Welcome to the Quilting Board!

Already a member? Login above
loginabove
OR
To post questions, help other quilters and reduce advertising (like the one on your left), join our quilting community. It's free!

Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7 ... LastLast
Results 126 to 150 of 246

Thread: Did anyone else read this in McCall's mag

  1. #126
    Super Member Dodie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Wyoming
    Posts
    1,467
    Blog Entries
    1
    I did write McCalls a letter and canceled also sent it at their expense in the envelope asking for my renewal but here is the difference a few days later I got the Fon's and Porter magazine the Fon's and Porter people had 3 of their own patterns in it for free download Jenny Beyer Had one plus some websites to fabric manufactures who had free patterns so who needs McCalls there was an answer back not answering anything just said to watch for short article next
    month this will take much more than a short article for me
    Dodie

  2. #127
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    in the heart of the awl
    Posts
    993
    I emailed McCalls Quilting magazine and here is there answer:
    Dear Carol,

    Thank you for your recent correspondence regarding the article about copyright law for quilters in the September/October 2010 issue of McCall’s Quilting. Due to overwhelming reader interest, we are working with the author of the piece, Janet Jo Smith, to prepare a short follow-up for our November/December issue.



    Copyright law is a complex topic, one which we would never have space enough to present completely to our readers. But it’s also a very important topic, and one we believe all quilters need information about in order to protect their rights and respect those of other quilters. It was with this in mind that we presented Janet Jo’s answers to quilters’ most common copyright questions. Unfortunately, some readers seem to have drawn inaccurate conclusions based on the limited information presented in the article, and are feeling alarmed about situations where copyright law has little or no application. For example, vast numbers of our favorite quilt blocks and patterns have been within the public domain for years and are not encumbered by copyright law as we understand it.



    We’re glad the article has spurred such interest and discussion in the quilting community, and hope you’ll watch for the follow-up.



    Sincerely,



    Beth Hayes
    Editor-in-Chief


    So, I guess that now we wait.

  3. #128
    Super Member plainjane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,811
    Blog Entries
    62
    I hate to beat a dead horse, but this is very irritating!
    today I got in a fabric to make my granddaughter a little dress (1 1/2 yd) and on the selvage was printed Linda Spivey for Elizabeth's Studio For personal use only! Well, if I have scraps left, yes I will put it in a quilt (postage stamp) and if I decide to some day, I may sell it! How does anyone think they can control the secondary market-Just that PRINTED selvage is soooo irritating-I will think twice about any $$$ going to this line of fabric.
    Jane

  4. #129

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    601
    I have been watching this thread for days, with growing alarm and concern. First, I know that copyright law can be complex and confusing. However, I believe that a few things need to be kept in mind. Copyright law was not written by McCall's Quilting. It was written by congress, enacted into law, and applies equally to all intellectual property, not just quilting. I think we need to remember context. The article is simply a brief explanation of how copyright law affects quilting. The laws are the same regardless of industry.

    Some people here have given very accurate and brief summaries of the "rules," if you will, but I think a lot of people are concerned about things that aren't actually affected by copyright law. No one is trying to recover the maple leaf block and turn it into private intellectual property. What they are doing is saying that if you use those instructions, for that version of a maple leaf quilt, you need to ask permission before displaying it, and cite the designer when you do. Derivative means a derivative of that version of the quilt - not of a block that happens to also appear in the the quilt. For example, if I decide to use a monkey wrench block, something that I'm very familiar with, to make a quilt that I make up using my own head, it's not derivative, since the block is in the public domain. If, however, I see instructions for how to make a specific monkey wrench quilt that I really like (which I did last month in a magazine), but it inspires me to make an altered version of that specific quilt (I'm changing the size, the relative sizes of the sashing, borders, and blocks, and color scheme), then it is derivative. It is derivative because I would not have thought of putting the quilt together in that way had I not seen the pattern in the magazine. That is the key that makes it derivative. I did not think of it on my own - I thought of the design because I saw someone else's design.

    Please remember that most designers are not wealthy or greedy individuals who are trying to cheat us. They are hard-working people who are (sometimes desperately) trying to make a living at something they love. If we want them to continue designing, inside and outside of magazines, we should support them, which means following the law and treating them with respect. In order to do this, I never photocopy a design, I buy one copy of a design for each copy of the quilt I wish to make, and if my design is a copy of or inspired by a pattern, I always credit the designer and ask permission before showing it publicly. It's not that burdensome, and it helps keep my favourite designers in business, not only by giving them my hard-earned money, but by being a advertisement for them as well. When others see credit given to a designer, they're more likely to buy something that designer made, which keeps them in business producing more of the patterns I love.

    Let's try to remember the purpose of copyright to begin with, and remember that it protects all of us - whether we're professional designers or not.

  5. #130
    JJs
    JJs is offline
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    LA - Lower Alabama
    Posts
    894
    Interesting that McCalls is telling us to wait with bated breath and to buy the next magazine to see what else they have to say.
    "Inaccurate conclusions"? and then they mention public domain blocks - WTH - if that quilt made with public domain blocks is not subject to copyright why don't they just say so? Why not put the copyright rules for EACH quilt in the mag right with the quilt instructions. Why have to contact the magazine AND the designer - why not one central person/place/email, why not just say, you can make this quilt and show it in a quilt show but not make twenty billion to sell. Why make such a pain in the wazoo out of the whole thing.
    Stupid

    What's so difficult about granting the permission along with the pattern? In this day and age of bazillion patterns, boocoo quilt shows, blah blah, why make everybody jump through hoops.

    I've said it before and I'll say it again - if (and that's a huge, big if) I decided to make a fantastic COPY quilt from somebody's design I would have no problem (maybe) of HAVING TO TAKE THAT EXTRA TIME, ENERGY, TROUBLE to ask permission when it should be inherent in the PRICE $$$$$$$ of the pattern in the first place.
    Nobody is 'stealing money from the designers' - they paid for the pattern....
    cripes

    inaccurate conclusions? ok, we are too dumb to understand and they are going to graciously explain it for us.... can't wait....

  6. #131
    Super Member hobo2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Boonsboro, MD
    Posts
    2,721
    Blog Entries
    1
    I was on line last night looking at Chinese imports and lo and behold they were selling quilts that bear more than a passing resemblance to "Shakespeare in the Park". A quilt I am very familiar with. They had it in bundles of 18 for $300.00 us. You could tell the fabric was cheap knockoff and the hand quilting was 3 to the inch. But its this type of Copyright infringement we need to stop and not allow in this country. I have never been told "NO" when I asked permission for displaying in a quilt show. They always wish me luck and ask to let them know after how I did. Great women!

  7. #132
    Super Member plainjane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,811
    Blog Entries
    62
    The item in question for me was the FABRIC! Not a pattern! Printed on the selvage.

  8. #133
    Super Member Dodie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Wyoming
    Posts
    1,467
    Blog Entries
    1
    Still makes me wonder how these designers can tweek a pattern then sell it for mega bucks One Bock Wonder was the most plain to understand tweeked pattern that I ever saw and
    as far as I know Bethany Reynolda designed the one in the stack and whack also when I pay for the pattern buy hards of very expensive fabric do hours and hours of work the quilt is MINE not the pattern as I did not design it but I did pay for it for my use so I am really done with the McCalls magazine get the new copy of Fon's and Porter and read it seems a lot friendlier then McCalls

  9. #134
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    in the heart of the awl
    Posts
    993
    Quote Originally Posted by plainjane
    The item in question for me was the FABRIC! Not a pattern! Printed on the selvage.
    My friend that works in the fabric dept told me that if you buy fabric and cut it up to sell on ebay, that is illegal. Especially if it is marked for personal use only.

  10. #135
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    in the heart of the awl
    Posts
    993
    Quote Originally Posted by Dodie
    Still makes me wonder how these designers can tweek a pattern then sell it for mega bucks One Bock Wonder was the most plain to understand tweeked pattern that I ever saw and
    as far as I know Bethany Reynolda designed the one in the stack and whack also when I pay for the pattern buy hards of very expensive fabric do hours and hours of work the quilt is MINE not the pattern as I did not design it but I did pay for it for my use so I am really done with the McCalls magazine get the new copy of Fon's and Porter and read it seems a lot friendlier then McCalls

    I noticed in the latest copy of Fons & Porter, they give permission to use one of the patterns. that was nice to see.

