Re: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
But can putting a boasting picture, with proper credits to book and designer, on a non-commercial boasting website, really be described as *publishing* except in the very widest sense of the word, ie make generally known. Surely it's the modern equivalent of having it hanging on your wall where all your friends will see it, or in a key ring fob, or taking your finished work to a lace day. Not really. Most people don't have millions of people worldwide coming to their living room to see their work. And someone who sees my piece (at a lace day or on a key ring or on my wall) is not in a position to make copies at the click of a mouse button, in order to make it themselves. They would have to get it from me, and only with my permission. Actually, is it legal for you to lend them the actual lace piece to reproduce? Also, what about taking pictures and putting them in a physical photo album and showing them to people? If the copyright problem is not people seeing the image, but people copying it and using it to reproduce the design, then I think it's the copying people who are breaking the copyright law, not the person who made the picture. In fact, I don't think it's even OK to download pictures from people's websites without their permission... In which case the only way putting a picture on a website would harm the designer would be by making it easier to make an illegal copy, which I don't think is by itself an illegal activity, especially if you give a source of the pattern so that people know it's published and copyrighted. Weronika -- Weronika Patena Caltech, Pasadena, CA, USA http://vole.stanford.edu/weronika - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 00:24:23 -0700, Weronika wrote: Which means: I can put a picture on my website, but not the pricking, and I should name the source - correct? Not in my opinion. Many people do this, but I believe it is a breach of copyright. A completed piece of lace is a 'derivative work' from the pricking, and is subject to just the same copyright limitations as a straight copy of the pricking. Hmmm... You mean the designer of the pattern actually holds copyright on the piece of lace I made, and images of it??? That seems very strange! The lace no, but images of it, yes. -- The future will be better tomorrow. - Dan Quayle Steph Peters, Manchester, England [EMAIL PROTECTED] Scanned by WinProxy http://www.Ositis.com/ - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
While still on this subject, but not about lace, I have a book of quilting blocks that I wanted to print off and use for a master copy. The book handily came with a cd of all the blocks to print(and adjust size if you like). Since I knew the author, I emailed her and asked permission to make a master copy and have it bound at my local Staples shop. This way I can have the patterns without ruining my autographed copy of the book and make notations on the master copy. This was more of a courtesy really, as I could have done it and no one would have been the wiser. The author gave me the permission and wished me well on my journey. With the internet and email, this is a handy way to gain approval for copying if the book is current. Karen - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
My youngest son, Alex, who is 20, just informed me the other day that Jimi Hendrix(for all familiar with 1960's music) did not, nor does his estate, own any of his works, and they cannot afford a proper burial site for him because the record company owns all his music and anything Jimi Hendrix. So if you see a shirt, hear his music, etc., his family sees not a single penny of it, the music company does(has anyone seen the new Pepsi ad for instance). So that is copyright gone totally WRONG. Whatever you thought or think about Jimi's music or his life, the fact he signed away his rights, most likely because the music industry took advantage of him, is just a shame. Look at how Priscilla Presley was able to salvage Elvis' name is now his daughter is a multimillionaire because of her mother's careful use of the copyrights she holds. Karen - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
I also have the quandry that in making lace for the great niece/nephew's Christening gown, I am using my grandmother torchon lace, made over 80 years ago, as a guide to design mine. I have looked through several books to find similar designs incorporating spiders with fans and then had help plotting it onto the computer lace program Ruth teaches. So whose design is it, mine, the author of the lace program, Robin Lewis-Wild's, Jeanine's, whose computer I used, or my long dead grandmother's, h. Even with the piece I have no idea where my grandmother got the pattern which will be used on the petticoat. Lynn Scott, Wollongong, Australia - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
Steph wrote: A completed piece of lace is a 'derivative work' from the pricking, and is subject to just the same copyright limitations as a straight copy of the pricking. Bev added: if a pricking is published with the intent that a reader would use it to produce a piece of lace, then the designer would not own copyright to the resulting piecethe pattern, yes, the lace itself noI think posting a picture of your lace made from someone else's design, on the web, is not violating copyright. I suspect this one would have to go to court to be decided. Yes, How To books are meant to be used, and it's really their designs, instructions and diagrams that they're copyrighting. However, the case can probably be made that they intended the patterns and their derivatives (the finished lace or bookcase or whatever) to be for personal use and not for publishing by the people who made things from the book. Robin P. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA http://www.pittsburghlace.8m.com/ - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
