Our PCB designer won't give us his project files (Altium / Eagle)

[Davy De Waele]

Hi,

We're very new to the world of custom PCB but have created a piece of hardware (custom PCB) and "outsourced" that PCB design to another company because it is not our main focus. Our focus being the business logic that runs on the hardware.

We've given him the necessary input on the high-level component choices and the overal archictecture (an AVR based microcontroller with a gprs module). Nothing too fancy.

After some requirements gathering sessions we concluded on a set of requirements that we wanted to see in the design.
After having gone through the design with the PCB designer we placed an order for the first 5 prototypes.

As we're new to all of this , we did stumble upon a couple of things that we find "strange" :

1. The PCB designer who is using Altium Designer (as many designers do) only wants to release electronic files that allow us to "reproduce" the current PCB design. He refers to Gerber files that can be sent to a manufacturer.

He's not willing to deliver Eagle files or Altium project files that would allows us to make changes to the design .

2. The PCB designer feels that giving the project files violates his intellectual property. We find this strange as he has no use for our hardware product, and the only reason he would opt to not give us the project files is to force us to stay in business with him, even for the smallest design change.

3. The PCB designer cannot guarantee in any way that the first 5 prototypes will work at all. We're charged additional fees to get the board verified electronically (simply verifying that the thing won't blow up when applying power). If for some reasons the prototypes fail to work the design needs to be re-visitied (again additional fees) and new prototypes need to be delivered.

We're relatively new to the whole custom PCB world but I was wondering if this was normal behavior. Is it true that the Gerber files only allow us to reproduce the existing design without making changes to it ? Is it normal that a PCB designer never releases his project files ?

As we're dealing with our own hardware product, we feel we have a right to these project files, as we paid for the PCB design, and would like to see this design altered by any party we see fit (as opposed to our current PCB designer keeping us hostage).

Any thoughts on this ?

 

[Ian Rogers]

You need to find out whether the design cost included the rights to the altium files. As a programmer I can design and sell a program to a client... But I purchased the compiler so unless they by the source code... All they get is the hex files... Find out how much the schematic and PCB design will cost you.....

Altium is an expensive outlay so I can understand the designers stance...

 

[eTech]

Hi,

We're very new to the world of custom PCB but have created a piece of hardware (custom PCB) and "outsourced" that PCB design to another company because it is not our main focus. Our focus being the business logic that runs on the hardware.

We've given him the necessary input on the high-level component choices and the overal archictecture (an AVR based microcontroller with a gprs module). Nothing too fancy.

After some requirements gathering sessions we concluded on a set of requirements that we wanted to see in the design.
After having gone through the design with the PCB designer we placed an order for the first 5 prototypes.

As we're new to all of this , we did stumble upon a couple of things that we find "strange" :

1. The PCB designer who is using Altium Designer (as many designers do) only wants to release electronic files that allow us to "reproduce" the current PCB design. He refers to Gerber files that can be sent to a manufacturer.

He's not willing to deliver Eagle files or Altium project files that would allows us to make changes to the design .

2. The PCB designer feels that giving the project files violates his intellectual property. We find this strange as he has no use for our hardware product, and the only reason he would opt to not give us the project files is to force us to stay in business with him, even for the smallest design change.

This usually is negotiable, otherwise look for a more "flexible" PCB design service.

3. The PCB designer cannot guarantee in any way that the first 5 prototypes will work at all. We're charged additional fees to get the board verified electronically (simply verifying that the thing won't blow up when applying power). If for some reasons the prototypes fail to work the design needs to be re-visitied (again additional fees) and new prototypes need to be delivered.

The PCB designer usually is not responsible for the electronic design, only the board design (component placement, routing) and production of the manufacturing files. But these things should be done in collaboration with the Electronic Design Engineer throughout the PCB design process.

We're relatively new to the whole custom PCB world but I was wondering if this was normal behavior. Is it true that the Gerber files only allow us to reproduce the existing design without making changes to it ? Is it normal that a PCB designer never releases his project files ?

Its true that gerber files will allow you to have any decent board fab house fabricate the board for you.
But you'll also need a drill file and aperature file. The file will need to be in a specific gerber format.
This item is usually specified and agreed upon in the contract agreement.

