Found this interesting policy statement from the American Institute of Architects:


PROFESSIONALINTERIORDESIGNER does not proclaim to be an attorney so take this with a large rock of sodium.  This appears to be a crack in the courtroom door regarding the use of the term “architects” and its variations such as “Interior Architect” or “Interior Architecture”.  That said PROFESSIONALINTERIORDESIGN is well aware of the ethical issues that this issue stirs up.  I digress.

Also, I am fairly certain that state licensing boards will still protect the right of their rightfully licensed/registered architects to legally own the term so don’t go changing your business cards yet.  If anybody knows, or has an opinion as to, what this AIA missive really means I welcome your comments.

P.S. Just heard from an acquaintance in Connecticut who advertises herself as an interior architect.  A Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection Special Investigator just issued her a cease and decist order based on Chapter 390 of the Architectural Licensing Board use of the title- to wit;

Sec. 20-290. Use of title “architect”. In order to safeguard life, health and property, no person shall practice architecture in this state, except as provided in this chapter, or use the title “architect”, or display or use any words, letters, figures, title, sign, seal, advertisement or other device to indicate that such person practices or offers to practice architecture, unless such person has obtained a license as provided in this chapter. Nothing in this chapter shall prevent any Connecticut corporation in existence prior to 1933, whose charter authorizes the practice of architecture, from making plans and specifications or supervising the construction of any building, except that no such corporation shall issue plans or specifications unless such plans or specifications have been signed and sealed by an architect licensed under the provisions of this chapter.


Looks like the AIA has gotten out of the 1st amendment business as well they should. Let the states pay for the battle.

2 responses to “WHAT’S IN A WORD REDUX DEUX”

  1. Is the tide turning? Maybe not in CT, but perhaps elsewhere? If we can’t own Interior Designer, then how can they legally own Architect? Kleenex and Xerox have fought this for years, but they are a legal brand. At some point they became generic and in the common use. Since IFI proudly proclaims in their name Interior Architect and many foreign countries recognize the term, it is time the AIA stop fighting this. Heck, we have been dealing with it for years when decorators took the name Interior Designers……


  2. Thanks. Another thought here is that the taxpayers are paying for the “Special Investigators” to police misrepresentation of titles….I guess that is where my close libertarian wants to bust out and proclaim…Enough!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: