This has been an interesting and at times, sad, thread to read. I had no idea there were people who were so terribly angry about such a thing. I understand that copyright law seems complicated and like it's written in a foreign language. I don't understand killing the messenger (McCalls). I don't understand the lashing out at others for their statements of their interpretations of copyright laws. I don't understand why there is such an issue with taking some self-responsibility to request permission to display an item that is a copy or derivative from a designer's original work. It is ethical and completely appropriate to ask permission and give credit where credit is due. (Yes, I get it that blocks and designs in public domain are free to be used without permission.) But really, is it so hard to let a designer know that you admired their work so much that you were inspired to create something like it of your own and would be proud to display it for public viewing? I'm betting few designers would decline such a request. This seems like a huge mountain out of a molehill to me. From reading the thread start to finish, I'm sure I'll get my 40 lashes with a wet noodle here. Best of luck to those of you switching to EQ exclusively. As for me, Dorothy Ann's quilt in McCall's was the reason I bought that issue to begin with. I love it and when the day comes that I make one and want to display it, I will certainly seek her blessing first. Thank you Dorothy Ann for sharing your beautiful designs. I find them to be energizing and inspiring. Without magazines and published patterns, designers would be hard-pressed to continue in their profession.