In a message dated 25/08/2004 14:49:44 GMT Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: However, the case can probably be made that they intended the patterns and their derivatives (the finished lace or bookcase or whatever) to be for personal use and not for publishing by the people who made things from the book. But can putting a boasting picture, with proper credits to book and designer, on a non-commercial boasting website, really be described as *publishing* except in the very widest sense of the word, ie make generally known. Surely it's the modern equivalent of having it hanging on your wall where all your friends will see it, or in a key ring fob, or taking your finished work to a lace day. No designer wants the lace made from their designs to then be hidden away in the back of a drawer. In fact, so long as it is accredited to them, it is free advertising for them. The important thing is that proper acknowledgement is made of the source of the pattern, both the designer and publisher, and this applies even if the lacemaker has made even quite substantial personal alterations to that design. Jacquie - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
But can putting a boasting picture, with proper credits to book and designer, on a non-commercial boasting website, really be described as *publishing* except in the very widest sense of the word, ie make generally known. Surely it's the modern equivalent of having it hanging on your wall where all your friends will see it, or in a key ring fob, or taking your finished work to a lace day. Not really. Most people don't have millions of people worldwide coming to their living room to see their work. And someone who sees my piece (at a lace day or on a key ring or on my wall) is not in a position to make copies at the click of a mouse button, in order to make it themselves. They would have to get it from me, and only with my permission. No designer wants the lace made from their designs to then be hidden away in the back of a drawer. In fact, so long as it is accredited to them, it is free advertising for them. Which is why most designers will give permission for one to display one's handiwork, crediting them, once one has asked them. However, they have the right to be asked and the right to give permission. Or withold it, if one's rendition is awful. So yes, giving credit is very important, but it's the least we can do. To be truly on the up-and-up, we need to ask permission to display, especially in such a public forum as the web. Robin P. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA http://www.pittsburghlace.8m.com/ - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
Very interested in this thread. Now here is a thought - I have a pattern which I bought last year for some free lace. Now the 'pricking' is not a pricking in the true sense of the word - it is simply a the outline drawing of the pin lines with no holes marked. (Yes, very free lace indeed). When I make this lace I will obviously be completing my own interpretation of the lace because how and where I put the pins are my ideas and also which braids I use within the lace are my own ideas. So, my question here is where is the copyright? If I'm right then I own copyright on my finished piece of lace because I have no choice but to use my interpretation on it but I have no copyright on the shape (ie outline) of the free lace because that came from the outline that is the pattern. There are two different things to take in account about designing patterns depending on laces: Those who refer to contour and those who refer to contents. Witch Stitch Lace is just a shape line with no holes pricked on the pattern, and of course it is the original design. The way that the lines are drawn is what makes sense to the overall. It is more important the lines that the contents in this case. You can work the braids with different stitches, but I always shall consider object of the copyright the shape of the pattern, does not matter which are the adaptations you make, working stitches different than the original ones. This rule I think could be also applied on Milanese Lace, and other tape laces. This is not the case whereas of Torchon Lace, where the shape or outline of the pattern is not so important as the contents. The combination of different stitches is what makes up the design, and what is object of copyright. Someone (I do not remember who now, excuse me) has talk about percentages in similarity. This would be the case. Carolina. Barcelona. Spain. -- Carolina de la Guardia http://www.geocities.com/carolgallego/ Private apartments for rent on Spanish Coast http://www.winterinspain.com - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