    It appears that more and more we are being restricted and if we question or complain, we are "not understanding" what they meant. there is a reason that McCalls printed that article but now there is so much backlash that they will have a fun time trying to explain it all. I wonder how much their magazine will suffer in all of this.

    I can't wait to read the next installment in the copyright saga and see what they say-especially about the quilt show issues.

  11. #136
    Senior Member renee765's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    955
    Quote Originally Posted by garysgal
    I emailed McCalls Quilting magazine and here is there answer:
    Dear Carol,

    Thank you for your recent correspondence regarding the article about copyright law for quilters in the September/October 2010 issue of McCall’s Quilting. Due to overwhelming reader interest, we are working with the author of the piece, Janet Jo Smith, to prepare a short follow-up for our November/December issue.



    Copyright law is a complex topic, one which we would never have space enough to present completely to our readers. But it’s also a very important topic, and one we believe all quilters need information about in order to protect their rights and respect those of other quilters. It was with this in mind that we presented Janet Jo’s answers to quilters’ most common copyright questions. Unfortunately, some readers seem to have drawn inaccurate conclusions based on the limited information presented in the article, and are feeling alarmed about situations where copyright law has little or no application. For example, vast numbers of our favorite quilt blocks and patterns have been within the public domain for years and are not encumbered by copyright law as we understand it.



    We’re glad the article has spurred such interest and discussion in the quilting community, and hope you’ll watch for the follow-up.



    Sincerely,



    Beth Hayes
    Editor-in-Chief


    So, I guess that now we wait.
    There you have it...."Unfortunately, some readers seem to have drawn inaccurate conclusions ..........". Looks to me like a LOT of us drew inaccurate conclusions. (I have a degree in English, so feel that I'm not completely incompetent in comprehending a magazine article.) Seems to me that Beth Hayes is saying that her readers are too stupid to understand their magazine. Perhaps the problem was the tone and focus of the article. JMHO

  12. #137
    Senior Member renee765's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    955
    Okay, I've been sitting here wondering why I am letting McCall's magazine raise my blood pressure. I guess it's because I love quilting, and I love seeing what all of you quilt. When someone tries to 'rain on our parade', it starts to take the enjoyment out of an otherwise pleasant activity.

    I understand there's a need for copyright laws. I don't think the magazine article did a very good job of explaining those laws.

    I'm going to let it go. BREATHE

    I will continue to love quilting, and look forward to being inspired by all of you. I will not let one unfortunate article take away my joy. Peace.

  13. #138
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    343
    Quote Originally Posted by garysgal
    Quote Originally Posted by plainjane
    The item in question for me was the FABRIC! Not a pattern! Printed on the selvage.
    My friend that works in the fabric dept told me that if you buy fabric and cut it up to sell on ebay, that is illegal. Especially if it is marked for personal use only.
    As shown earlier on in this thread, that is not illegal. That's a scare tactic to make you buy directly from the store. If it was illegal then the fabric store would not be able to buy it, from whoever sells it to them.

    If you buy from a fabric store and turn it into fat quarters and sell on ebay, your doing no more then being a store.

  14. #139
    Power Poster Annaquilts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    10,789
    I am considering canceling this magazine. It was the last of the quilt magazines I still have coming. The only place I display quilts is at my house or if I gave them to some one and when I post them on the internet like this board. I am not even sure if I ever made a pattern in any of the magazines I paid for. It is more eye candy and fun to read. What irritates me the most is that most of these so said designer patterns are knock offs of patterns that have been around a long time. Maybe they are the ones using and selling other people's info.

  15. #140
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    in the heart of the awl
    Posts
    993
    Quote Originally Posted by moonwolf23
    Quote Originally Posted by garysgal
    Quote Originally Posted by plainjane
    The item in question for me was the FABRIC! Not a pattern! Printed on the selvage.
    My friend that works in the fabric dept told me that if you buy fabric and cut it up to sell on ebay, that is illegal. Especially if it is marked for personal use only.
    As shown earlier on in this thread, that is not illegal. That's a scare tactic to make you buy directly from the store. If it was illegal then the fabric store would not be able to buy it, from whoever sells it to them.

