Knitter's Review Forums
  The online community for readers of Knitter's Review.
  This week: Always know how much yarn you need
   > 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

nparkhurst
Warming Up

USA
54 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  03:05:24 AM  Show Profile Send nparkhurst a Private Message
If you're from the US, and you find current copyright law excessive, you should know that there's currently a bill in the works in Congress to make what seems like a reasonable change in copyright law. (I think copyright owners should have rights, but it's gone overboard, mostly to benefit companies instead of the original creators).

Here's a summary of the suggested law from the people who proposed it (site listed below):

"How would it work?

"Fifty years after a copyrighted work was published, a copyright owner would have to pay a tiny tax. That tax could be as low as $1. If the copyright owner does not pay that tax for three years in a row, then the copyright would be forfeited to the public domain. If the tax is paid, then the form would require the listing of a copyright agent--a person charged with receiving requests about that copyright. The Copyright Office would then make the listing of taxes paid, and copyright agents, available free of charge on their website."


Here's more information:
http://eldred.cc/

If you think this is a good idea, please contact your congresspeople about it:

http://www.house.gov/writerep/

Really, if you're not making enough royalties to pay $1 a year (after fifty years, no less), why not let something go into the public domain?

Go to Top of Page

nparkhurst
Warming Up

USA
54 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  03:05:24 AM  Show Profile Send nparkhurst a Private Message
If you're from the US, and you find current copyright law excessive, you should know that there's currently a bill in the works in Congress to make what seems like a reasonable change in copyright law. (I think copyright owners should have rights, but it's gone overboard, mostly to benefit companies instead of the original creators).

Here's a summary of the suggested law from the people who proposed it (site listed below):

"How would it work?

"Fifty years after a copyrighted work was published, a copyright owner would have to pay a tiny tax. That tax could be as low as $1. If the copyright owner does not pay that tax for three years in a row, then the copyright would be forfeited to the public domain. If the tax is paid, then the form would require the listing of a copyright agent--a person charged with receiving requests about that copyright. The Copyright Office would then make the listing of taxes paid, and copyright agents, available free of charge on their website."


Here's more information:
http://eldred.cc/

If you think this is a good idea, please contact your congresspeople about it:

http://www.house.gov/writerep/

Really, if you're not making enough royalties to pay $1 a year (after fifty years, no less), why not let something go into the public domain?

Go to Top of Page

emma@girlfromauntie.com
New Pal

8 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  04:11:17 AM  Show Profile  Visit emma@girlfromauntie.com's Homepage Send emma@girlfromauntie.com a Private Message
KanDeeLee wrote:
quote:

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.


and:
quote:

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.



Interesting points.

First, copyright is an economic right, not just a moral concept. It is supposed to give the author/copyright owner economic control over their work.

Is Trish Malcolm's interpretation correct? Maybe. (I haven't read it. Did she use conditional language, like "may"?) It depends on the exact state of the law in each jurisdiction. It also depends on just how much artistic merit exists in the knitted item that is separable from the functional aspect of the item. If anyone needs a definite "yes" or "no" answer, then they should consult their own copyright attorney.

Should designers provide "full disclosure" of their rights? Well, that is actually the function of copyright law. We don't walk around with disclaimers pinned to our backside advising others that they do not have the right to kick us. Stores do not have to notify customers that shoplifters will be prosecuted before calling the cops. And copyright owners do not have to explain what copyright means before suing you for infringement. The fact that we have public laws should be notice enough to the consumer.

Should--but often isn't. All laws are subject to interpretation by the courts, and unfortunately thanks to the subject matter of copyright, it's an area of law that is subject to widely varying interpretations, by consumers, designers, lawyers, and judges.

I personally think, too, that knitters would benefit from some kind of clear licence agreement between the designer and the user. I've been working on one for my own use, in fact. However, in situations where the designer isn't directly selling her patterns, the enforceability of the agreement might be further muddled by contract law. (In some places, this might mean that your VK would have to come shrinkwrapped with a licence agreement printed on it. No more riffling through the pages on the newsstand!)

