It is assumed, for previous builders, the new owner will be the primary contact for support and new supplier defacto(having in reality assumed that role) ergo upon test in court has the very real possibility of losing his shirt. ----- Original Message ----- From: "joe" <feg...@earthlink.net> To: "KRnet" <kr...@mylist.net> Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 2:44 PM Subject: Re: KR>Rand/Robinson Engineering--Assumption of Liability
> There never is a connection between the previous manufacturer; plan seller > or material supplier only to the > previous liability. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Max Hardberger" <mhardber...@admiraltyassociates.com> > To: "KRnet" <kr...@mylist.net> > Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 1:34 PM > Subject: Re: KR>Rand/Robinson Engineering--Assumption of Liability > > > > Regarding the assumption of "25 years of liability," and without offering > > legal advice, one would assume that if a company wanted to buy the rights > to > > sell the plans to the KR series, and to build kits to these plans, the > > company would not "buy" Rand-Robinson Engineering, but would instead buy > > intellectual property (consisting of the plans) under the aegis of a new > > company. This company--to my mind, and without researching the > issue--would > > not be assuming any liability for previously sold kits and plans, since > > there would be no connection between RR and the new company except as > vendor > > and buyer of the IP rights. Of course, the new company would have > liability > > for its own negligence in selling the plans, but this cannot be avoided in > > any case, regardless of their source. > > > > Regarding the similarities between the "original" KR aircraft and any > > aircraft sold by the new company, I would further assume that the new > > company would do its own research and testing, and would draw from the 25 > > years of experience that KR builders now have. This would almost certainly > > result in at least some changes to the original plans, an opinion > reinforced > > by the many successful modifications that builders have made to these > plans. > > The changes would probably be incremental rather than fundamental, but > they > > may well result in a craft different-enough from the original KR's that it > > could be marketed under a new name, as has been noted in previous posts. > > > > With all that said, and with the understanding that RR may still be > > overvaluing its property, I believe that a viable aircraft project could > be > > undertaken with the KR as its basis. RR should remember that it would not > > take much modification for the new company to be able successfully to > defend > > itself against an IP suit. If RR really did want to sell the rights to the > > plans, it should negotiate accordingly. > > > > Max Hardberger > > Admitted in California Only > > > > > > _______________________________________ > > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@mylist.net > > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > > > _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html