    If you buy from a fabric store and turn it into fat quarters and sell on ebay, your doing no more then being a store.
    What moonwolf said was on the selvage of the fabric she bought it said for personal use only. My friend at the fabric store said you can buy fabric to sew, but when you cut it up and re-sell it on ebay or where ever, it is illegal, because you aren't using it for personal sewing. I don't know if this is true or not, because I wouldn't even know how to check it out, but it I was going to do this, I would want to know if I was violating any copy right (or what ever) laws.

  16. #141
    Super Member sew cornie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,872
    Thank you, Mattee. I think this is very well spoken. I read the McCall's article a few weeks ago. It didn't upset me, but rather left me with more questions. I've been feeling an ethical dilemma lately and I think you may have answered my concern: I am making a quilt inspired by a picture I saw in an ad in the back of a quilting magazine. I know the pattern is for sale because I looked it up at the advertiser's website. It's a scrappy quilt using 2 common (public domain) blocks. But I'm making mine with similar toned fabrics and using the same light/dark placement as the designer. I'm unsure yet about doing the pieced border as pictured or designing my own border containing applique. I only chose to not buy the pattern because it was for a lap size and used 6" blocks. I'm making a queen size and wanted 8" blocks. From your description, my quilt will in fact be a derivative, which is what I've been unsure about up till now. Although it is for my own bed and won't ever be on public display, I want to do what's right here. I feel the same way about sheet music copyrights and hearing someone say, "Who's gonna know?" doesn't make it a correct thing to do. I will be contacting the publisher/designer to ask for permission to use a derivative of the design. If necessary, I'll pay the cost of the pattern. I know I'm going to love the quilt when it's finished and I don't mind paying the designer for an idea that I hadn't come up with on my own. In my opinion, it will be well deserved.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mattee
    I have been watching this thread for days, with growing alarm and concern. First, I know that copyright law can be complex and confusing. However, I believe that a few things need to be kept in mind. Copyright law was not written by McCall's Quilting. It was written by congress, enacted into law, and applies equally to all intellectual property, not just quilting. I think we need to remember context. The article is simply a brief explanation of how copyright law affects quilting. The laws are the same regardless of industry.

    Some people here have given very accurate and brief summaries of the "rules," if you will, but I think a lot of people are concerned about things that aren't actually affected by copyright law. No one is trying to recover the maple leaf block and turn it into private intellectual property. What they are doing is saying that if you use those instructions, for that version of a maple leaf quilt, you need to ask permission before displaying it, and cite the designer when you do. Derivative means a derivative of that version of the quilt - not of a block that happens to also appear in the the quilt. For example, if I decide to use a monkey wrench block, something that I'm very familiar with, to make a quilt that I make up using my own head, it's not derivative, since the block is in the public domain. If, however, I see instructions for how to make a specific monkey wrench quilt that I really like (which I did last month in a magazine), but it inspires me to make an altered version of that specific quilt (I'm changing the size, the relative sizes of the sashing, borders, and blocks, and color scheme), then it is derivative. It is derivative because I would not have thought of putting the quilt together in that way had I not seen the pattern in the magazine. That is the key that makes it derivative. I did not think of it on my own - I thought of the design because I saw someone else's design.

    Please remember that most designers are not wealthy or greedy individuals who are trying to cheat us. They are hard-working people who are (sometimes desperately) trying to make a living at something they love. If we want them to continue designing, inside and outside of magazines, we should support them, which means following the law and treating them with respect. In order to do this, I never photocopy a design, I buy one copy of a design for each copy of the quilt I wish to make, and if my design is a copy of or inspired by a pattern, I always credit the designer and ask permission before showing it publicly. It's not that burdensome, and it helps keep my favourite designers in business, not only by giving them my hard-earned money, but by being a advertisement for them as well. When others see credit given to a designer, they're more likely to buy something that designer made, which keeps them in business producing more of the patterns I love.

    Let's try to remember the purpose of copyright to begin with, and remember that it protects all of us - whether we're professional designers or not.

  17. #142
    Super Member LindaR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    2,944
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by garysgal
    Quote Originally Posted by Dodie
    Still makes me wonder how these designers can tweek a pattern then sell it for mega bucks One Bock Wonder was the most plain to understand tweeked pattern that I ever saw and
    as far as I know Bethany Reynolda designed the one in the stack and whack also when I pay for the pattern buy hards of very expensive fabric do hours and hours of work the quilt is MINE not the pattern as I did not design it but I did pay for it for my use so I am really done with the McCalls magazine get the new copy of Fon's and Porter and read it seems a lot friendlier then McCalls

    I noticed in the latest copy of Fons & Porter, they give permission to use one of the patterns. that was nice to see.

