Originally Posted by tooMuchFabric
Well my goodness. I was reading through all this very interesting topic, replying as though we were all sitting around a kitchen table gabbing and sipping, and I realize I must be the only person awake at this hour - which is late even for me!
I apologize to everyone for running off at the fingertips on here.
But I do so enjoy everyone.
I agree :) I enjoyed reading through your recap of the discussion.
I went to a quilt show yesterday with three other ladies and on the way there we had a discussion about the different rules at different shows. We tlked about identifying the designer and what was legally allowed by the designer. We all voiced similar opinions to what was discussed here.
We got to the show and it featured a community of quilters who have overcome very difficult times in the last 100 yrs and who are now being presented as innovative and 'nouveau'. Their designs have been picked up by a major 'chain' store who are selling quilts in these designs as young urban 'chic'. The designs and quality were very 'primitive ' and 'homespun' using a variety of fabrics that may be found in an old clothesbasket or thrift store.
As I walked around looking at the quilts I was thinking about the copyright aspect. I did chat with some of the ladies from the community that had accompanied their display for the show and the history was all very interesting. The problem that I had with this display was (although I appreciate the community's history etc) is that these designs and quilts were similar to something that my daughter would have made and did create when she was 6 yrs old. I am sure some of us have similar ones that have been passed down to us from long ago or if our children dabbled in sewing, when they were very young, some may have been created.
My point here is, now, these very simplistic designs, some of which have been in the public domain for 100 yrs are now 'copyrighted' . Where does the spinning wheel stop? If a children's group decided to make a few wall hangings or quilts that would definitely look similar and they raffled or sold them they would perhaps be in fringement of these designs.
This whole infringment area is really murky waters and can be argued either way. I guess the question becomes, "What is an original design"? What aspects of a design give it the 'original' label? Are past designs that are already in the public domian taken into account?
Even some of the more intricate designs have been around for a very long time - If you walk through the churches in Europe and look at the floor tiles and mosaics that have been there for hundreds of years you will see designs that are now being considered as new or original.