Lynn, I can put your mind at rest on one point - I.L.Soft (the author of the lace programme) does not own the copyright on your pattern!! The computer programme was only the tool you used to draw the pattern - from what you've said to me privately, I would say the ownership of the design and therefore the copyright, belongs to you. Robin Lewis-Wild might've given you a starting idea, Jeanine has helped you, and I don't think your long-dead grandmother is going to cause you any problems either! Warm regards, Ruth Budge (Sydney, Australia) lynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:I also have the quandry that in making lace for the great niece/nephew's Christening gown, I am using my grandmother torchon lace, made over 80 years ago, as a guide to design mine. I have looked through several books to find similar designs incorporating spiders with fans and then had help plotting it onto the computer lace program Ruth teaches. So whose design is it, mine, the author of the lace program, Robin Lewis-Wild's, Jeanine's, whose computer I used, or my long dead grandmother's, h. Even with the piece I have no idea where my grandmother got the pattern which will be used on the petticoat. Lynn Scott, Wollongong, Australia - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies. http://au.movies.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
In a message dated 24/08/2004 05:58:41 GMT Standard Time, Adele writes: Hi Weronika - you raised a couple of interesting questions. Copyright law recognizes that there is a process by which a copyright image or creation becomes changed, changed again, and further changed, and eventually is no longer the original image or creation at all. Unfortunately there is no hard-and-fast way to decide exactly where adaptation stops and inspired by begins. More thoughts here - I know that in the past we have agreed that if you make a piece of lace and put the finished piece on your website you should acknowlege the source of the pattern. If you adapt a piece and put it up you acknowlege the source of the original pattern and then explain your adaptation. We got that far last time. Also, from the Mrs Channer mat discussion (and please let's not go there again), we know that whilst the original pricking or photo of a piece of lace may be available for us to copy from say a musuem collection, once someone true's up that pricking or makes a pricking from the photo (with permission) their new pricking now becomes their own work and their copyright. Now here is a thought - I have a pattern which I bought last year for some free lace. Now the 'pricking' is not a pricking in the true sense of the word - it is simply a the outline drawing of the pin lines with no holes marked. (Yes, very free lace indeed). When I make this lace I will obviously be completing my own interpretation of the lace because how and where I put the pins are my ideas and also which braids I use within the lace are my own ideas. This means that the original idea for the lace is that of the designer but the making of the lace becomes my own interpretation even if I try to copy the picture supplied with the pattern because there are no pin marks to go by so I cannot truely copy reproduce the lace. So, my question here is where is the copyright? If I'm right then I own copyright on my finished piece of lace because I have no choice but to use my interpretation on it but I have no copyright on the shape (ie outline) of the free lace because that came from the outline that is the pattern. What do you guys think? Regards Liz in London I'm back blogging my latest lace piece - have a look by clicking on the link or going to http://journals.aol.com/thelacebee/thelacebee - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
For example, in the Milanese books by Read and Kincaid there are lots of Milanese braid designsCan I use these braids in my patterns (including patterns that are just a straight piece of braid for a bookmark g) without copyright infringement? If I draw diagrams by myself, can I put them on my webpage? It's my understanding that Read considers her *diagrams* of the braids to be copyrighted but not the braids themselves. In Sandi Woods' class, she said she specifically got Pat's permission to do diagrams like Pat's for her own book. If you publish diagrams, I believe you need to develop your own style that looks different enough from hers to be clearly your own. Of course, there's only so many ways you can draw thread diagrams As for how much modification it takes to qualify as outside the copyright, that's where you get into case law (the rightness and wrongness is determined by what cases have been won and lost) and I believe there is no hard answer. Robin P. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA http://www.pittsburghlace.8m.com/ - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 08:29:12PM -0700, Adele Shaak wrote: Your bookmark sounds like an adaptation to me. Which means: I can put a picture on my website, but not the pricking, and I should name the source - correct? If you had looked at a photo of a finished piece and said to yourself gosh, I bet I could draw a pattern like that and then did, without using any published pattern as a guide, then that is your creation and the copyright is yours. But, you used the published pattern to help you create your own pricking and so you are adapting the published pattern and you may only use that for yourself. Ah. If I do own the pattern and have looked at it (without purposefully memorizing it), and then closed the book and drew my own, is that using the pattern as a guide or not? I'm talking about *very* simple lace pieces for which it's very easy to draw the pattern by just looking at the lace, or even without that. By the way, I'm getting into those details just to understand things better - I'm not trying to insist that it's OK for me to do the things I'm writing about. It doesn't matter whether you used the pattern by scanning it or by copying the dots by hand - it's still somebody else's pattern. Putting that pricking onto your website is a violation of copyright because you are basically republishing somebody else's pattern. But, you could put photos of your finished lace onto your website, with a credit to the book. Yep. That seems right. Also, are all designs in books automatically copyright? If the design was done for the book, the designer (might be the author, might be somebody else) holds the copyright. But, if a book shows, for example, historical pieces of lace, nobody gets copyright on that design just because they put it in a book, but there is still a copyright on the *presentation* of that design - the photograph or drawing that appears in the book. So, you couldn't just scan the photo straight out of the book and put it up on your website, for example, but you could take a look at the photo and use the old lace as inspiration for a new pattern you drew yourself, and you would have the copyright on that. Ah. That seems reasonable. Does it work even if my new pattern lace piece ends up very similar to the old one? The difference is between illustrating a simple technique and a design. For example, if you learn from the book how to do the meandering braid, then you are welcome to use the meander design in your own patterns, just as you would be if you learned, say, cloth stitch or half stitch from the book. That's what I thought. But, you have to draw your own pattern, even if it is just a straight strip with the meander technique in it. You can't just copy (hand or scanning) the ones from the book. Right. Just to get into details, what's the difference between hand copying and drawing my own? If I'm not looking at the original while doing it, does it count as my own, even though I'm using the same style of diagram? It just happens to be my favourite diagram style (at least for some things), and there aren't many of them... Designs are more complex and may include many techniques - the actual designs, like Tie Ends or the Braid Sampler are of course copyright. Yep. These are just my opinions based on a fair amount of time spent reading up on copyright (and I have a friend who juggles copyright laws for a living). The reason lawyers make lots of money is that there are always fine shadings of meaning and grey areas that may be argued until the cows come home. And, as Stephanie has pointed out, the copyright laws differ depending on which country you're in. I doubt we get many lawsuits on lace designs, so I was mostly wondering what people in the lace community feel is and isn't OK. But anyway, I hope this helps. Definitely. Thanks! Weronika -- Weronika Patena Caltech, Pasadena, CA, USA http://vole.stanford.edu/weronika - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
And don't forget that each country has their own copyright rules, meaning that whatever US copyright rules apply to the US, doesn't necessarily apply to your country. You may have a copy of a book produced in the US, and copyrighted there, but in your country it might be quite allright for you to copy it. Copyright laws are different and everyone needs to be reminded that though this internet is a global society, each of us has to follow our own countries rules about copyright, not the US's only. Karen who is in Canada - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
- Original Message - From: Dorte Zielke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Weronika Patena [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 4:22 PM Subject: Re: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations Hi Weronika, when you change the pattern at least 20 procent, you can call it your own design, so it is here in Denmark, if you are re-creating an old pattern it is then yours to sell. anything else is a copy, wether you copy on a machine, on grafic paper, on a lace program in the computer and you can't give that away ore sell it to make a profit. The original you bay, is for you alone to use, you are alowed to make a copy to you self so you don't damage the original. Less it is written that this book is for eduction, you are alowed to make a copy to thouse you a teaching to lace. Hope that can be to some help Dorte - Original Message - From: Weronika Patena [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 2:20 AM Subject: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations Hi, Yet another question from me! g I keep modifying patterns from books, and I'm confused about the copyright status... Here are some examples of what I'm confused about at the moment. If there are some general rules, by all means just tell me those instead of commenting on the examples... If I take an edging pattern I found in a book, and make a bookmark pattern that basically consists of two pieces of that edging, with some changes, is that an adaptation of the pattern, or what is it called? And can I put the pricking on my website? What if I made my pricking by scanning the book pattern and making changes with a graphics program? And what if I drew it by myself without any scanning? Also, are all designs in books automatically copyright? For example, in the Milanese books by Read and Kincaid there are lots of Milanese braid designs - I guess I don't really know, but I was assuming that they didn't personally design all the braids, but that some of them were just traditional Milanese braids. Can I use these braids in my patterns (including patterns that are just a straight piece of braid for a bookmark g) without copyright infringement? If I draw diagrams by myself, can I put them on my webpage? Weronika -- Weronika Patena Caltech, Pasadena, CA, USA http://vole.stanford.edu/weronika - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
