- The district court found Nino Homes and its president (Lochirco) infringed by copying the registered drawings and using the copies to construct multiple houses, awarding actual damages (including Jones Associates’ lost profits and Nino Homes’ profits), attorneys’ fees, and prejudgment interest.

## Issues

1. Whether Nino Homes infringed Jones Associates’ copyrights in architectural drawings and abridged floor plans through copying and construction of houses based on those plans.
2. Whether recoverable damages under 17 U.S.C. § 504 for infringement of architectural drawings may include losses and profits tied to the infringer’s subsequent use of copied plans to build and sell houses, not merely the act of reproducing the drawings.
3. Whether the district court properly awarded attorneys’ fees and prejudgment interest.

## Decision

- The Sixth Circuit affirmed the finding that Nino Homes and Lochirco unlawfully copied the Aspen plans and used the infringing plans to construct houses.
- The court held that damages for infringement of architectural drawings may include the copyright owner’s losses and the infringer’s profits attributable to the construction and sale of houses built from infringing copies.
- The court reversed the award of attorneys’ fees and prejudgment interest.

## Legal Principles

- Architectural drawings are protectable “pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works” under the Copyright Act, and infringement can include copying the drawings and exploiting copied drawings to create physical structures.
- Under 17 U.S.C. § 504(b), a copyright owner may recover (1) actual damages suffered as a result of the infringement and (2) infringer profits attributable to the infringement, to the extent not duplicated in the actual-damages calculation.
- “As a result of the infringement” can include economic harm proximately caused by the infringer’s use of infringing plan copies to build and sell houses, including the owner’s lost sales and the infringer’s construction-based profits.
- For profits under § 504(b), the owner must show the infringer’s gross revenue reasonably attributable to the infringement; the infringer bears the burden to prove deductible expenses and apportionment to noninfringing factors.

## Conclusion

The Sixth Circuit upheld liability and damages premised on both the copying of copyrighted architectural plans and the commercial use of those infringing copies to build and sell houses, but it set aside attorneys’ fees and prejudgment interest.


Robert R. Jones Assocs., Inc. v. Nino Homes, 858 F.2d 274 (6th Cir. 1988)