garysgal

Dorothy Ann, In one post you stated that you designed for McCalls and it is copyrighted. Then in another you say "McCall's finds patterns and quilts they think the general public will enjoy. You can make 20 of each of the quilts without asking permission, you can show them off to your friends, give them as gifts and I assume show them at show and tell at your guild."
I am assuming that you mean that McCalls is not including your patterns in the ones that they have found and thought the general public will enjoy?
I agree with the majority here. We are NOT against the copyright laws, but it makes NO SENSE to buy a magazine and make a quilt from a pattern in that magazine and then not be able to show it, give it or whatever, without permission. That is what we are all upset about. It defeats the purpose of buying the magazine if we can't use the patterns without strings attached.
And what is this garbage about making 20 of something? Are we to assume is we make 21 we will be hauled away to jail? If you step back and look at it logically and in the way that we are (none of us to my knowledge are designers) you will see that we have a valid complaint.
I am also not renewing any of my subscriptions because I don't want to make something and find out that I have violated a copy right law.
I am sure the folks at McCalls quilting are wonderful people and all of us here know that they didn't make the laws. But we just don't understand the whole idea behind the copyright patterns being in a magazine for anyone in the world to buy and make-with stipulations.

Dorothy Ann

Well, I hope you do one of mine someday. I will gladly give you permission, Dorothy Ann

JJs

the permission should be inherent in the pattern - not a separate thing...

the whole thing in a nutshell

Dorothy Ann

I went back and read what you wrote. I do see your point. The law doesn't limit the number of quilts you make for your personal use, this would include making and giving as gifts forever. I'm sorry we will lose you as a subscriber, but I bet your EQ quilts will be wonderful. By the way, if you go back to the quilt in the July/Aug issue of McCall's, it was stated that I used EQ to design the quilt. I used the butterfly on EQ. We have to do it too.

Dorothy Ann

Well, I can see that all of you are upset about a law that I didn't write and haven't agreed or disagreed with. I sensed that your anger is somehow aimed at me. It is my profession. I take a huge risk when I publish and kit the quilt. I lose money on some, and others I make money, but not a lot. I just love what I do. And I will not call anything you have said, garbage. It is your individual opinion. I was only trying to share from a different perspective. I didn't expect to be quoted and vented to. I'm a teacher by profession and I encouraged individual thought. I still do, but I have not written anything other than the presentation of my views.

watson's mom

Absolutely! Otherwise all we are doing is paying some "designer" for the privilege of looking at her quilt pictures.

garysgal

Dorothy Ann, no one is angry with you. We are just trying to tell you that If someone publishes a pattern, then why not note then and there that we can use it freely and not worry about what we do with it? When I used the word "garbage" I was NOT refering to your words per se, I don't use curse words, so I was trying to tell you politely, that telling someone they can make up to 20 copies of something is silly. It makes no sense. How do you know how many they are going to make? And how does the magazine publisher know?
Tell me something, it seems that you are representing McCalls quilting ( your use of the phrase " we hate to see you go") here, so why now is McCalls printing this article"? Is it because someone used one of their quilts as you said someone here did and they are trying to let people know they can't do what she did? I can't remember in all my years of taking quilting magazines any articles like this one. Something must have triggered it.

garysgal

woops! not sure why that winking smilely face appeared!

dgmoby

Please remember that just because we read something, anywhere, doesn't make it true or legal. Just because a magazine or some nameless person online says it's so, doesn't make it so. The law is the only thing that makes an action legal or illegal, and it can be interpreted or misinterpreted in any fashion. Even copyright attorney's disagree on this area of law, which is why it's in a constant state of flux and not easily understood.

I am an intelligent woman, as I know many of you are also, and I will continue to follow the same rules I always have. I do not lie, cheat or steal - ever. Reading a different interpretation of the copyright law anywhere, doesn't change my own level of integrity or influence my understanding of what that law means. Especially when I read statements from nameless people online, or in a publication of any sort, that has specific interests to protect. As a person of integrity, I will always follow the law. But I will not be swayed by people who stand to gain from influencing my personal understanding of said law.

That's my opinion...and I'm sticking to it :)

AbbyQuilts

This is all speculation and opinion.
No one here is a copyright lawyer. It is nice to have a designer here and thank you for sharing your view.

I have stated my opinion on copyright in other threads so I will not repeat myself here.
But everyone remember that no one here is a lawyer so.

If you want to sell a quilt you make the call.
If you want to risk getting sued (and remember they dont have to win to cost you a lot) then go on with it,
If you have copyright questions ask a lawyer
If its not that big of deal to track down the designer then track them down and ask
If you dont like that the pattern comes with stipulations then dont buy it.


Also even lawyers can argue this case to death.
Just as Mccall's has lawyer on their side saying what they want them to say.
I too could find a lawyer on my side saying what I want them to say.
Until this matter has been handled in a court room it will be gray area.
I have yet to see a court case about patterns that did not have to deal with the pattern its self being copied. Or if it was about the item made it was settled with a gag order so we will never know.

Just one question

if McCall's has all of these copyrighted patterns why are none registered.