Here's another thought, we are allowed under british copyright law to photocopy a percentage of a book (which can't exceed certain qualifications, in the uk it's no more than about a third of the book or x number of articles). So, I get my book 'A visual introduction to Bucks Point Lace' by Geraldine Stott. And I decided to work my way through the book by doing all the patterns from page 1 to the end. I'm going to do this because I want to master Bucks Point. There are 40 patterns in this book and only 90 pages - this means that I am going to photocopy over half the book! This, under normal UK laws is a breach of copyright. This is why lacemaking is such a strange subject for copyright. But, Geraldine Stott is a wonderful woman. On page 'v' of the book is this wonderful paragraph. 'Prickings From experience I find there are many lacemakers who have neither pens, skills nor time to prick and draw out complicated Bucks Point patterns. The following is the method I use constantly: photocopy your patter (acceptable only for your own personal use); cut out pricking; .' She then goes on to say that if you don't like that method then prick through the photocopy etc. This is a practical woman who makes lace and by putting this caveat into her book has bypass the issue on photocopying that we have in the UK that would affect being able to use the patterns. Something that came up off the list is the fact that as a craft, we have a strange issue over photocopying because it is taken as the common way to copy a pattern rather than trace and prick (some how I think I would have given up by now as my tracing is terrible). Just a thought. Regards Liz in London I'm back blogging my latest lace piece - have a look by clicking on the link or going to http://journals.aol.com/thelacebee/thelacebee - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
In a message dated 24/08/2004 19:54:03 GMT Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Less it is written that this book is for eduction, you are alowed to make a copy to thouse you a teaching to lace. Hope that can be to some help Dorte Dorte, I like that caveat - that you can say that your book is for education and can use it to teach. That is a generous touch. Regards Liz in London I'm back blogging my latest lace piece - have a look by clicking on the link or going to http://journals.aol.com/thelacebee/thelacebee - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 08:55:06 -0700, Weronika wrote: On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 08:29:12PM -0700, Adele Shaak wrote: Your bookmark sounds like an adaptation to me. Which means: I can put a picture on my website, but not the pricking, and I should name the source - correct? Not in my opinion. Many people do this, but I believe it is a breach of copyright. A completed piece of lace is a 'derivative work' from the pricking, and is subject to just the same copyright limitations as a straight copy of the pricking. So you should ask the copyright holder for permission to display the picture of the finished lace. I've asked quite a lot of designers for permission for pieces on my website, and so far no-one has said no. Most look on it as good publicity I think. To help understand why this is so, consider a similar situation. I bought an oil painting by E B Watts of a teapot shaped like a cauliflower in a field of carrots. The painting I bought is the one and only oil original. However, I didn't buy the copyright to the image, only the physical painting itself. So E B Watts can (and I believe has) sell prints of the painting I own. She can produce Christmas cards with that image on, I can't. The image still belongs to her, unless she chooses to sell it. This is important because obviously it enables her to continue to earn money from her idea. -- I love children, especially when they cry, for then someone takes them away. Nancy Mitford Steph Peters, Manchester, England [EMAIL PROTECTED] Scanned by WinProxy http://www.Ositis.com/ - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
