I haven't bought a clothing/sewing pattern in a couple of decades,
but when I did, there were on some of them stated restrictions as to how many items could be made from that particular copy of the pattern before another pattern must be purchased;
stated restriction that even though the pattern was multi-sized ( as in Size X-Small thru X-Large all printed on one sheet ) it was forbidden to make more than one size item from the pattern;
and that usage must be limited to home non-commercial items, including not for charity sales.
I do not know what patterns say nowadays.
I hope the restrictions have changed.
Originally Posted by tabberone
If, as McCalls asserts in this recent article, copyright restrictions are what Mccalls claims they are, then why is it that nowhere on the McCalls web site, or the Simplicity web site, or the Butterick web site, or the Vogue web site, is there ANY mention of restrictions upon the use of patterns?
Of course these companies will lie to you about copyrights. It is in their best financial interests because you will buy pattern after pattern from them. I have not been able to locate a single federal lawsuit about the commercial use of patterns. And I have looked, and looked.
I do not have a copy of the recent McCalls article but when I get one I will deconstruct the McCalls lies on my web site.
McCalls has NO registered copyrights on its patterns. Neither does Butterick or Simplicity. Vogue has some back in the 1950s probably before the copyright office started refusing to register patterns.