: Wednesday, May 19, 2004 2:32 PM
Subject: Re: [lace] Re: lFantasy Flowers
I'm not able to comment on these opinions, as I'm not familiar with either
book
- but I do think it is most unfair to make accusations like this when
Rosemary
is out of the country and can't defend herself.
Ruth Budge
In a message dated 19/05/2004 16:38:55 GMT Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What you are all saying is
that it is OK to take someone's work and use it for one's own material gain?
That isn't how I read the posts on this subject at all. What they do all
seem to be saying is that it
If Rosemary made her first flowers in the late 70s then this predates the
Novak ones by a considerable margin. But no-one would think that plagiarism
has taken place the other way round, would they!
Frankly, that was my first reaction--that it could have just as easily been
plagiarism in either
Hi,
I have nothing to say on the similar flowers, since I haven't seen
either book, but one of the emails made me wonder about something else:
that we should respect the fact. I am quite sceptical at the suggestion that
two people design the same piece, maybe in Torchon but not in Free lace.
-
From: Weronika Patena [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2004 5:02 PM
To: Karolina Jeffers
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [lace] Re: lFantasy Flowers
Hi,
I have nothing to say on the similar flowers, since I haven't seen
either book, but one of the emails made me wonder
I'm not able to comment on these opinions, as I'm not familiar with either book
- but I do think it is most unfair to make accusations like this when Rosemary
is out of the country and can't defend herself.
Ruth Budge (Sydney, Australia)
Karolina Jeffers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I had a look at