Whether or not a PCB designer releases the design files is usually negotiated before contract signing.
Otherwise, there is no obligation or commitment for the PCB designer to provide them.

 

[Davy De Waele]

You need to find out whether the design cost included the rights to the altium files. As a programmer I can design and sell a program to a client... But I purchased the compiler so unless they by the source code... All they get is the hex files... Find out how much the schematic and PCB design will cost you.....

We were a bit naive about this I guess. The PCB designer only does this part-time, it's not a big agency. I also feel he has nothing to gain by doing this (other than trying to force us to stay in business with them). I thought it was common-sense to hand over all design artifacts.

I come from a software development background where it's common sense that you deliver both code and not only binaries.
If I ask someone to design a logo I also get the PSDs and not just the PDFs. If I ask someone to develop a website I also get the HTML.

My fear (perhaps misplaced) is that by doing this we are forced into collaborating with this designer until the end-of-days.
We've paid a lot of money for the design. If for some reason we want to do this elsewhere (because he goes bankrupt, or he can't commit himself to the project, or he's overcharging us) we'll need to start all over agian.

 

[Davy De Waele]

This usually is negotiable, otherwise look for a more "flexible" PCB design service.

I hope we'll be able to come to some sort of agreement... It kinda stands in the way of a good professional relationship.

The PCB designer usually is not responsible for the electronic design, only the board design (component placement, routing) and production of the manufacturing files. But these things should be done in collaboration with the Electronic Design Engineer throughout the PCB design process.

I think the PCB designer here (one-man company doing this alongside his day-job) has both the PCB design hat and the electronic design engineer hat on.

Its true that gerber files will allow you to have any decent board fab house fabricate the board for you.
But you'll also need a drill file and aperature file. The file will need to be in a specific gerber format.
This item is usually specified and agreed upon in the contract agreement.

We've agreed to get the following files from the designer :

• gerber files
• pick & place files
• drill files
• bom list
• schematic

If we ever need to change something in the design (remove/add components, add / remove some routing, ......) are these files sufficient, or do we need the actual design files (Eagle export / Altium project) to do that ? If the designer cannot commit himself anymore, or if the designer starts over-charging us for small design changes, do we need to start from scratch again ?

 

[Ian Rogers]

Its usual for the designer to supply the prototypes and then up to 4 changes to design ( At least this is what I do )

If you don't own the IP to the design, then I suggest getting it.... Anything can happen!! If you fall out with this man all hell will ensue... If you indeed paid a lot of money for the PCB design then I would have thought that the IP would be yours.....

 

[KeepItSimpleStupid]

We've agreed to get the following files from the designer :

• gerber files
• pick & place files
• drill files
• bom list
• schematic

Yep, and you get one copy of the schematic on dissolve-able paper, right?
Just saying that you could get the schematic in multiple formats such as paper, pdf, dxf, HPGL etc.

Drill files in usually one of at least two formats. Escellon is usually preferred.

BOM list - again a paper copy, right?

Somebody can screw you and give you a gerber format that isn;t wildly supported.

Not sure about pick and place files, but I would THINK that if say the height of a compnent changes, the file may change too.

Gerbers can, apparently be edited, but very rudimently. They could be converted to PDF or even DXF. Some savy person could probably use a DXF file and place it on a a layer with some transparency and reproduce the routing, so it's better than just having a board reverse-engineered.

Once, I tried to get some "real blueprints" scanned/converted into a vector format. The best I could do was a high resolution TIFF format. The conversion programs barfed.
Right now, I may have the only complete copies of documentation (schematics only) for a discontinued audio product. I did not realize until I shared some of the drawings with now two friends, that there are two versions of the product. The schematics are "virtually" the same, but the layout is vastly different. As "payment" for the files, I got a free assembled CFL immune IR board and manual for the product and it's schematic and BOM. It was only when I tried to install it, I realized the assembly instructions were not compatable. Size OK. Connector OK. The board needed a small notch to fit and the wire connections to the IR receiver photo transistor and board were different. Then we found out that my product has a daughter card and everyone else's has a double PCB front panel. I believe the point was to lower the cost and not have a lot of ribbon-like cables to the main board. It's still a nightmare to service.

 

[Davy De Waele]

Yep, and you get one copy of the schematic on dissolve-able paper, right?
Just saying that you could get the schematic in multiple formats such as paper, pdf, dxf, HPGL etc.