Steph's example is absolutely correct in this country as well. But here, it is possible to buy the original AND to purchase the residuals as well. As an example, a young artist in Virginia painted a picture of a scene depicting an historic event. A doctor in the town bought the painting AND the residuals. The artist continued to paint, and became quite successful, with *prints* of his paintings (signed and numbered, but NOT the originals!) fetching handsome sums. The doctor continues to own the right to print the artist's first painting, and continues to make money on this every year... though not a fortune, by any stretch of the imagination. But collectors love having that first... Established writers, painters, lace designers, etc., etc., are more savy and know better than to sign away their rights. Caveat to the uninitiated... Clay - Original Message - From: Steph Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 7:59 PM Subject: Re: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 08:55:06 -0700, Weronika wrote: On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 08:29:12PM -0700, Adele Shaak wrote: Your bookmark sounds like an adaptation to me. Which means: I can put a picture on my website, but not the pricking, and I should name the source - correct? Not in my opinion. Many people do this, but I believe it is a breach of copyright. A completed piece of lace is a 'derivative work' from the pricking, and is subject to just the same copyright limitations as a straight copy of the pricking. So you should ask the copyright holder for permission to display the picture of the finished lace. I've asked quite a lot of designers for permission for pieces on my website, and so far no-one has said no. Most look on it as good publicity I think. To help understand why this is so, consider a similar situation. I bought an oil painting by E B Watts of a teapot shaped like a cauliflower in a field of carrots. The painting I bought is the one and only oil original. However, I didn't buy the copyright to the image, only the physical painting itself. So E B Watts can (and I believe has) sell prints of the painting I own. She can produce Christmas cards with that image on, I can't. The image still belongs to her, unless she chooses to sell it. This is important because obviously it enables her to continue to earn money from her idea. -- I love children, especially when they cry, for then someone takes them away. Nancy Mitford Steph Peters, Manchester, England [EMAIL PROTECTED] Scanned by WinProxy http://www.Ositis.com/ - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
you raised a couple of interesting questions. Copyright law recognizes that there is a process by which a copyright image or creation becomes changed, changed again, and further changed, and eventually is no longer the original image or creation at all. Unfortunately there is no hard-and-fast way to decide exactly where adaptation stops and inspired by begins. Yep. I've been doing a lot of changing patterns from books, but almost no actual designing from scratch, so I'm getting into the gray area... More thoughts here - I know that in the past we have agreed that if you make a piece of lace and put the finished piece on your website you should acknowlege the source of the pattern. If you adapt a piece and put it up you acknowlege the source of the original pattern and then explain your adaptation. We got that far last time. That seems reasonable. Also, from the Mrs Channer mat discussion (and please let's not go there again), we know that whilst the original pricking or photo of a piece of lace may be available for us to copy from say a musuem collection, once someone true's up that pricking or makes a pricking from the photo (with permission) their new pricking now becomes their own work and their copyright. I.e. if you use their pricking to make your design, it's just an adaptation, but you can still go to the museum or look at a picture of the lace and make your own pricking, right? The problem comes in if you've seen the copyrighted pricking before making your own, since it's hard to tell whether you're copying your memory of it... Now here is a thought - I have a pattern which I bought last year for some free lace. Now the 'pricking' is not a pricking in the true sense of the word - it is simply a the outline drawing of the pin lines with no holes marked. (Yes, very free lace indeed). When I make this lace I will obviously be completing my own interpretation of the lace because how and where I put the pins are my ideas and also which braids I use within the lace are my own ideas. This means that the original idea for the lace is that of the designer but the making of the lace becomes my own interpretation even if I try to copy the picture supplied with the pattern because there are no pin marks to go by so I cannot truely copy reproduce the lace. So, my question here is where is the copyright? If I'm right then I own copyright on my finished piece of lace because I have no choice but to use my interpretation on it but I have no copyright on the shape (ie outline) of the free lace because that came from the outline that is the pattern. That makes sense. However, you can see the outline in your finished lace, so anyone who wanted it could just look at your finished lace picture (which you're allowed to show them, since it's your copyright), outline it and use it as a pattern, right? Weronika -- Weronika Patena Caltech, Pasadena, CA, USA http://vole.stanford.edu/weronika - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
It's my understanding that Read considers her *diagrams* of the braids to be copyrighted but not the braids themselves. In Sandi Woods' class, she said she specifically got Pat's permission to do diagrams like Pat's for her own book. If you publish diagrams, I believe you need to develop your own style that looks different enough from hers to be clearly your own. Of course, there's only so many ways you can draw thread diagrams Exactly... I find it hard to believe they have copyright on the a line per pair, crossing lines=cloth stitch, little line across=add twist diagram style... Is it OK to use the diagram style with different colors for different stitches (I don't remember how it goes or where it's from right now, but it seems pretty popular) without worrying about copyright? Weronika -- Weronika Patena Caltech, Pasadena, CA, USA http://vole.stanford.edu/weronika - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
