No Fabric Boycott Needed - Inform Yourself
11-24-2011, 05:11 AM
#22
Super Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Central PA
Posts: 1,920
Thanks for the info. My question then is related to embroidery designs. Would they also be covered by copyright? At the site where embroidery designs are offered, there is a statement regarding sale of items using these designs. Just wondering.
11-24-2011, 05:26 AM
#23
Power Poster
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lake Elsinore, CA
Posts: 15,145
Tabberone has been cited here numerous times. The fact remains that the manufacturer put that "restriction" on their selvage, and we must assume that it was because they plan to try to enforce it, even if there is no legal basis to do so. I prefer not to buy a product from a manufacturer who does that. There are plenty of other fabrics available.
11-24-2011, 06:47 AM
#24
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Enid, OK
Posts: 8,273
PLEASE stop posting this site...it is NOT the Holy Bible of Copyright law. and YES, people are sueing/being sued over the use of fabric to make items for sale that have this "not for commercial use" printed on the selvages.
I belong to several designer forums and it is really causing many issues in the industry.
LIke one lady said, she respects, the Copyrighted art, the logo's, the cartoon character's, etc, but when she found a bolt of a plain brown fabric with white polka dots on it, and it had that statement on the selvage, she drew the line....
the whole business is out of line and if we do NOT send a message to the Designers & Manufacturer's of the fabric that have that statement, then it will continue to grow and fester away at our guild raffle quilts, our baby charity quilts, you name it....it will always be a thorn, a dividing wall, etc....
I belong to several designer forums and it is really causing many issues in the industry.
LIke one lady said, she respects, the Copyrighted art, the logo's, the cartoon character's, etc, but when she found a bolt of a plain brown fabric with white polka dots on it, and it had that statement on the selvage, she drew the line....
the whole business is out of line and if we do NOT send a message to the Designers & Manufacturer's of the fabric that have that statement, then it will continue to grow and fester away at our guild raffle quilts, our baby charity quilts, you name it....it will always be a thorn, a dividing wall, etc....
11-24-2011, 07:23 AM
#25
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Sturbridge, Ma
Posts: 3,992
This is certainly interesting as fabric manufacturers routinely send out new fabric lines to magazines and or quitmakers as a way of promoting their lines. Shops kits the fabric which sells more fabric and makes more commission for the designer.
11-24-2011, 07:48 AM
#27
Super Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Heart of grain field
Posts: 1,826
This was a great read for sure. Bottom line is whether it is fabric or patterns that we purchase, it is stating that they have no right to tell us what we can or cannot do with it. So my understanding is, if I want to share a piece of fabric I purchased with someone I can and If I purchased a quilt pattern I can also share this, so long as I'm not reproducing the pattern and selling it. Yes it also states that some will challenge you, but really have no leg to stand on legally. Just most of us would shake in our boots if we were challenged. If you are wondering where I read the part about sharing patterns it was under the First Sale Doctrine part. So, if I have misunderstood someone correct me.
11-24-2011, 08:02 AM
#28
Super Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Mena, Arkansas
Posts: 1,351
Originally Posted by ghostrider
Using the fabric in a book could be considered a straight copyright violation because the fabric has been reproduced...same as if you were to post a photo of it here. It is the reproduction of the fabric, not the use of it in a quilt, that is in question I believe, and that is copyright law, not trademark law.
11-24-2011, 08:14 AM
#29
Super Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: near Peoria Illinois
Posts: 1,638
It has been my understanding also that the first sale doctrine holds true here. There are always people/firms/manufacturers that will try to push the law.
I find the case of Emily Cier interesting as the publisher of the book is taking on her battle, but the manufacturer who sent the fabric for her to use with the understanding there would be a book, has decided to "not get involved". Really, how is that? She would not have had that fabric without that manufacturer giving it to her. It seems to me that the battle should be between the designer and the manufacturer who released the designer's fabric for use. What Ms. Cier did was nothing more than use fabric as it is intended-- to make something out of it.
I also find it sad that a civil court would waste time and energy to try yet another case of the nature, when they are
fully booked on other things. But then, attorneys have bills to pay too, I guess.
I find the case of Emily Cier interesting as the publisher of the book is taking on her battle, but the manufacturer who sent the fabric for her to use with the understanding there would be a book, has decided to "not get involved". Really, how is that? She would not have had that fabric without that manufacturer giving it to her. It seems to me that the battle should be between the designer and the manufacturer who released the designer's fabric for use. What Ms. Cier did was nothing more than use fabric as it is intended-- to make something out of it.
I also find it sad that a civil court would waste time and energy to try yet another case of the nature, when they are
fully booked on other things. But then, attorneys have bills to pay too, I guess.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Iona D.
Main
78
02-14-2018 03:17 PM
craftybear
General Chit-Chat (non-quilting talk)
0
08-10-2011 11:38 AM
