A word of warning about this article. I had read it too and used the info to comment on a quilter's blog on Facebook. One of her followers is a lawyer and stated that some of the information is not true, so be careful. I don't know what to believe anymore. I have to remind myself though, that just because I read an article someone has written, does not necessarily make the information factual. Just be careful everybody.

dixie_fried,

Thank you for posting. I feel more comfortable knowing that your information comes from attorneys that you know (and love---lol) as opposed to some unknown person writing on an internet website. There is a lot of information (and misinformation) on the internet. It is hard to separate fact from fiction.

I would like to clarify that DH and I are not offering legal advice. Nor am I condoning illegal or immoral activities. My comments were/are very specific to the purchase of patterns and books and the potential sale of items created from those patterns and books.

Our interpretation of Right of First-sale doctrine and Copyright limitations helped us come to the conclusion that products produced from a purchased pattern are not controlled by the designers original copyright. There is no contract between the person who purchase a book or pattern and the author that limits the use of the book or pattern, short of federal law that does not allow the purchaser to make copies of the book/pattern and sell it for profit.

The designer is compensated when the pattern is purchased, so the idea of "STEALING" from designers by selling items made from their sometimes very expensive books seems like a farce. Besides, only the printed words are copyright protected because the government won't grant copyright to an idea or a process.

Another thing I find hysterical is that utilitarian objects (i.e.: quilts, garments, pieces of furniture, etc.) are not eligible for copyright protection. The Copyright laws mention "designs"--designs of SHIP HULLS. Only in the 1990's were fashion designs even considered in the Supreme Court, and the courts decided then that designers of high fashion couldn't make a good enough argument why their garments deserved to be included in the law wording.

Read it all right here: http://www.copyright.gov/

I really am not going to spend my time worrying about this as I know some of these people would really like to put fear into us but I just will not use any magazines as there is plenty of stuff on the internet that way we can quilt in our group and still exchange patterns worry free also I am sure a lot of this article is true or we would not be seeing all these spin off patterns that we are getting and there are many of them the ones that comes to mind are twister spin off of square dance----one block wonder spin off of stack and whackand many many others and these people are really doing it for money where with friends we trade patterns I can see no harm in it as long as I leave the magazines alone where these people does not want their patterns used I will quilt for fun even the fabric companies has tons of patterns so just sew
quilt have fun and enjoy

Thanks for sharing.

Thank you for the information, but when it comes to facts about copyrights, you should go by what the library of congress has. That is where you file for copyrights and trademarks of any kind.

That was very interesting read. thanks for sharing. i admit in the past i have hesitated many times. I dont sell what I do, so I am not making a profit off anyone.

The lawyer who said some of the information was wrong?

What specifically?

What federal statute or court case did they cite to prove what we have posted is wrong?

We post federal court cases and in one instance the 1879 Supreme Court decision.

Can't respond to what was wrong without more information then "some of the stuff is wrong"

If I read this article right, I can make a quilt from a pattern and sell it, but I cannot copy the pattern itself and sell it.

Good info, to know. Clears up a lot of questions we have. Thank You for posting.