    It appears that more and more we are being restricted and if we question or complain, we are "not understanding" what they meant. there is a reason that McCalls printed that article but now there is so much backlash that they will have a fun time trying to explain it all. I wonder how much their magazine will suffer in all of this.

    I can't wait to read the next installment in the copyright saga and see what they say-especially about the quilt show issues.
    I can't wait either, should be interesting...gee whiz, they created lots of ill will for themselves. You know I was thinking, our little quilt show is "display" only, no money is changing hands, just a group of guild quilts for women to admire.

  18. #143
    Super Member Dodie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Wyoming
    Posts
    1,467
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by garysgal
    I wonder if McCalls is getting any feedback on this? Every quilter in America (and beyond) should send them a letter and cancel their subscription. What they printed doesn't make sense and it isn't fair. I agree with JJs-if someone made a quilt without seeing the pattern in a magazine, what then?? enough already! I plan to write to McCalls and let them know what I think.
    make me wonder why do these people sell these patterns to magazines if they don't want anyone to use them what do they think we buy their magazine for I for one do not want any more magazines they just stack up and there are plenty of free patterns out there they can keep theirs oh by the way Ginny Beyer has a free pattern in the new issue
    of Fon's and Porter

  19. #144
    JJs
    JJs is offline
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    LA - Lower Alabama
    Posts
    894
    Let's just say that I cannot figure out why someone would put a pattern in a magazine or book or by itself - KNOWING that whoever buys it (in any form) is going to want to MAKE A QUILT from it. As it's already been said, why else even make the pattern available.

    Quilters have ALWAYS SHARED - from waaaaay back when, they would make a stack of 'pattern blocks' - you kept those so you'd know how to make a block. (mainly because paper was at such a premium). These ladies did not snip and snipe at each other - "oh, you used *my* block"

    Does this mean no more show and tell at guild meetings?
    I guess you make a quilt but hide it in the closet when company comes because the little wifey might see that quilt on the bed and want to copy it.

    I don't know who designers are, not familiar with who is who and frankly my dear, I don't give a hoot... and it's a sure bet that at this stage of my life (real live OLD LADY) I'm not going to bother to find out. They can keep their quilt designs and magazines and books and I'll work with my EQ and all the quilts in MY head...

  20. #145
    Super Member watson's mom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Lakeshore, Ont. Canada
    Posts
    2,707
    Quote Originally Posted by JJs
    Let's just say that I cannot figure out why someone would put a pattern in a magazine or book or by itself - KNOWING that whoever buys it (in any form) is going to want to MAKE A QUILT from it. As it's already been said, why else even make the pattern available.

    Quilters have ALWAYS SHARED - from waaaaay back when, they would make a stack of 'pattern blocks' - you kept those so you'd know how to make a block. (mainly because paper was at such a premium). These ladies did not snip and snipe at each other - "oh, you used *my* block"


    Amen! It seem like we are supposed to support these people and the quilt rags with our money but then we have to hide our work in case someone might see it and want to make one like it. These designers can keep their patterns from now on
    and the rags can sell their subscriptions to someone else.
    Does this mean no more show and tell at guild meetings?

    I don't know who designers are, not familiar with who is who and frankly my dear, I don't give a hoot... and it's a sure bet that at this stage of my life (real live OLD LADY) I'm not going to bother to find out. They can keep their quilt designs and magazines and books and I'll work with my EQ and all the quilts in MY head...

  21. #146

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    601
    Just to clear a few things up:

    There's no reason to hide a quilt when company is coming. You need to ask a designer's permission for public display only. The article in question makes this distinction very clear.

    If someone wants to make a copy of a quilt that you made based on a pattern, it's not a problem. That person just needs to buy their own copy of that pattern, which in this day and age of the internet, is very easy to do. You can often get out of print patterns very easily as well, sometimes for free, by contacting the original designer.