There in electronic format.... We were going for the common-sense approach and didn't read all the fine-print.
As someone who is not experienced with PCB design we simply requested all design artifacts in electronic format.

BOM list - again a paper copy, right?

It's a detailed excel with all components, characteristics, supplier codes, quantities. So that seems to be complete.

Somebody can screw you and give you a gerber format that isn;t wildly supported.

I don't know what the issue with Altium is. Despite the fact that it's expensive I don't see any reason why someone would not want to hand this over. The designer is now saying that the Gerber files can also be edited, so he doesn't see any issue.

My concern is that we, as a tech-company that wants to produce and sell a hardware/software combo, should have the right and control over the design. If we want to make a change to the design, and we feel the current designer is not up to the task (time constraints, cost-factor, ......) we should be able to take the design to someone else.

Gerbers can, apparently be edited, but very rudimently. They could be converted to PDF or even DXF. Some savy person could probably use a DXF file and place it on a a layer with some transparency and reproduce the routing, so it's better than just having a board reverse-engineered.

I don't master all these tools / file-formats.

For us the requirement was clear : make sure we have all the design artifacts that allow us to not only reproduce the design, but also modify it.

In that sense it would seem that the Gerber files aren't sufficient ? It's probably not as simple as importing the Gerber files into a design tool like Altium and start making changes to the design.

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

For us the requirement was clear : make sure we have all the design artifacts that allow us to not only reproduce the design, but also modify it.

In which case you should have specified that in the contract (and paid a LOT more), the PCB designer seems to be completely in the right - likewise I don't supply source code files for any work I do, only HEX files - if the customer wanted the source code he would have to pay for it.

 

[ericgibbs]

In which case you should have specified that in the contract (and paid a LOT more), the PCB designer seems to be completely in the right - likewise I don't supply source code files for any work I do, only HEX files - if the customer wanted the source code he would have to pay for it.

This is the way I ran my business.

Ensure that the specification document that you put out to tender for quotation is water tight and covers ALL the documentation and intellectual property rights you expect from the completed work.

Check that the written formal quotation you receive back, includes ALL the items required by your specification.

Eric

 

[Davy De Waele]

In which case you should have specified that in the contract (and paid a LOT more), the PCB designer seems to be completely in the right - likewise I don't supply source code files for any work I do, only HEX files - if the customer wanted the source code he would have to pay for it.

You don't know what we've paid I think it was substantial and also the initial prototypes weren't what you would call cheap.

We did the initial component selection, we write all the software for the PCB, we provide test-programs to help the designer validate the prototypes. The only thing we cannot do ourselves is create a custom PCB and get it manufactured.

I agree that you need to make sure everything is in the contract, but a lot of the stuff is in the fine-print.

For example, "the designer delivers all design artifacts in electronic format to reproduce the PCB" . For us that meant all the files, including the design files. At that point we didn't know that this was only the files to reproduce the current design.

The whole point of working with a PCB designer is to have some kind of professional relationship where there is mutual trust. We're not a restaurants that wants a custom LED solution that doesn't care about the IP. We're a tech-company that wants to sell a product and maintain the ownership of it. We assumed this was clear (and we often discussed this with the designer).

My feeling is if you constantly need to worry about the fine-print than you do about the actual product, than it becomes extremely difficult to have a working relationship.

 

[Davy De Waele]

This is the way I ran my business.

Ensure that the specification document that you put out to tender for quotation is water tight and covers ALL the documentation and intellectual property rights you expect from the completed work.

Check that the written formal quotation you receive back, includes ALL the items required by your specification.

Eric

For us (a company just starting out in this world) it proved to be difficult to come up with a spec that covers everything. Looking back it at you could call us naive.

On the other hand, you can also state the designer wasn't completely honest / transparant about things. Perhaps in his mind this was clear, but we still don't see any added value for the designer to keep our design hostage. We don't care if the designer wants to use parts of our design for other projects, that's a non-issue for us.

If the only reason for not releasing this design is the designer thinking that this will generate some kind of constant revenue stream that only he can control, then I think that's a sad business model.

 

[ericgibbs]

hi Davy,
Like you, I learned the hard way with out-sourcing design work., do it 'in house' whenever possible.

Put your lawyers hat on when dealing with design specifications.
A guide would be to look a the spec's documentation prepared by other successful companies.

caveat emptor

Eric

 

[Davy De Waele]

hi Davy,
Like you, I learned the hard way with out-sourcing design work., do it 'in house' whenever possible.

Put your lawyers hat on when dealing with design specifications.
A guide would be to look a the spec's documentation prepared by other successful companies.

caveat emptor

Eric

If you're willing to share some of this documentation or point me to a place where I can find them my guest

I was kinda expecting these scenarios when out-sourcing design to big companies or when moving to off-shore countries, not with the friendly local PCB designer who has nothing to gain from this behavior except to screw us over.

 

[ericgibbs]

hi,
Look at this link for a selection of guidelines.
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=writing a specification for software&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a&gws_rd=cr&ei=yRf-UuaQO8SRhQf4i4DYDw

E

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

I was kinda expecting these scenarios when out-sourcing design to big companies or when moving to off-shore countries, not with the friendly local PCB designer who has nothing to gain from this behavior except to screw us over.

Not really, it's HIS PCB design, you expect it to become YOUR PCB design without paying substantially for the rights to it?.

For example, "the designer delivers all design artifacts in electronic format to reproduce the PCB" . For us that meant all the files, including the design files. At that point we didn't know that this was only the files to reproduce the current design.

That's seems pretty clear and explicit, if you read it as something you wanted it to say, as opposed to what it actually says, them that was your error - you say you've already paid 'substantially', but that's irrelevant, the existing payment is for what you've got, and what you contracted for.

Presumably this is for a commercial project?, which you will be selling - assuming you sell via a wholesaler you're not going to provide the wholesaler with all the design details so they can start making them themselves are you? - it's a similar situation, the total design is YOURS the PCB design is HIS.

 

[alec_t]

Hi Davy,
Which part of the world are you in? Intellectual property (IP) law varies from one jurisdiction to another. Ownership of IP rights may or may not need to be explicitly specified in contracts accordingly.

 

[Davy De Waele]

Not really, it's HIS PCB design, you expect it to become YOUR PCB design without paying substantially for the rights to it?.

This may seem very clear-cut to you, but it wasn't to us. We were under the impression that this would include all rights.
Just like when I ask for a logo I get the PSDs, if I ask for a website I get the HTMLs, if I ask for a piece of software I get the code.

Today I contacted 4 different PCB design agencies and asked them this Intellectual Property question specifically, and all 4 stated that Intellectual Property is transfered to the customer. 2 of them specifically mention that Altium design files are also transferred to the customer. Perhaps I got lucky with those.

I realise now it was our bad that we didn't bring in someone with some additional expertise to help us interpret the terms & conditions. This is definitely a lessons learned. Small talk around the table doesn't mean sh**t.

Presumably this is for a commercial project?, which you will be selling - assuming you sell via a wholesaler you're not going to provide the wholesaler with all the design details so they can start making them themselves are you? - it's a similar situation, the total design is YOURS the PCB design is HIS.

As a product owner, I feel I should have full control over the design of the product and all artifacts that go with it.
I should have the freedom to switch manufacturers / designers as I please.

But again, it simply boils down to the fine-print. We mentioned on several occasions that we are new at this, that we're a tech company that wanted to release this product and that we want ownership of this. The designer never raised a flag at that point. That to me is a shame. His expertise on the matter outweighs ours and it would have been decent business conduct to warn us at this point.

We've put too much trust in what was said during meetings and exchanged via emails. When we started this we had no idea what the difference was between a Gerber file and an Eagle file. We had complete faith in the designer when we explained the product and the concept. It was made clear that we wanted to retain ownership.

 

[alec_t]

Further to my last post, here's what the UK law (Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988) on designs is:

215 Ownership of design right.
(1)The designer is the first owner of any design right in a design which is not created in pursuance of a commission or in the course of employment.
(2)Where a design is created in pursuance of a commission, the person commissioning the design is the first owner of any design right in it.

Since you commissioned the design, you would already hold the design rights if you are in the UK, so would be entitled to the Altium files IMO.

 

[ericgibbs]

hi alec,
I dont think Davey is having a problem with the design rights as such, as I understand it, its what he expected to get supplied from the party laying out the artwork for the price he agreed to pay.?

E