Originally Posted by
MaryTG
This is a very useful clarification that was included in the US Copyright Office's new compendium released in late December 2014.
920.1 Patterns for Making ArticlesThe drawings and text in a pattern book may be copyrightable, if they are sufficiently original. This may include textual instructions, technical diagrams that demonstrate cutting, stitching, weaving, or other techniques required by the pattern, as well as illustrations of the completed items.
A registration for a pattern book generally does not extend to individual pattern pieces that may be used to create a useful article, such as shapes that may be traced and used to make a sleeve for a dress, because they have an intrinsic utilitarian function. Nor does the registration extend to any useful article that may be created with the pattern, such as an item of clothing. For a general discussion of useful articles, see Section 924.
Doesn't this apply to the person trying to acquire a copyright and not to the person trying to use a copyrighted pattern?
This is a Supreme Court case and still referred to yet today.
This information is taken directly from the court opinion. It is not taken out of context nor is it altered.
From Baker v Selden, 101 US 99 (1879)
¶ 6 But there is a clear distinction between the book, as such, and the art which it is intended to illustrate. The mere statement of the proposition is so evident, that it requires hardly any argument to support it. The same distinction may be predicated of every other art as well as that of book-keeping. A treatise on the composition and use of medicines, be they old or new; on the construction and use of ploughs, or watches, or churns; or on the mixture and application of colors for painting or dyeing; or on the mode of drawing lines to produce the effect of perspective, would be the subject of copyright; but no one would contend that the copyright of the treatise would give the exclusive right to the art or manufacture described therein. The copyright of the book, if not pirated from other works, would be valid without regard to the novelty, or want of novelty, of its subject-matter. The novelty of the art or thing described or explained has nothing to do with the validity of the copyright. To give to the author of the book an exclusive property in the art described therein, when no examination of its novelty has ever been officially made, would be a surprise and a fraud upon the public. That is the province of letters-patent, not of copyright. The claim to an invention or discovery of an art or manufacture must be subjected to the examination of the Patent Office before an exclusive right therein can be obtained; and it can only be secured by a patent from the government.
Using words we all understand, it says that items made using copyrighted information are not covered by the copyright.