    Designing a quilt pattern is no different from writing a novel when it comes to copyright. Novelists all use the same tools to make their stories. Quilters all use the same tools to make quilts. When you come up with your own idea for how to put those tools (whether they be words or blocks) together, it is copyrighted, period.

  22. #147
    JJs
    JJs is offline
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    LA - Lower Alabama
    Posts
    894
    you know, Mattee, WE GET IT you do not need to keep going on and on about the copyright - WE GET IT....
    The problem - as I see it and IN MY OPINION ONLY - YOUR MILEAGE MAY VARY AND I don't care...
    is the stupidity of having to ask mommy if you can show the quilt that you made....
    why force people to go to the stupid step of asking permission to show a quilt in a quilt show - why not PUT THE INFORMATION in with the pattern in the first place - either say, "once you have your quilt completed from this pattern, you are allowed to show your quilt at guild shows" or not.....
    The other problem with the whole thing is the magazine or designers or even the copyright saying that you cannot make a DERIVATIVE work from a quilt pattern and claim it as your own - but in the VERY SAME ISSUE that the RULES are in are SEVERAL quilts "designed" using public domain blocks - DERIVATIVE WORKS from run of the mill, old, everyday quilts...

    What makes one "designer" derivative quilt "ok" but the next person is not allowed???

  23. #148
    Super Member Dodie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Wyoming
    Posts
    1,467
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by JJs
    you know, Mattee, WE GET IT you do not need to keep going on and on about the copyright - WE GET IT....
    The problem - as I see it and IN MY OPINION ONLY - YOUR MILEAGE MAY VARY AND I don't care...
    is the stupidity of having to ask mommy if you can show the quilt that you made....
    why force people to go to the stupid step of asking permission to show a quilt in a quilt show - why not PUT THE INFORMATION in with the pattern in the first place - either say, "once you have your quilt completed from this pattern, you are allowed to show your quilt at guild shows" or not.....
    The other problem with the whole thing is the magazine or designers or even the copyright saying that you cannot make a DERIVATIVE work from a quilt pattern and claim it as your own - but in the VERY SAME ISSUE that the RULES are in are SEVERAL quilts "designed" using public domain blocks - DERIVATIVE WORKS from run of the mill, old, everyday quilts...

    What makes one "designer" derivative quilt "ok" but the next person is not allowed???
    right on JJ after we pay for the pattern plus big bucks for the fabric and spend hours and hours on the work it is my quilt I can understand not to copy their pattern but if I can't claim my quilt to do with as I please they have no business selling their pattern to a magazine or anyplace else why do they think we buy the magazines but no more
    I sure don't need any more magazines to clutter my house and they can keep their patterns many other places to get them

  24. #149
    Power Poster BellaBoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Front row
    Posts
    14,656
    Blog Entries
    2
    I won't make copies of a copyrighted pattern to resell. I won't post the copyrighted pattern online. If I display a quilt I made from a copyrighted pattern I will give the pattern credit. That's all I feel the copyright has control over me. I'm not quilting for profit in any shape form or fashion. If I win a local quilt show contest using a copyrighted pattern, yeah for me for having paid for the pattern and make the quilt. I loan quilt books and magazines and patterns to other quilters all the time. Usually I don't get them back or forget who has them.

  25. #150

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    601
    JJs and Dodie,

    I'm sorry if I offended you, or anyone else, but it just seems that a lot of people don't get it. People are complaining about copyright a lot on this thread, and writing about what they will and won't do, and the portions of copyright law that do and do not have "control" over them. Some people are also making it clear that they don't understand what a derivative work is.

    If I was a professional designer reading this thread, I would be throwing my hands up in frustration and seriously considering throwing in the towel. I know that a lot of designers in many different crafting mediums have already done so because they are sick and tired of being ripped off by people who don't understand or don't care about copyright. It seems like there are a lot of people who fall into one of those two categories posting in this thread. I feel awful for those designers who work so hard and help bring me so many hours of enjoyment, and I want them to know that there are people out there who do care about their rights.

    You may want me to stop correcting some people's misinterpretations and misinformation, but I suspect that there are some people who appreciate reading a clarification, rather than more complaints about how copyright laws just aren't fair. When people spread inaccurate information, it hurts everyone, and there have been a lot of inaccurate conclusions drawn and then spread in this thread.

Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.