Re: [lace] intent of copyright law
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 20:18:01 -0700 (PDT), Bev wrote: Steph wrote: When someone buys a pricking (whether in a book or as a single piece of paper) they buy the right to make lace from the pricking. However they do not buy the right to copy in any other way. That's why putting a picture of finished lace on a website is a breach of copyright if From what you say, my bookmark made from a purchased pattern - a pricking - is a 'copy' of that pricking? This is, to me, an unusual definition of the word 'copy.' I would consider it a 'use' of the pattern (of the pricking) - that I have bought the right to use the pattern - and the result is *my* piece of lace (made from the purchased pattern). I've used 'copy' as shorthand for the full wording which extends to reproduction in whole or in part in any medium, electronic or otherwise, or deriving any work from the copyrighted work. By making lace you are deriving a work in thread from the pricking. The topic is getting worn out but I'd like to make another point (silly as it might be) - if I were to sew an outfit from a purchased dress pattern, post a picture of myself on a website, a photo of me wearing this garment at a lace event (for instance) ought I have asked the pattern company permission to do so? In theory yes. In practice pattern companies don't bother about this sort of usage. But put that dress on a model in a fashion magazine and they will sue. -- 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] intent of copyright law (shortish)
Hi everyone - to prolong the discussion only a bit more: or deriving any work from the copyrighted work. By making lace you are deriving a work in thread from the pricking. No, you are using the pricking for its intended use - a derivation would be altering the pricking, or taking elements of the original lace and constructing another pricking, and calling that 'original' (which, in conventional lace terms, I think we call 'adapted' - of no real consequence unless someone tries to profit by this adapted version) But put that dress on a model in a fashion magazine and they will sue. Anybody can sue anyone for any thing (at any time) - if there is to be a case, it would depend on intent (and $). Apart from that, let's continue to share our lace accomplishments with pride, in our lace mags. and newsletters, and at our websites - credit the designer where known, or specify if it isn't an original design (unknown source seems to cover a lot - then if someone recognizes it they can tell you the source..). 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] Intent of copyright law
someone doesn't buy a book because then she will be unable to show the finished piece to her friends without getting permission from the author? As the one who has been most vocal on this point, I have to say again--there's never been any claim that you can't show your work to your friends. However, publishing to the web is mass-production and comes under copyright restrictions. If someone published a book of their work, with detailed photos of the pieces they did from others' patterns, would that not be infringement? Do you really think the publisher would accept the job without permission from the designers? Do you really think the author could win in court using the argument, I was just showing my work to my friends? What about the situation where people are afraid to look at a book lest they inadvertantly get ideas from it that they apply to their work? Again, getting ideas is not infringement. Copying the piece is. You can get ideas from several sources and combine them, or mix one or more of them with your own. You can't *reproduce* their design. What about the situation where people are afraid that they will invent on their own a design that resembles one already invented? That's where the 20% rule comes in. *If* you're taken to court by the other designer, they will have to demonstrate that your version is so close to theirs that you couldn't have arrived at it independently. However, we're not talking about going to court. The vast majority of infringement cases (or even apparent cases) never even get to the confrontation stage, much less to court. The expense (money and time) are just not worth it compared to the amount of lost compensation of a pattern. We're talking here about how we can be upstanding citizens and do the right thing. And for that, this argument is specious. I know whether I came up with my idea independently, or copied so-and-so. I wonder how many sales of worthy books are being lost and worthy ideas not developed in our zeal not to violate the spirit of the copyright law because we are ignorent of the case law that illuminates it? Considerably fewer than are lost by people sharing books and patterns! There is still a great deal of photocopying of others' books, we are still trying to educate people about that. Ten years ago it was a lot worse--many of us have come to realize the error of our ways. But there is still need for further education that this is not only a crime, but hurts us in the long run by harming the source of our patterns. I call for a national movement to demonstrate at Bar Association events, Copyright Conferences and pubs located near Courthouses. Let two lawyers never meet but that there be a lace demonstrator within twenty feet of them... Now there we can agree! 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] Intent of copyright law
So are you saying we will be seeing fewer and fewer websites of other arachneans completed lace pieces, to inspire and spur us to create our own masterpieces, simply because the owners of said websites are unable (or can't be bothered/no time) to track down the authors of the books the lace came fromto ask their permission. If those websites had not been created I doubt very much that those same people would have published a booklet due to the complexities of book publishing not to mention cost. Publishing to the web in this way may be considered mass-production, it could also be considered free advertising. I am sure there are people who have seen websites with completed pieces displayed who have then gone out and bought the book in order to create the design themselves. i.e I, having looked at all the Milanese lace I went out and bought a Milanese book. I have still yet to make any, but at least I have got the book ready for when I get round to itg. Likewise I quite liked the chrysanthemum lace I saw a while ago, I haven't bought *that* book simply because I thought I had enough on my plate to cope with, but as and when I get time I will probably buy a book on that as well. This particular part of this topic is something of interest to me as I had been considering creating a website to put my little bits and pieces on, none of which were created out of my head and some pieces were created so long ago I can't remember where I got them from without going through all the books and booklets I have collected over the years and borrowed from the library. So maybe I won't bother. Who are the winners then! If I do create a website I won't actually gain anything from it apart from the experience of creating a website, and maybe one or two acknowledgements, any authors I named might possibly get some benefit.. If I don't create a website then nothing happens and no one gets anything. I think I'm rambling. Its late so I'll shut up. Just hit the delete key. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Panza, Robin Sent: 26 August 2004 15:05 To: Arachne (E-mail) Subject: RE: [lace] Intent of copyright law As the one who has been most vocal on this point, I have to say again--there's never been any claim that you can't show your work to your friends. However, publishing to the web is mass-production and comes under copyright restrictions. If someone published a book of their work, with detailed photos of the pieces they did from others' patterns, would that not be infringement? Do you really think the publisher would accept the job without permission from the designers? Do you really think the author could win in court using the argument, I was just showing my work to my friends? - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