re: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
Hi everyone Steph wrote: copyright. A completed piece of lace is a 'derivative work' from the pricking, and is subject to just the same copyright limitations as a straight copy of the pricking. So you should ask the copyright holder for Fun with copyright. I see it this way: if a pricking is published with the intent that a reader would use it to produce a piece of lace, then the designer would not own copyright to the resulting piece, the one you made and hold in your hand; the pattern, yes, the lace itself no - because the pattern is intended as a means to an end that is not unique - it is meant for anyone (any lacemaker) to use, and the results will vary even minutely, with each lacemaker (unlike an original artwork, which is unique to the artist). So - I think posting a picture of your lace made from someone else's design, on the web, is not violating copyright. It would be fraudulent if you give the impression that the lace is your original design - so to protect your self and give due credit, clearly state the source of the pattern. bye for now Bev in Sooke, BC (west coast of Canada) - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [lace] pattern copyright and adaptations
Hi Weronika - you raised a couple of interesting questions. Copyright law recognizes that there is a process by which a copyright image or creation becomes changed, changed again, and further changed, and eventually is no longer the original image or creation at all. Unfortunately there is no hard-and-fast way to decide exactly where adaptation stops and inspired by begins. If I take an edging pattern I found in a book, and make a bookmark pattern that basically consists of two pieces of that edging, with some changes, is that an adaptation of the pattern, or what is it called? And can I put the pricking on my website? What if I made my pricking by scanning the book pattern and making changes with a graphics program? And what if I drew it by myself without any scanning? Your bookmark sounds like an adaptation to me. If you had looked at a photo of a finished piece and said to yourself gosh, I bet I could draw a pattern like that and then did, without using any published pattern as a guide, then that is your creation and the copyright is yours. But, you used the published pattern to help you create your own pricking and so you are adapting the published pattern and you may only use that for yourself. It doesn't matter whether you used the pattern by scanning it or by copying the dots by hand - it's still somebody else's pattern. Putting that pricking onto your website is a violation of copyright because you are basically republishing somebody else's pattern. But, you could put photos of your finished lace onto your website, with a credit to the book. Also, are all designs in books automatically copyright? If the design was done for the book, the designer (might be the author, might be somebody else) holds the copyright. But, if a book shows, for example, historical pieces of lace, nobody gets copyright on that design just because they put it in a book, but there is still a copyright on the *presentation* of that design - the photograph or drawing that appears in the book. So, you couldn't just scan the photo straight out of the book and put it up on your website, for example, but you could take a look at the photo and use the old lace as inspiration for a new pattern you drew yourself, and you would have the copyright on that. For example, in the Milanese books by Read and Kincaid there are lots of Milanese braid designs - I guess I don't really know, but I was assuming that they didn't personally design all the braids, but that some of them were just traditional Milanese braids. Can I use these braids in my patterns (including patterns that are just a straight piece of braid for a bookmark g) without copyright infringement? If I draw diagrams by myself, can I put them on my webpage? The difference is between illustrating a simple technique and a design. For example, if you learn from the book how to do the meandering braid, then you are welcome to use the meander design in your own patterns, just as you would be if you learned, say, cloth stitch or half stitch from the book. But, you have to draw your own pattern, even if it is just a straight strip with the meander technique in it. You can't just copy (hand or scanning) the ones from the book. Designs are more complex and may include many techniques - the actual designs, like Tie Ends or the Braid Sampler are of course copyright. These are just my opinions based on a fair amount of time spent reading up on copyright (and I have a friend who juggles copyright laws for a living). The reason lawyers make lots of money is that there are always fine shadings of meaning and grey areas that may be argued until the cows come home. And, as Stephanie has pointed out, the copyright laws differ depending on which country you're in. But anyway, I hope this helps. Adele North Vancouver, BC (west coast of Canada) - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
