Autodesk Technology Managers Forum
Share your knowledge, ask questions, and engage with fellow CAD/BIM Managers.
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Ownership of CAD files

81 REPLIES 81
Reply
Message 1 of 82
Evan Yares
2542 Views, 81 Replies

Ownership of CAD files

This came though the email list of the National BIM Standard group, and I found it thought provoking. It's from an architect who works for the general services division of a state government. (I've removed the reference to the particular state.)



As far as standard legal agreements addressing sharing of BIM and even CAD information, indemnifying the authors, etc., we... are attempting to take the long view and streamline the inevitable argument over whether the architect will give or sell to the contractor(s) CAD (or BIM) files for use in creating coordination drawings, shop drawings, etc. We’ve found great inconsistencies in the disclaimer forms our architectural firms are asking contractors to sign, as well as the amounts they are asking for to burn a CD, and believe it’s in everyone’s interest to write a standardized passage in our General Conditions that will eventually be tested and proven. Not to mention the potential for delays while these negotiations occur. And since the State has asserted ownership of the contract documents, and the architects are only asking for the contractor to indemnify them, the State is exposed to claims from errors in the documents/electronic files. Hopefully once all parties have legal protections, and a set of reasonable expectations, information sharing can become the norm rather than the exception. Of course we need to also address the fact that the contractor needs to share the information they’ve added with the owner/agency for use in managing the facility. Please understand that we are writing this in the language of today’s practice, but hope it will to begin to educate and train our folks for the coming paradigm shift. We are hoping to post the new documents for review by the end of the summer.
81 REPLIES 81
Message 2 of 82
rculp
in reply to: Evan Yares

That's a paradigm shift that has occurred in other industries (non-architectural) some time ago. For quite some time our contracts have stipulated that all CAD files produced in pursuit of that contract are the property of our clients.
But hey, that's just me.

Randall Culp
Civil-Structural Design Technician
(aka CADaver)
Message 3 of 82
Anonymous
in reply to: Evan Yares

Evan,

Isn't this something the AIA needs to get a handle on?

Matt
mstachoni@comcast.net
mstachoni@bhhtait.com


On Mon, 3 Jul 2006 21:11:57 +0000, Evan Yares <> wrote:

>This came though the email list of the National BIM Standard group, and I found it thought provoking. It's from an architect who works for the general services division of a state government. (I've removed the reference to the particular state.)


>
>As far as standard legal agreements addressing sharing of BIM and even CAD information, indemnifying the authors, etc., we... are attempting to take the long view and streamline the inevitable argument over whether the architect will give or sell to the contractor(s) CAD (or BIM) files for use in creating coordination drawings, shop drawings, etc. We’ve found great inconsistencies in the disclaimer forms our architectural firms are asking contractors to sign, as well as the amounts they are asking for to burn a CD, and believe it’s in everyone’s interest to write a standardized passage in our General Conditions that will eventually be tested and proven. Not to mention the potential for delays while these negotiations occur. And since the State has asserted ownership of the contract documents, and the architects are only asking for the contractor to indemnify them, the State is exposed to claims from errors in the documents/electronic files. Hopefully once all parties have legal
>protections, and a set of reasonable expectations, information sharing can become the norm rather than the exception. Of course we need to also address the fact that the contractor needs to share the information they’ve added with the owner/agency for use in managing the facility. Please understand that we are writing this in the language of today’s practice, but hope it will to begin to educate and train our folks for the coming paradigm shift. We are hoping to post the new documents for review by the end of the summer.
Message 4 of 82
Anonymous
in reply to: Evan Yares

How was this issue handled when we used pin-bar drafting? How was this
handled when we provided "slicks" or sepias to others?

wrote in message news:5225982@discussion.autodesk.com...
This came though the email list of the National BIM Standard group, and I
found it thought provoking. It's from an architect who works for the
general services division of a state government. (I've removed the
reference to the particular state.)