On the other hand, if we went in the direction of a Microsoft EULA, there'd be plenty of scope for the designer to disclaim liability for the knitter's mistakes: "Knitter holds Designer immune and absolved from all claims of liability arising from the use of the Pattern in the event Knitter fails to knit a gauge swatch of at least 6" square before proceeding to follow the directions of said Pattern." Ha!

Jenna
http://www.girlfromauntie.com (Yes, most of my site is down. The copyright section should be returning within a week or two after I reformat it.)
Go to Top of Page

emma@girlfromauntie.com
New Pal

8 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  04:11:17 AM  Show Profile  Visit emma@girlfromauntie.com's Homepage Send emma@girlfromauntie.com a Private Message
KanDeeLee wrote:
quote:

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.


and:
quote:

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.



Interesting points.

First, copyright is an economic right, not just a moral concept. It is supposed to give the author/copyright owner economic control over their work.

Is Trish Malcolm's interpretation correct? Maybe. (I haven't read it. Did she use conditional language, like "may"?) It depends on the exact state of the law in each jurisdiction. It also depends on just how much artistic merit exists in the knitted item that is separable from the functional aspect of the item. If anyone needs a definite "yes" or "no" answer, then they should consult their own copyright attorney.

Should designers provide "full disclosure" of their rights? Well, that is actually the function of copyright law. We don't walk around with disclaimers pinned to our backside advising others that they do not have the right to kick us. Stores do not have to notify customers that shoplifters will be prosecuted before calling the cops. And copyright owners do not have to explain what copyright means before suing you for infringement. The fact that we have public laws should be notice enough to the consumer.

Should--but often isn't. All laws are subject to interpretation by the courts, and unfortunately thanks to the subject matter of copyright, it's an area of law that is subject to widely varying interpretations, by consumers, designers, lawyers, and judges.

I personally think, too, that knitters would benefit from some kind of clear licence agreement between the designer and the user. I've been working on one for my own use, in fact. However, in situations where the designer isn't directly selling her patterns, the enforceability of the agreement might be further muddled by contract law. (In some places, this might mean that your VK would have to come shrinkwrapped with a licence agreement printed on it. No more riffling through the pages on the newsstand!)

On the other hand, if we went in the direction of a Microsoft EULA, there'd be plenty of scope for the designer to disclaim liability for the knitter's mistakes: "Knitter holds Designer immune and absolved from all claims of liability arising from the use of the Pattern in the event Knitter fails to knit a gauge swatch of at least 6" square before proceeding to follow the directions of said Pattern." Ha!

Jenna
http://www.girlfromauntie.com (Yes, most of my site is down. The copyright section should be returning within a week or two after I reformat it.)
Go to Top of Page

Elaine@PA
New Pal

16 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  04:47:33 AM  Show Profile Send Elaine@PA a Private Message
Knitting is not cheap these days.I feel I am one of the knitters who is keeping the knitting magazines,(I have 4 subscriptions),designers, yarn shop owners, the companies who produce the needles, yarn, knitting notions,the owners who raise the animals that produce the yarn, etc in business. If we (the knitters) can make money by selling items from anyone's design, we will have more money to put back into the industry. Are there really that many sweathers being sold to hurt the pocketbooks of the designers?

Go to Top of Page

Elaine@PA
New Pal

16 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  04:47:33 AM  Show Profile Send Elaine@PA a Private Message
Knitting is not cheap these days.I feel I am one of the knitters who is keeping the knitting magazines,(I have 4 subscriptions),designers, yarn shop owners, the companies who produce the needles, yarn, knitting notions,the owners who raise the animals that produce the yarn, etc in business. If we (the knitters) can make money by selling items from anyone's design, we will have more money to put back into the industry. Are there really that many sweathers being sold to hurt the pocketbooks of the designers?

