Knitter's Review Forums
  The online community for readers of Knitter's Review.
  This week: Photos and wisdom from the Knitter's Review Retreat
   > Have you subscribed yet?
Knitter's Review Forums
KR Home | My Profile | Register | Active Topics | Private Messages | Search | FAQ | Want to make Betty happy?
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your username or password?

 All Forums
 General Chitchat
 Random Knitting-Related Stuff
 Copyright -- How far is too far?
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly
Previous Page | Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 9

Genie
New Pal

USA
9 Posts

Posted - 07/24/2003 :  9:00:36 PM  Show Profile  Visit Genie's Homepage Send Genie a Private Message
Geez, I don't have time enough to knit all the goodies on my list for my four grandchildren, and surely no time to knit for payment. If I did, what would designers expect me to do--conjure up all my own patterns? That would be a hoot! Where would stringent copywrite inforcement leave all the charity organizations that sell volunteers' efforts, such as hospital auxiliaries or church groups? We'd be living in a world overrun with altered patterns of dish cloths, ripple afghans and destitute parishes. Take two Prozacs and get over it! :)
Genie


Go to Top of Page

Genie
New Pal

USA
9 Posts

Posted - 07/24/2003 :  9:00:36 PM  Show Profile  Visit Genie's Homepage Send Genie a Private Message
Geez, I don't have time enough to knit all the goodies on my list for my four grandchildren, and surely no time to knit for payment. If I did, what would designers expect me to do--conjure up all my own patterns? That would be a hoot! Where would stringent copywrite inforcement leave all the charity organizations that sell volunteers' efforts, such as hospital auxiliaries or church groups? We'd be living in a world overrun with altered patterns of dish cloths, ripple afghans and destitute parishes. Take two Prozacs and get over it! :)
Genie


Go to Top of Page

Licensed2Cook
Permanent Resident

USA
3554 Posts

Posted - 07/24/2003 :  9:34:25 PM  Show Profile  Send Licensed2Cook a Yahoo! Message Send Licensed2Cook a Private Message
I did some looking around and found this on the US Copyrights site. I think it is clear as mud!

USEFUL ARTICLES
A “useful article” is an article having an intrinsic utilitarian function that is not merely to portray the appearance of the article or to convey information. Examples are clothing, furniture, machinery, dinnerware, and lighting fixtures. An article that is normally part of a useful article may itself be a useful article, for example, an ornamental wheel cover on a vehicle.

Copyright does not protect the mechanical or utilitarian aspects of such works of craftsmanship. It may, however, protect any pictorial, graphic, or sculptural authorship that can be identified separately from the utilitarian aspects of an object. Thus, a useful article may have both copyrightable and uncopyrightable features. For example, a carving on the back of a chair or a floral relief design on silver flatware could be protected by copyright, but the design of the chair or flatware itself could not.

Some designs of useful articles may qualify for protection under the federal patent law. For further information, contact the Patent and Trademark Office at Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks, Washington, D.C. 20231 or via the Internet at www.uspto.gov. The telephone number is (800) 786-9199 and the TTY number is (703) 305-7785. The automated information line is (703) 308-4357.

Copyright in a work that portrays a useful article extends only to the artistic expression of the author of the pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work. It does not extend to the design of the article that is portrayed. For example, a drawing or photograph of an automobile or a dress design may be copyrighted, but that does not give the artist or photographer the exclusive right to make automobiles or dresses of the same design.



Dee
Go to Top of Page

Licensed2Cook
Permanent Resident

USA
3554 Posts

Posted - 07/24/2003 :  9:34:25 PM  Show Profile  Send Licensed2Cook a Yahoo! Message Send Licensed2Cook a Private Message
I did some looking around and found this on the US Copyrights site. I think it is clear as mud!

USEFUL ARTICLES
A “useful article” is an article having an intrinsic utilitarian function that is not merely to portray the appearance of the article or to convey information. Examples are clothing, furniture, machinery, dinnerware, and lighting fixtures. An article that is normally part of a useful article may itself be a useful article, for example, an ornamental wheel cover on a vehicle.

Copyright does not protect the mechanical or utilitarian aspects of such works of craftsmanship. It may, however, protect any pictorial, graphic, or sculptural authorship that can be identified separately from the utilitarian aspects of an object. Thus, a useful article may have both copyrightable and uncopyrightable features. For example, a carving on the back of a chair or a floral relief design on silver flatware could be protected by copyright, but the design of the chair or flatware itself could not.

Some designs of useful articles may qualify for protection under the federal patent law. For further information, contact the Patent and Trademark Office at Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks, Washington, D.C. 20231 or via the Internet at www.uspto.gov. The telephone number is (800) 786-9199 and the TTY number is (703) 305-7785. The automated information line is (703) 308-4357.

Copyright in a work that portrays a useful article extends only to the artistic expression of the author of the pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work. It does not extend to the design of the article that is portrayed. For example, a drawing or photograph of an automobile or a dress design may be copyrighted, but that does not give the artist or photographer the exclusive right to make automobiles or dresses of the same design.



Dee
Go to Top of Page

christine@christineharris.com


Posts

Posted - 07/24/2003 :  10:17:54 PM  Show Profile Send christine@christineharris.com a Private Message
"Would it make a difference if she was credited with the design?' several people have suggested. I would be really careful about doing this unless you had the creator's written permission (as they say, a verbal agreement is not worth the paper it is written on). By putting this in writing, you are legally admitting that you have either copied or used that designer's idea or work. However, if you have permission, then it could be good for both designer and knitter. But sometimes they won't give it unless a payment is involved.
ChristineH
Go to Top of Page

christine@christineharris.com


Posts

Posted - 07/24/2003 :  10:17:54 PM  Show Profile Send christine@christineharris.com a Private Message
"Would it make a difference if she was credited with the design?' several people have suggested. I would be really careful about doing this unless you had the creator's written permission (as they say, a verbal agreement is not worth the paper it is written on). By putting this in writing, you are legally admitting that you have either copied or used that designer's idea or work. However, if you have permission, then it could be good for both designer and knitter. But sometimes they won't give it unless a payment is involved.
ChristineH
Go to Top of Page

phlame
Permanent Resident

USA
1562 Posts

Posted - 07/24/2003 :  10:30:50 PM  Show Profile Send phlame a Private Message
That's very interesting that Vogue Knitting would bring this up. In one issue of Vogue, there was a sweater pattern that was an EXACT copy of a J.Jill sweater. It was a very distinctive design. No mention or credit given to J.Jill in the pattern. Then, that same sweater appeared in another knitting magazine...I can't remember which one or whether it was a hand-knit or machine-knit. I'm wondering how legal it is to make a pattern of a sweater from a catalog and pass it off as your own.

Shirley

Too much is not enough!
Go to Top of Page

phlame
Permanent Resident

USA
1562 Posts

Posted - 07/24/2003 :  10:30:50 PM  Show Profile Send phlame a Private Message
That's very interesting that Vogue Knitting would bring this up. In one issue of Vogue, there was a sweater pattern that was an EXACT copy of a J.Jill sweater. It was a very distinctive design. No mention or credit given to J.Jill in the pattern. Then, that same sweater appeared in another knitting magazine...I can't remember which one or whether it was a hand-knit or machine-knit. I'm wondering how legal it is to make a pattern of a sweater from a catalog and pass it off as your own.

Shirley

Too much is not enough!
Go to Top of Page

ApacheRose


USA
Posts

Posted - 07/24/2003 :  10:39:10 PM  Show Profile Send ApacheRose a Private Message
This may sound anarchist of me...but I've put the time and effort into learning every technique that is needed to successfully execute the pattern. Without that time put in by ALL knitters, pattern designers would not have a market. So if we put monetary value on time, we've already made an intitial investment into the venture. Then we purchase the pattern. The designer gets their cut, but nobody has reimbursed me for the time I have spent learning. Then I purchase the yarn, needles, findings to produce the knitted object. Next I put hours upon hours into physically producing the knitted object.

The way I see it, if I am not allowed to sell the product I have made, then the designer is actually in debt to ME, for time spent learning, money spent on supplies, and time spent producing...minus the 5.95 I paid for the pattern.

Of course I can always choose not to knit, or to design my own patterns...but if all knitters were forced to do that, there would be no market for designers at all. So I say the designers who are complaining (and they HAVE to exist, or this would not even be an issue) need to stop whining and be thankful that they have a market at all.

Sorry If I sound negative...

-Diana

Go to Top of Page

ApacheRose


USA
Posts

Posted - 07/24/2003 :  10:39:10 PM  Show Profile Send ApacheRose a Private Message
This may sound anarchist of me...but I've put the time and effort into learning every technique that is needed to successfully execute the pattern. Without that time put in by ALL knitters, pattern designers would not have a market. So if we put monetary value on time, we've already made an intitial investment into the venture. Then we purchase the pattern. The designer gets their cut, but nobody has reimbursed me for the time I have spent learning. Then I purchase the yarn, needles, findings to produce the knitted object. Next I put hours upon hours into physically producing the knitted object.

The way I see it, if I am not allowed to sell the product I have made, then the designer is actually in debt to ME, for time spent learning, money spent on supplies, and time spent producing...minus the 5.95 I paid for the pattern.

Of course I can always choose not to knit, or to design my own patterns...but if all knitters were forced to do that, there would be no market for designers at all. So I say the designers who are complaining (and they HAVE to exist, or this would not even be an issue) need to stop whining and be thankful that they have a market at all.

Sorry If I sound negative...

-Diana

Go to Top of Page

amelia
New Pal

23 Posts

Posted - 07/24/2003 :  10:55:45 PM  Show Profile Send amelia a Private Message
With the seamstress example I believe the rule is the customer has to buy the pattern and fabric themselves and the seamstress returns the pattern w/the finished product.

Amelia
Go to Top of Page

amelia
New Pal

23 Posts

Posted - 07/24/2003 :  10:55:45 PM  Show Profile Send amelia a Private Message
With the seamstress example I believe the rule is the customer has to buy the pattern and fabric themselves and the seamstress returns the pattern w/the finished product.

Amelia
Go to Top of Page

knitwhits
Warming Up

USA
69 Posts

Posted - 07/24/2003 :  11:55:10 PM  Show Profile  Visit knitwhits's Homepage Send knitwhits a Private Message
Keep in mind the designer has also spent many years learning and perfecting techniques, ideas and methods to create a pattern. Each pattern has to be made, checked, double and triple checked, even then it may or may not prove to be a successful idea or design even after the designer may have put many many hours into the creation of that one piece.

When a musician or band makes an album and people copy it from their friends rather than buying it, the artist looses out as they are paid on the sale of each album.

Some knitwear designers sells each pattern individually. If stores copy patterns (which I have seen happen) then the designer loses the entire value of their work. Sure the store sells the yarn and the item gets made. The knitter may say, "oh yes it's a pattern by so-and-so" but the original designer still didn't get paid for the sale of that pattern. Tell that to the landlord!

In the art world, technically if you alter something by 15% then you aren't liable to copyright violations.. I was always curious to know in art school how to define what that 15% was.

Personally, I don't know how I would feel if I saw someone selling my designs at a market. I think if I was getting credit, that would take out some of the sting, but ultimately that person would be taking advantage of the situation. My approach to that type of situation though would be more along the lines of encouraging them to create their own designs.

However, if someone asks you to make something for them, such as a seamstress would make something, and wants to pay you for it, I don't see that as copyright violation. You are in theory, buying the pattern. If you were to make 10 of "them" and sell in a market without crediting the original designer, then I think that crosses that mysterious copyright line.

Sorry for the long winded opinion on this.. it certainly is an interesting topic to try to define.

Tina
www.knitwhits.com

Never cut what you can untie. - Joubert (1754-1824)
Go to Top of Page

knitwhits
Warming Up

USA
69 Posts

Posted - 07/24/2003 :  11:55:10 PM  Show Profile  Visit knitwhits's Homepage Send knitwhits a Private Message
Keep in mind the designer has also spent many years learning and perfecting techniques, ideas and methods to create a pattern. Each pattern has to be made, checked, double and triple checked, even then it may or may not prove to be a successful idea or design even after the designer may have put many many hours into the creation of that one piece.

When a musician or band makes an album and people copy it from their friends rather than buying it, the artist looses out as they are paid on the sale of each album.

Some knitwear designers sells each pattern individually. If stores copy patterns (which I have seen happen) then the designer loses the entire value of their work. Sure the store sells the yarn and the item gets made. The knitter may say, "oh yes it's a pattern by so-and-so" but the original designer still didn't get paid for the sale of that pattern. Tell that to the landlord!

In the art world, technically if you alter something by 15% then you aren't liable to copyright violations.. I was always curious to know in art school how to define what that 15% was.

Personally, I don't know how I would feel if I saw someone selling my designs at a market. I think if I was getting credit, that would take out some of the sting, but ultimately that person would be taking advantage of the situation. My approach to that type of situation though would be more along the lines of encouraging them to create their own designs.

However, if someone asks you to make something for them, such as a seamstress would make something, and wants to pay you for it, I don't see that as copyright violation. You are in theory, buying the pattern. If you were to make 10 of "them" and sell in a market without crediting the original designer, then I think that crosses that mysterious copyright line.

Sorry for the long winded opinion on this.. it certainly is an interesting topic to try to define.

Tina
www.knitwhits.com

Never cut what you can untie. - Joubert (1754-1824)
Go to Top of Page

michelle
Chatty Knitter

United Kingdom
235 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  12:21:54 AM  Show Profile  Visit michelle's Homepage Send michelle a Private Message
Interesting thread! As the amateur designer of a few free patterns, I am guilty of stating that one of my patterns was not to be knit to sell for profit (I think I just looked to see what other designers of free patterns had said, and then just said the same thing). I reason I included this was that, as I had provided the pattern for free, I didn't see why someone should profit from it, but had no problem with people making the item for charity.
However, now I have thought about it, I very much doubt that it is possible to handknit most items for profit, as the price tag would be too great to truely reimburse the knitters time taken to knit the item (maybe 10-15 hours at a reasonable rate say $10/hr), plus cost of materials, so anyone knitting an item to sell probably is not making a profit anyway. Some very basic bulky weight patterns could be knit for profit I suppose (e.g simple hats and scarves), but these patterns are so basic I doubt if anyone could claim them as truely their own, so if anyone wants to knit any of my patterns for profit - good luck to you! (I would like to be credited though)
Michelle
P.S. only one pattern on my site so far, but I have a childs sunhat, and suntop, and a lace edged cardigan to add when I get round to it.

http://www.retroknits.com
http://www.stores.ebay.co.uk/retroknits
Go to Top of Page

michelle
Chatty Knitter

United Kingdom
235 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  12:21:54 AM  Show Profile  Visit michelle's Homepage Send michelle a Private Message
Interesting thread! As the amateur designer of a few free patterns, I am guilty of stating that one of my patterns was not to be knit to sell for profit (I think I just looked to see what other designers of free patterns had said, and then just said the same thing). I reason I included this was that, as I had provided the pattern for free, I didn't see why someone should profit from it, but had no problem with people making the item for charity.
However, now I have thought about it, I very much doubt that it is possible to handknit most items for profit, as the price tag would be too great to truely reimburse the knitters time taken to knit the item (maybe 10-15 hours at a reasonable rate say $10/hr), plus cost of materials, so anyone knitting an item to sell probably is not making a profit anyway. Some very basic bulky weight patterns could be knit for profit I suppose (e.g simple hats and scarves), but these patterns are so basic I doubt if anyone could claim them as truely their own, so if anyone wants to knit any of my patterns for profit - good luck to you! (I would like to be credited though)
Michelle
P.S. only one pattern on my site so far, but I have a childs sunhat, and suntop, and a lace edged cardigan to add when I get round to it.

http://www.retroknits.com
http://www.stores.ebay.co.uk/retroknits
Go to Top of Page

KanDeeLee
New Pal

USA
11 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  12:45:55 AM  Show Profile Send KanDeeLee a Private Message
Is instilling fear in the home crafter developing a crafting ethic or opportunistic economics?