As far as standard legal agreements addressing sharing of BIM and even
CAD information, indemnifying the authors, etc., we... are attempting to
take the long view and streamline the inevitable argument over whether the
architect will give or sell to the contractor(s) CAD (or BIM) files for use
in creating coordination drawings, shop drawings, etc. We've found great
inconsistencies in the disclaimer forms our architectural firms are asking
contractors to sign, as well as the amounts they are asking for to burn a
CD, and believe it's in everyone's interest to write a standardized passage
in our General Conditions that will eventually be tested and proven. Not to
mention the potential for delays while these negotiations occur. And since
the State has asserted ownership of the contract documents, and the
architects are only asking for the contractor to indemnify them, the State
is exposed to claims from errors in the documents/electronic files.
Hopefully once all parties have legal protections, and a set of reasonable
expectations, information sharing can become the norm rather than the
exception. Of course we need to also address the fact that the contractor
needs to share the information they've added with the owner/agency for use
in managing the facility. Please understand that we are writing this in the
language of today's practice, but hope it will to begin to educate and train
our folks for the coming paradigm shift. We are hoping to post the new
documents for review by the end of the summer.
Message 5 of 82
Wotdat
in reply to: Evan Yares

What I wanna know is, who decided on when electronic file-sharing will be the norm? Most companies bought Computer Aided Design softwares to get rid of Manually doing drafting or anything for that matter, not the idea of giving electronic files to any body. We had to buy computers and softwares, Tools we use for achieving a final printed and signed contract document on mylar/velum......which had not been declared obsolete by anybody.

IMO, Everything a company does in the computer that it needs to achieve contractual Printed/Signed design document is theirs and theirs alone.
If anyone wants electronic files, they will have to pay for it.
Give em signed mylars.
Message 6 of 82
Anonymous
in reply to: Evan Yares

How would the desires of Municipal Agencies fit into your desires Wotdat?

In the Civil Engineering side of things I've had about as many Agencies on
each side of this coin.

The more forward-thinking Agencies have fairly well said "Thou shalt"
deliver electronic files; while those whose position is still somewhat
"behind the times" still only require Mylar/Vellum plots to substantiate the
Record Drawing requirement.

--
Don Reichle
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
----------------------------------------------------------
!! Please discuss whatever we tell you with your SysMgr !!
!! They appreciate staying in the loop 🙂 !!

LDT/CD-2K4
AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual-Core 3800+ 2.01GHz
XP-Pro 32bit SP2
2GB RAM
Dual WD800JD Hard Drives - 149GB Nvidia Stripe
Nvidia Quadro FX 1300 128MB
Dual ViewSonic 19-inch VA902b monitors

"The only Constant is Change".


wrote in message news:5226728@discussion.autodesk.com...
What I wanna know is, who decided on when electronic file-sharing will be
the norm? Most companies bought Computer Aided Design softwares to get rid
of Manually doing drafting or anything for that matter, not the idea of
giving electronic files to any body. We had to buy computers and softwares,
Tools we use for achieving a final printed and signed contract document on
mylar/velum......which had not been declared obsolete by anybody.

IMO, Everything a company does in the computer that it needs to achieve
contractual Printed/Signed design document is theirs and theirs alone.
If anyone wants electronic files, they will have to pay for it.
Give em signed mylars.
Message 7 of 82
Wotdat
in reply to: Evan Yares

> for use in creating coordination drawings, shop drawings, etc.

Please allow me to add.....
Why should the architect be responsible for contractors and manufacturers' shop drawings or what have you? Shouldn't they also be doing their own "BIM" they much desire to obtain based on the Architects' Design and, without the EASY button.

Let the architect convert DWG to Portable Document Format (PDF) as file-sharing of contract documents. From there, let everyone interprete and built using that information. Telling the Architect to give up the CAD (or BIM) information is the same as asking them to give up their privacy (IMO)....so selling it just make sense.

But don't listen to me....I only mention things I think are worth my 2 cents.
Message 8 of 82
Anonymous
in reply to: Evan Yares

Since Evan started from the Architectural side of things, I just wanted
everyone to have a chance to understand that the differing disciplines have
further considerations to deal with on this issue.

The differing disciplines I refer to may of course have differing Agencies
to work with/for also.

HTH

--
Don Reichle
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
----------------------------------------------------------
!! Please discuss whatever we tell you with your SysMgr !!
!! They appreciate staying in the loop 🙂 !!

LDT/CD-2K4
AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual-Core 3800+ 2.01GHz
XP-Pro 32bit SP2
2GB RAM
Dual WD800JD Hard Drives - 149GB Nvidia Stripe
Nvidia Quadro FX 1300 128MB
Dual ViewSonic 19-inch VA902b monitors

"The only Constant is Change".


wrote in message news:5226830@discussion.autodesk.com...
> for use in creating coordination drawings, shop drawings, etc.

Please allow me to add.....
Why should the architect be responsible for contractors and manufacturers'
shop drawings or what have you? Shouldn't they also be doing their own "BIM"
they much desire to obtain based on the Architects' Design and, without the
EASY button.

Let the architect convert DWG to Portable Document Format (PDF) as
file-sharing of contract documents. From there, let everyone interprete and
built using that information. Telling the Architect to give up the CAD (or
BIM) information is the same as asking them to give up their privacy
(IMO)....so selling it just make sense.

But don't listen to me....I only mention things I think are worth my 2
cents.
Message 9 of 82
jorgeledezma
in reply to: Evan Yares

"Most companies bought Computer Aided Design softwares to get rid of Manually doing drafting or anything for that matter, not the idea of giving electronic files to any body"

You did exactly in the point. I have said in dozens of posts that issues of ownership, interoperability, and sharing, also the 3D, comes from the relationship between that paradigm shift and ADSK marketing.

I created a post named "To whom the dwg belongs to" to point that we are immerses in a big problem that nobody here sees it: we have a standard file, which becomes standard for external causes (internet effect), but we don't have any agency for ruling the standardization, and we use that file for sharing!

I remember in the ACAD beginings there was the believe that "if you change your drafting table, maylar and pencil for computer, keyboard and mouse, you have to change your procedures also" That change haven arrived yet, at least in the majority here.

Can yo imagine if you contractor give you a bunch of maylar drawings, but lets say, cutted in little pieces, like a puzzle or something like that? So you have to put together all that pieces before you can use the information in that drawing? Who pays for repairing or adapting an external drawing to fit our requirments? Lets say you have your own cad standard and you inquire to your contarctor uses that before they send you the file. But you are not the only contractor client. Who pays to the contractor that custom standard for each client like you.

Client, contractor, ADSK, who? In the case of maylars drawings we had (and have) ANSI, DIM or whatever code we use. We stiil need another code to prepares the layers, block, views and other dwg subproducts, before interchange the dwg file. Who will create that code?

One person, like that unique person in the AUGI wish list?, wrong!

It have to be a council, a group, for inside ACAD users, and for outside ACAD users.

But first we need to figure out to whom belogns the dwg to:

If we own the dwg format we are responsible to fix it. If ADSK owns, ADSK has to fix it. Somebody have to do it.

Finally I have to say you this: in this DG there are some blinds propaganda alienate attacking this type of posting, so don't lose your time.

Its just matter of time. I know it.
Message 10 of 82
Evan Yares
in reply to: Evan Yares

The AutoCAD License Agreement includes the following clause:



6.1 Functionality Limitations. COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN SOFTWARE AND OTHER TECHNICAL SOFTWARE ARE TOOLS INTENDED TO BE USED BY TRAINED PROFESSIONALS ONLY. THEY ARE NOT SUBSTITUTES FOR YOUR PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT. COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN SOFTWARE AND OTHER TECHNICAL SOFTWARE ARE INTENDED TO ASSIST WITH PRODUCT DESIGN AND ARE NOT SUBSTITUTES FOR INDEPENDENT TESTING OF PRODUCT STRESS, SAFETY AND UTILITY. DUE TO THE LARGE VARIETY OF POTENTIAL APPLICATIONS FOR THE SOFTWARE, THE SOFTWARE HAS NOT BEEN TESTED IN ALL SITUATIONS UNDER WHICH IT MAY BE USED. Autodesk SHALL NOT BE LIABLE IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER FOR THE RESULTS OBTAINED THROUGH THE USE OF THE SOFTWARE. PERSONS USING THE SOFTWARE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SUPERVISION, MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL OF THE SOFTWARE. THIS RESPONSIBILITY INCLUDES, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO, THE DETERMINATION OF APPROPRIATE USES FOR THE SOFTWARE AND THE SELECTION OF THE SOFTWARE AND OTHER PROGRAMS TO ACHIEVE INTENDED RESULTS. PERSONS USING THE SOFTWARE ARE ALSO RESPONSIBLE FOR ESTABLISHING THE ADEQUACY OF INDEPENDENT PROCEDURES FOR TESTING THE RELIABILITY AND ACCURACY OF ANY PROGRAM OUTPUT, INCLUDING ALL ITEMS DESIGNED BY USING THE SOFTWARE.



The paragraph is capitalized by Autodesk because of legal precendents that require important notices such as this to be highlighted. That is to say, as much as you might want to skim over some sections of the license agreement, and say they're not important, you'd better not skim over the parts that are capitalized.



I added a bold highlighting to one sentence here. It says that users have a contractual responsibility with respect to independent procedures (i.e. not using Autodesk software) for testing the reliability and accuracy of program output (e.g. DWG files, prints, etc.)



In a complex project lifecycle, where the creators of data files are not necessarily the owners or ultimate consumers of those data files, this contractual obligation raises some interesting questions.



I'm more than a little curious how some of the AutoCAD users here are fulfilling this contractual requirement -- especially since the word "independent" makes it rather clear that it can't be done with Autodesk software?

Message 11 of 82
rculp
in reply to: Evan Yares

"" Why should the architect be responsible for contractors and manufacturers' shop drawings or what have you? ""

To save the client money. Can't speak for architectural firms, but we look to provide our clients with the best product at the least cost. To do that we regularly share design files with fabricators and suppliers in return for a better price.
But hey, that's just me.

Randall Culp
Civil-Structural Design Technician
(aka CADaver)
Message 12 of 82
rculp
in reply to: Evan Yares

"" but we don't have any agency for ruling the standardization, and we use that file for sharing""

oh here we go again. Jorge, one size does NOT fit all. If you want the AIA to manage the standardization of Architectural files then call on them. But AIA standards ONLY work for architects (and not very well there), they don't work at all in our industry or any other for that matter. A single standard will only reduce the flexibility of the tool and in turn it usefulness. For a change try looking at the several hundred industries utilizing Autodesk products that are not architectural.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"" Can yo imagine if you contractor give you a bunch of maylar drawings, but lets say, cutted in little pieces, like a puzzle or something like that? ""

Autodesk doesn't do that either. Very poor analogy.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"" "if you change your drafting table, maylar and pencil for computer, keyboard and mouse, you have to change your procedures also" That change haven arrived yet, at least in the majority here. ""

Speak only for yourself on that issue Jorge. You're the only poster I've seen that refuses to setup his own standards with even a minimum of customization. You'd prefer someone else to tell you how and what to draw.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"" Lets say you have your own cad standard and you inquire to your contarctor uses that before they send you the file. But you are not the only contractor client. Who pays to the contractor that custom standard for each client like you.""

We provide our suppliers with the tools to accomplish our standards, as should any firm.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"" We stiil need another code to prepares the layers, block, views and other dwg subproducts, before interchange the dwg file. Who will create that code? ""

We do. I have a question Jorge, as an architect how would you like a standard developed by a steel fabricator. Only the layers and styles needed for steel fabrication are allowed in this new code. Would that fit you well? Probably not, just as one created by the AIA would not fit us. And should Autodesk attempt some standard that will accommodate ALL possible users in ALL possible industries it will be much to cumbersome to be of any use at all. Surely you can see that.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"" It have to be a council, a group, for inside ACAD users, and for outside ACAD users. ""

oh no, a committee?? that'll guarantee it's uselessness.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"" But first we need to figure out to whom belogns the dwg to...""

nope already done that, you just don't like the result for some reason.
But hey, that's just me.