Go to Top of Page

lizzi
Gabber Extraordinaire

USA
553 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  06:22:52 AM  Show Profile  Visit lizzi's Homepage Send lizzi a Private Message
After reading all of this twice, I've come to a decision. All the free patterns I design and post on my website will be available both for "home-use" for yourself or charity and for use as a sale item. I don't see this as someone profiting from my design; I see this as someone trying to make a profit from the time and materials they invested in making the product. Yes, technically they will profit more on the time if they did not design the pattern themselves, but as I am an amateur and not professional designer, I'm really not getting paid either way.

If anyone is interested in my free patterns, they are linked on my blog.

Lizzi
http://amimono.blogspot.com

Amimono wa daisuki desu.

Go to Top of Page

lizzi
Gabber Extraordinaire

USA
553 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  06:22:52 AM  Show Profile  Visit lizzi's Homepage Send lizzi a Private Message
After reading all of this twice, I've come to a decision. All the free patterns I design and post on my website will be available both for "home-use" for yourself or charity and for use as a sale item. I don't see this as someone profiting from my design; I see this as someone trying to make a profit from the time and materials they invested in making the product. Yes, technically they will profit more on the time if they did not design the pattern themselves, but as I am an amateur and not professional designer, I'm really not getting paid either way.

If anyone is interested in my free patterns, they are linked on my blog.

Lizzi
http://amimono.blogspot.com

Amimono wa daisuki desu.

Go to Top of Page

jade
Permanent Resident

USA
1543 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  07:05:45 AM  Show Profile Send jade a Private Message
I haven't yet gotten either my VK or IK but I will read Trisha Malcolm's article carefully. My opinion is that there is such a tiny amount of money involved that any legal issues are just not worth the cost of prosecution. I'd love to know how much is involved in Alice Starmore's case. Anyone know the details?

The definition of ownership in knitting design is very fuzzy. Who owns the stitches? Who owns the combination of stitches and yarns? At what point does it become distinctively different? If I look at something, pull out my Barbara Walker books and make a knockoff using yarn from my stash, is that copyright theft?

Seems like a storm in a teacup to me.

Cheryl

Go to Top of Page

jade
Permanent Resident

USA
1543 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  07:05:45 AM  Show Profile Send jade a Private Message
I haven't yet gotten either my VK or IK but I will read Trisha Malcolm's article carefully. My opinion is that there is such a tiny amount of money involved that any legal issues are just not worth the cost of prosecution. I'd love to know how much is involved in Alice Starmore's case. Anyone know the details?

The definition of ownership in knitting design is very fuzzy. Who owns the stitches? Who owns the combination of stitches and yarns? At what point does it become distinctively different? If I look at something, pull out my Barbara Walker books and make a knockoff using yarn from my stash, is that copyright theft?

Seems like a storm in a teacup to me.

Cheryl

Go to Top of Page

dale
New Pal

USA
8 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  07:06:23 AM  Show Profile  Visit dale's Homepage Send dale a Private Message
There is the age old dilemma of ethics and morality, for copyrights as well as other non-intrusive laws, you have to get caught for it to cause a problem. Hence, I am pretty sure that no one is going to find out or care too much if a friend or two pay you to knit them a sweater. And a person can always take the Napster type risk that noone will notice until millions of dollars are at stake. (Also for the music analogy, I am pretty sure that in most cases, the artist doesn't make money on record sales, the music companies do. Unless their contract specifies so, the artist usually only make money from touring, and perhaps the licensing of songs that they write.)

However, if one wants to observer a bit of respect for the designers who so brilliantly research and publish patterns for the rest of us to use, and in the case of selling your work, I believe that the person from the UK has the right idea. If your pieces are significantly based on a copyrighted pattern or a pattern and you don't want to run the risk of a potential lawsuit in the case where the designer decides to spend the money to pursue it, (or you just want to show a bit of deference to the designer) just ask the copyrighted party for permission. It probably will take less time to get a response than it takes to knit most things (then again I am a slow knitter!) I can't imagine that most knitting designers are that uptight. The designer may ask for a commission, or to have their name mentioned as the pattern designer, say no problem or tell you that you don't have permission to sell items using their pattern. If they don't grant you permission find someone else who does, and stop buying patterns from the company/person who didn't give you permission. If you run into problems finding a designer who will grant you permission to sell small quantities of their product, I would then contact a law service to see what you can do.




Go to Top of Page

dale
New Pal

USA
8 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  07:06:23 AM  Show Profile  Visit dale's Homepage Send dale a Private Message
There is the age old dilemma of ethics and morality, for copyrights as well as other non-intrusive laws, you have to get caught for it to cause a problem. Hence, I am pretty sure that no one is going to find out or care too much if a friend or two pay you to knit them a sweater. And a person can always take the Napster type risk that noone will notice until millions of dollars are at stake. (Also for the music analogy, I am pretty sure that in most cases, the artist doesn't make money on record sales, the music companies do. Unless their contract specifies so, the artist usually only make money from touring, and perhaps the licensing of songs that they write.)

However, if one wants to observer a bit of respect for the designers who so brilliantly research and publish patterns for the rest of us to use, and in the case of selling your work, I believe that the person from the UK has the right idea. If your pieces are significantly based on a copyrighted pattern or a pattern and you don't want to run the risk of a potential lawsuit in the case where the designer decides to spend the money to pursue it, (or you just want to show a bit of deference to the designer) just ask the copyrighted party for permission. It probably will take less time to get a response than it takes to knit most things (then again I am a slow knitter!) I can't imagine that most knitting designers are that uptight. The designer may ask for a commission, or to have their name mentioned as the pattern designer, say no problem or tell you that you don't have permission to sell items using their pattern. If they don't grant you permission find someone else who does, and stop buying patterns from the company/person who didn't give you permission. If you run into problems finding a designer who will grant you permission to sell small quantities of their product, I would then contact a law service to see what you can do.




Go to Top of Page

ENugent
Chatty Knitter

120 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  07:16:35 AM  Show Profile  Visit ENugent's Homepage Send ENugent a Private Message
I am a US patent attorney (practicing in Massachusetts). However, no one should consider the following to be reliable legal advice for any particular situation - it is simply abstract discussion. No one on this board is my client, and reading this post doesn't make you my client. Always consult a lawyer in your own jurisdiction if you need reliable advice for a specific venture. If you rely on this post and get into hot water, you're on your own as far as I'm concerned!

First of all, there is a slight inaccuracy in one of the posts above - utility patents last for 20 years from the date of filing in the US and most other places in the world. Design patents in the US (on the aesthetic appearance, rather than the useful features, of an article) last for 14 years from the date of issuance.

Copyright applies to a wide variety of types of artistic works in the US, and I think knitted garments probably qualify for copyright protection. (The classes are literary works; musical works, including any accompanying words; dramatic works, including any accompanying music; pantomimes and choreographic works; pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works; motion pictures and other audiovisual works; sound recordings; and architectural works. Knitted articles probably fall under pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works). Food made from a particular recipe is not covered by copyright (unless it is also sculptural, I suppose), although the written recipe itself is covered, so comparisons to recipes are inapposite.

Copyrights in works created after 1978 last for the life of the author plus 70 years.

When you buy a knitting pattern, you almost certainly have purchased an implied license to make and use the knitted article (assuming there is no explicit license attached to the article). Under the doctrine of exhaustion, you probably also have the right to sell that article. Thus, if you buy a knitting pattern that does not have any notice that you are limited in your rights to sell articles made from the pattern, I think you're OK. Downloading it off the net is much fuzzier, especially if it wasn't put up by the author. On the other hand, if someone puts up his or her own pattern and asks people to send photos of the garments made from the pattern, they've very clearly implied that it's OK to make the garment, and if they haven't put limits on selling it, you probably can sell it as well.

If there is a notice that you can make the article for personal use, but can't sell it for a profit, I think that notice is probably valid and binding. Being "reimbursed for your time" is probably profit; being reimbursed for your yarn is not. However, if it just says that you can't sell the item (without mentioning profit), even being reimbursed for your yarn is probably prohibited. The license to make it yourself for your own personal use might stretch to hiring someone to make it for you for your own personal use, even though that person is paid for his or her time.

Copyright is limited by the doctrine of "fair use". In determining whether a use is "fair", a court is required to consider four statutory factors, and may consider other factors as well. The four statutory factors are the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; the nature of the copyrighted work; amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. Selling baby booties at the church fair is more likely to be fair use than selling high-end sweaters at a boutique, but the fair use jurisprudence is all over the place, and it's very difficult to predict whether any particular use will qualify as "fair", especially if it's a commercial use.

I haven't seen the VK article, so I don't know what it said. But to flat out say that you can't ever sell a knitted item made from someone else's pattern is probably an overstatement. It really depends on the terms of the license under which you have the pattern.

Go to Top of Page

ENugent
Chatty Knitter

120 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  07:16:35 AM  Show Profile  Visit ENugent's Homepage Send ENugent a Private Message
I am a US patent attorney (practicing in Massachusetts). However, no one should consider the following to be reliable legal advice for any particular situation - it is simply abstract discussion. No one on this board is my client, and reading this post doesn't make you my client. Always consult a lawyer in your own jurisdiction if you need reliable advice for a specific venture. If you rely on this post and get into hot water, you're on your own as far as I'm concerned!

First of all, there is a slight inaccuracy in one of the posts above - utility patents last for 20 years from the date of filing in the US and most other places in the world. Design patents in the US (on the aesthetic appearance, rather than the useful features, of an article) last for 14 years from the date of issuance.

Copyright applies to a wide variety of types of artistic works in the US, and I think knitted garments probably qualify for copyright protection. (The classes are literary works; musical works, including any accompanying words; dramatic works, including any accompanying music; pantomimes and choreographic works; pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works; motion pictures and other audiovisual works; sound recordings; and architectural works. Knitted articles probably fall under pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works). Food made from a particular recipe is not covered by copyright (unless it is also sculptural, I suppose), although the written recipe itself is covered, so comparisons to recipes are inapposite.

Copyrights in works created after 1978 last for the life of the author plus 70 years.

When you buy a knitting pattern, you almost certainly have purchased an implied license to make and use the knitted article (assuming there is no explicit license attached to the article). Under the doctrine of exhaustion, you probably also have the right to sell that article. Thus, if you buy a knitting pattern that does not have any notice that you are limited in your rights to sell articles made from the pattern, I think you're OK. Downloading it off the net is much fuzzier, especially if it wasn't put up by the author. On the other hand, if someone puts up his or her own pattern and asks people to send photos of the garments made from the pattern, they've very clearly implied that it's OK to make the garment, and if they haven't put limits on selling it, you probably can sell it as well.

If there is a notice that you can make the article for personal use, but can't sell it for a profit, I think that notice is probably valid and binding. Being "reimbursed for your time" is probably profit; being reimbursed for your yarn is not. However, if it just says that you can't sell the item (without mentioning profit), even being reimbursed for your yarn is probably prohibited. The license to make it yourself for your own personal use might stretch to hiring someone to make it for you for your own personal use, even though that person is paid for his or her time.

Copyright is limited by the doctrine of "fair use". In determining whether a use is "fair", a court is required to consider four statutory factors, and may consider other factors as well. The four statutory factors are the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; the nature of the copyrighted work; amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. Selling baby booties at the church fair is more likely to be fair use than selling high-end sweaters at a boutique, but the fair use jurisprudence is all over the place, and it's very difficult to predict whether any particular use will qualify as "fair", especially if it's a commercial use.

I haven't seen the VK article, so I don't know what it said. But to flat out say that you can't ever sell a knitted item made from someone else's pattern is probably an overstatement. It really depends on the terms of the license under which you have the pattern.

Go to Top of Page

l.h.brady@worldnet.att.net
New Pal

1 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  07:16:38 AM  Show Profile Send l.h.brady@worldnet.att.net a Private Message
I have a copy of Knitting for Fun and Profit by Shirley MacNulty. She states, after a discussion regarding how confusing the copyright laws are in the this area: "...let me easy your mind by saying that the sale of products made from copyrighted patterns, designs, and magazine how-to-projects is probably not goiung to cause any problems as long as sales are limited, and they yield a profit only to you, the crafter. That means no sales through shops of any kind where a sales commission or profit is received by a third party, and absolutely no wholesaling of such products.....You are not mass producing if you make a dozen handcrafted items for sale at a craft fair or holiday boutique, but you would definitely be considered a mass-producter if you made dozens, or hundreds, for sale in shops."
Go to Top of Page

l.h.brady@worldnet.att.net
New Pal

1 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  07:16:38 AM  Show Profile Send l.h.brady@worldnet.att.net a Private Message
I have a copy of Knitting for Fun and Profit by Shirley MacNulty. She states, after a discussion regarding how confusing the copyright laws are in the this area: "...let me easy your mind by saying that the sale of products made from copyrighted patterns, designs, and magazine how-to-projects is probably not goiung to cause any problems as long as sales are limited, and they yield a profit only to you, the crafter. That means no sales through shops of any kind where a sales commission or profit is received by a third party, and absolutely no wholesaling of such products.....You are not mass producing if you make a dozen handcrafted items for sale at a craft fair or holiday boutique, but you would definitely be considered a mass-producter if you made dozens, or hundreds, for sale in shops."
Go to Top of Page

DebbiOH
Gabber Extraordinaire

USA
525 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  07:44:38 AM  Show Profile Send DebbiOH a Private Message
Being a textile junkie at heart I also quilt and teach quilting classes. This copyright law question is always a topic of conversation. I love reading how others interpret the law since I'm not sure myself. Anyway, when teaching, whether it is knitting or quilting we also tell the students that they have to buy the book, or pattern or source of pattern. We never copy anything out of a book to include in our classes. My concern now is what to advise students about reproducing knitting items from published patterns. I have to admit that I have made a few sweaters for friends that do not knit and they paid me to do so. They picked out the pattern and I did the work. So was this illegal?

Debbi
NW Ohio
Go to Top of Page

DebbiOH
Gabber Extraordinaire

USA
525 Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  07:44:38 AM  Show Profile Send DebbiOH a Private Message
Being a textile junkie at heart I also quilt and teach quilting classes. This copyright law question is always a topic of conversation. I love reading how others interpret the law since I'm not sure myself. Anyway, when teaching, whether it is knitting or quilting we also tell the students that they have to buy the book, or pattern or source of pattern. We never copy anything out of a book to include in our classes. My concern now is what to advise students about reproducing knitting items from published patterns. I have to admit that I have made a few sweaters for friends that do not knit and they paid me to do so. They picked out the pattern and I did the work. So was this illegal?

Debbi
NW Ohio
Go to Top of Page

floppytaildesignandknit


USA
Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  08:00:18 AM  Show Profile Send floppytaildesignandknit a Private Message
I am a brand spanking new knitwear designer, too. I went to my local knit shop & asked the owner about this subject. She's a designer & has published a book. Her rule of thumb is a pattern must be altered at least 30%.
I guess I'm OK because I used the schematic (shape) from the design. I changed the stitch, yarn, finish details, changed collar.
It is a laugh to think about actually turning a profit by designing & knitting my own stuff. Can't be done unless I become a super fast knitter.
Moms came asking for the sweaters my kids wear to school & gifts I made the teachers. And I think I have a market in my general area. But the focus is doing what I love.
Go to Top of Page

floppytaildesignandknit


USA
Posts

Posted - 07/25/2003 :  08:00:18 AM  Show Profile Send floppytaildesignandknit a Private Message
I am a brand spanking new knitwear designer, too. I went to my local knit shop & asked the owner about this subject. She's a designer & has published a book. Her rule of thumb is a pattern must be altered at least 30%.
I guess I'm OK because I used the schematic (shape) from the design. I changed the stitch, yarn, finish details, changed collar.
It is a laugh to think about actually turning a profit by designing & knitting my own stuff. Can't be done unless I become a super fast knitter.
Moms came asking for the sweaters my kids wear to school & gifts I made the teachers. And I think I have a market in my general area. But the focus is doing what I love.
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 1.8 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