I would suggest that designers and their publishers want us to believe that copywriten directions provides the author economic control over the products being made from their patterns. If authors want that much control, they should be selling production licenses and not just patterns. I would ask if Trisha Malcolm's interpretation is a just and fair interpretation of Copy write law, or, are her words those of a person with economic interests in extending control of copywriten material to the control of what that published material produces? According to Trisha Malcolm there is no limit to the protection afforded by Copy write. The knitting shop owner selling a class project or sample is just as guilty as a professional hired to knit the latest Debbie Bliss for several new grandbabies.

The real issue here is the power words have in convicting her reader's. Many may accept her pronouncements and hold themselves and others guilty when there is no legal ground for doing so. Making it seem all the more unethical to challenge this economically biased interpretation of Copy write law.

Until there are clear guidelines, a fair and just designer who believes their Copy write provides them with control over copying and control over production of goods that result from their patterns, should include a full disclosure statement in readable print that informs the user they relinquish all rights of profiting from their labor when using that pattern. Any user should have the right to this information before they purchase the pattern or publication.







Go to Top of Page

KanDeeLee
New Pal

USA
11 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  12:45:55 AM  Show Profile Send KanDeeLee a Private Message
Is instilling fear in the home crafter developing a crafting ethic or opportunistic economics?

I would suggest that designers and their publishers want us to believe that copywriten directions provides the author economic control over the products being made from their patterns. If authors want that much control, they should be selling production licenses and not just patterns. I would ask if Trisha Malcolm's interpretation is a just and fair interpretation of Copy write law, or, are her words those of a person with economic interests in extending control of copywriten material to the control of what that published material produces? According to Trisha Malcolm there is no limit to the protection afforded by Copy write. The knitting shop owner selling a class project or sample is just as guilty as a professional hired to knit the latest Debbie Bliss for several new grandbabies.

The real issue here is the power words have in convicting her reader's. Many may accept her pronouncements and hold themselves and others guilty when there is no legal ground for doing so. Making it seem all the more unethical to challenge this economically biased interpretation of Copy write law.

Until there are clear guidelines, a fair and just designer who believes their Copy write provides them with control over copying and control over production of goods that result from their patterns, should include a full disclosure statement in readable print that informs the user they relinquish all rights of profiting from their labor when using that pattern. Any user should have the right to this information before they purchase the pattern or publication.







Go to Top of Page

Jtension1824@aol.com
New Pal

1 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  01:33:08 AM  Show Profile Send Jtension1824@aol.com a Private Message
I'm writing from London, UK, where copyright laws may be a little different. A while ago I asked Debbie Bliss how would she feel if I knitted some of her bootees to sell at a church fair for charity, and she said go ahead, she had no problem with that. I think it is the mass market that designers want protecting from, not at-home knitters who maybe knit something for a friend who pays them in cash or some other way.

What about if one person photo-copies a pattern from a book to give to a friend who does not want to purchase a hardback book for just the one pattern? I feel if the designer is Debbie Bliss or Rowan, then the friend purchases that company's yarn, and that would be acceptable, though I expect it is probably illegal.
Go to Top of Page

Jtension1824@aol.com
New Pal

1 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  01:33:08 AM  Show Profile Send Jtension1824@aol.com a Private Message
I'm writing from London, UK, where copyright laws may be a little different. A while ago I asked Debbie Bliss how would she feel if I knitted some of her bootees to sell at a church fair for charity, and she said go ahead, she had no problem with that. I think it is the mass market that designers want protecting from, not at-home knitters who maybe knit something for a friend who pays them in cash or some other way.

What about if one person photo-copies a pattern from a book to give to a friend who does not want to purchase a hardback book for just the one pattern? I feel if the designer is Debbie Bliss or Rowan, then the friend purchases that company's yarn, and that would be acceptable, though I expect it is probably illegal.
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 9 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Knitter's Review Forums © 2001-2014 Knitter's Review Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 2.25 seconds. Snitz Forums 2000
line This week's bandwidth
kindly brought to you by


and by knitters like you.
How can I sponsor?


line subscribe to Knitter's Reviwe