Randall Culp
Civil-Structural Design Technician
(aka CADaver)
Message 13 of 82
Wotdat
in reply to: Evan Yares

Don't get me wrong Randy, I know that every firm's priority is toward saving the "Client" money. Isn't it the reason every design firm plunged into the technology paradigm with the hope of doing things better and faster with the intention of stream lining expensies related to doing things the hard way. Therefore, acquiring CAD (or BIM) files from any firm through sell/purchase should just be a part of doing business that come with the changes of time like everything else. Naturally.
Message 14 of 82
Anonymous
in reply to: Evan Yares

There's two means of accomplishing the end of raising the Client's
"profitability" Wotdat;

1 - Quick & Dirty

2 - Quality & Diligence

The ONLY similarities though with these two methods are my own contrived
Initials for the 2nd method.

I wonder which method is the most profitable for ALL concerned? Especially
the Buying Public, as they certainly fit into that definition of ALL.

Tell me honestly now - which of those two styles of Development would you
desire to call "home"?

And the 2nd query I place before you goes hand-in-hand;

Do you practice the methodology that you wish to live with/in?

And the 3rd query naturally follows;

You really feel you've done your best effort for the true Clients - the ones
who choose to live with/in our products?

Just some thought-provoking queries to ponder upon - the next time either
style Client calls upon your firm with a concept, for your firm to produce
Final Plans for them.

Hope They Help.

--
Don Reichle
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
----------------------------------------------------------
!! Please discuss whatever we tell you with your SysMgr !!
!! They appreciate staying in the loop 🙂 !!

LDT/CD-2K4
AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual-Core 3800+ 2.01GHz
XP-Pro 32bit SP2
2GB RAM
Dual WD800JD Hard Drives - 149GB Nvidia Stripe
Nvidia Quadro FX 1300 128MB
Dual ViewSonic 19-inch VA902b monitors

"The only Constant is Change".


wrote in message news:5228021@discussion.autodesk.com...
Don't get me wrong Randy, I know that every firm's priority is toward
saving the "Client" money. Isn't it the reason every design firm plunged
into the technology paradigm with the hope of doing things better and
faster with the intention of stream lining expensies related to doing things
the hard way. Therefore, acquiring CAD (or BIM) files from any firm through
sell/purchase should just be a part of doing business that come with the
changes of time like everything else. Naturally.
Message 15 of 82
wookie
in reply to: Evan Yares

>>1 - Quick & Dirty

2 - Quality & Diligence<<

Or as our factory manager likes to say.
"We may be slow, but at least we're rough."

Fortunately he's joking....
Message 16 of 82
Wotdat
in reply to: Evan Yares

> 2 - Quality & Diligence

Don, You sneaky..... Don't get me wrong.
That's me, totally, bulls eye right on the dot, 100%.
Customer Satisfaction Guaranteed.

I don't know about you but I think I should be more worried about the Selected contractor rather than the Hired Architect selling to What to Whom. Where I'm from at least.
Message 17 of 82
jorgeledezma
in reply to: Evan Yares

"PERSONS USING THE SOFTWARE ARE ALSO RESPONSIBLE FOR ESTABLISHING THE ADEQUACY OF INDEPENDENT PROCEDURES FOR TESTING THE RELIABILITY AND ACCURACY OF ANY PROGRAM OUTPUT"

1. dwg is an output? right?

2. ADSK fails ("?") to realize that the dwg is a standard by default (facto), for network effect. They simply cant "ignore" what they did, for money.

Tobacco companies put a warning in the cigarettes boxes, and the governments enforce them to have more responsability in the consequences of their products.

In this case should be the users because the government is not aware of this?

I would like the Cad Managers make the math and get the exact cost of this.

