Originally Posted by JJs
Another question:
If these designers and magazines are so gung-ho on controlling YOUR quilt and what you can do with it after YOU make it, that should be clearly stated with each and every pattern in the magazine...
For instance, the aforementioned McCalls - there are patterns in there so why not put the copyright notice right there along with the designers name???? On page 64 is a quilt called "Rosie's Wreaths", designed by Pat Sloan... tells you how to make the quilt, tells you how much of each fabric you need, gives you the patterns - NO WHERE does it say, oh by the way, after you make this quilt you can't show it to anybody or that we are going to keep track of you and your quilt for ever...
On page 34 is a MAPLE LEAF quilt - "designed" by Renee Peterson - You think???? Maple leaf has been around FOREVER...
Same thing for the quilt on page 26, or the pinwheels on page 20 or the Snowballs and 9 patch on page 46 - oh wait, they changed the name to "Swing Dance" - and now they are claiming this oh so traditional quilt design???????????
Frankly the whole thing is getting stupider by the minute.
If somebody comes up with a new, fantastic design (and I've seen some at shows) with a new idea on how to combine colors or something, I can see where they should be credited.
But this taking old standard squares and sticking a quilt in a magazine and then claiming the 'design' is beyond belief.
Especially since the squares used in the quilts I just mentioned are ALL IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN and in the EQ programs AND EQ's copyright info says you can use those squares to your heart's content....
sheesh
Okay, I had to buy the magazine to see what this was all about. 'Sheesh' is right!
First of all, what's the big idea of using a cutesy cartoon of a quilter in prison! Talk about scare tactics.
Secondly, referring to the quilts shown and patterns included in this magazine - who and HOW did the magazine perform due diligence prior to publishing these quilts and patterns to ensure that they weren't infringing on someone else's copyright? Like the person (probable a century or more ago) who created the maple leaf pattern? I certainly agree that, as beautiful as Renee Peterson's maple leaf quilt is, she certainly didn't create the maple leaf pattern. Her use of fabric was unique? So is ours. What makes her quilt copyrightable? No offense to Renee Peterson - I think her quilt is gorgeous and I'm only using hers as an example because we all recognize the maple leaf pattern.
I'm making two baby quilts for a set of twins soon to be born. I'm making them in the D9P. Do I have to tell the mom that she'd better not take the babies out of her home wrapped in these quilts in the event someone else sees the D9P pattern in the quilts and threatens to prosecute? And God forbid she take the twins on an airplane wrapped in these quilts - imagine the huge numbers of people that might see the 'stolen' pattern then!
I'm afraid that this really reminds me of our Homeowner's Association when this neighborhood was first built. I planted flowers in the front yard and received a nasty letter saying I had to remove them because I didn't seek approval from the HOA for the COLOR choice! When people who don't usually feel powerful get a little power it goes to their heads.
Rules are needed, but power trips aren't.