Note: Randy, if you are not ADSK employee, do not reply to my posts. It is suspect that I am not censured by the DG administrator but all my post are persecuted by Randy.
Message 18 of 82
Anonymous
in reply to: Evan Yares

There is a good article in the July Professional Surveyor Magazine. It
basically tells the story of one Surveying & Engineering firm who decided it
was their responsibility to deliver their product in whatever format the
client wanted. They've made investments in software and training. They have
grown from a 5 person firm to a 150 person firm in the past 10 years.

So while some may argue about whose responsibility compatibility is. Others
have taken on that responsibility and made a good deal of money at it.
They've obviously chosen #2.

Allen

"Don Reichle" wrote in message
news:5228255@discussion.autodesk.com...
There's two means of accomplishing the end of raising the Client's
"profitability" Wotdat;

1 - Quick & Dirty

2 - Quality & Diligence

The ONLY similarities though with these two methods are my own contrived
Initials for the 2nd method.

I wonder which method is the most profitable for ALL concerned? Especially
the Buying Public, as they certainly fit into that definition of ALL.

Tell me honestly now - which of those two styles of Development would you
desire to call "home"?

And the 2nd query I place before you goes hand-in-hand;

Do you practice the methodology that you wish to live with/in?

And the 3rd query naturally follows;

You really feel you've done your best effort for the true Clients - the ones
who choose to live with/in our products?

Just some thought-provoking queries to ponder upon - the next time either
style Client calls upon your firm with a concept, for your firm to produce
Final Plans for them.

Hope They Help.

--
Don Reichle
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
----------------------------------------------------------
!! Please discuss whatever we tell you with your SysMgr !!
!! They appreciate staying in the loop 🙂 !!

LDT/CD-2K4
AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual-Core 3800+ 2.01GHz
XP-Pro 32bit SP2
2GB RAM
Dual WD800JD Hard Drives - 149GB Nvidia Stripe
Nvidia Quadro FX 1300 128MB
Dual ViewSonic 19-inch VA902b monitors

"The only Constant is Change".


wrote in message news:5228021@discussion.autodesk.com...
Don't get me wrong Randy, I know that every firm's priority is toward
saving the "Client" money. Isn't it the reason every design firm plunged
into the technology paradigm with the hope of doing things better and
faster with the intention of stream lining expensies related to doing things
the hard way. Therefore, acquiring CAD (or BIM) files from any firm through
sell/purchase should just be a part of doing business that come with the
changes of time like everything else. Naturally.
Message 19 of 82
Evan Yares
in reply to: Evan Yares

Jorge -

Yes, DWG is an output.

Autodesk is well aware of DWG's status as a de facto standard, and I'm certain that they understand the value of the network effect that DWG creates. (They talk about it on their website.)

This "warning" is probably like the warning on a cigarette box. Yet, in this case, Autodesk may be asking users, as part of the warning, to do something that they can't easily do -- *independently* test the reliability and accuracy of their DWG files.

How does this affect liability, when there are multiple parties involved (Autodesk, the user, and their customer), and questions about ownership? I don't know. I'm not trying to beat up on Autodesk here, but rather am interested in hearing other perspectives than my own.
Message 20 of 82
Anonymous
in reply to: Evan Yares

"" ADSK fails ("?") to realize that the dwg is a standard by default
(facto), for network effect.""

No they don't. they plan on making big money because of it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"" They simply cant "ignore" what they did, for money. ""

They're not attempting to ignore anything

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"" Tobacco companies put a warning in the cigarettes boxes, and the
governments enforce them to have more responsability in the consequences of
their products. ""

Oh for Pete's sake. Now you're equating Autodesk with cancer causing
agents. Evan, this is the kind of mean-spirited, panic-mongering lie that
draw a hostile response.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"" I would like the Cad Managers make the math and get the exact cost of
this. ""

The exact cost of what, Jorge? Making money?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"" Note: Randy, if you are not ADSK employee, do not reply to my posts. ""

Jorge, when you get to be an Autodesk forum moderator you can tell me when
and what to post. Until then, save your breath.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"" It is suspect that I am not censured by the DG administrator but all my
post are persecuted by Randy. ""

Yo Evan, can you say "black-helicopter"?

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Post to forums  

Administrator Productivity


Autodesk Design & Make Report