copyrights and multiples...eh?

Libraries have to follow copyright laws too. next time you are in your public library, go over to the photocopy machine and look for the copyright notice that should be posted on it (or near to it).

If you would like more information, talk to you public librarian. I'm sure (s)he'd love to discuss Fair Use. ;-)

an academic librarian

ellis snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com wrote:

That assumes the person borrowing the pattern book is going to copy it.

If the argument is that one pattern = one finished work, then the library is violating copyright by making one pattern available to create many finished works by many people. The library could limit this for law-abiding folks by not allowing renewals but that doesn't account for someone who could actually stitch the design in the time before the due date.

The spirit, therefore, is that if it's in the library, it's fair game.

Let's list the arguments and define our terms.

Argument 1: One pattern = ONE finished work. Pattern may no longer be used by anyone ever again. Finished work may not be sold, traded, or gifted. Copies of pattern may not be made for any purpose other than "working copies" (and some designers don't even like working copies)

Argument 2: One pattern = finished work. Pattern may NOT be traded, sold, or gifted. Original owner of pattern may use the pattern more than once. Finished work may or may not be sold, traded, or gifted. Copies of pattern may not be made for any purpose other than "working copies."

Argument 3: One pattern = finished work. Pattern may be traded, sold, or gifted once original owner is through with it. Finished work may or may not be sold, traded, or gifted. Copies of pattern may not be made for any purpose other than "working copies."

IMO, the greater damage is done by those making copies that they then sell, trade, or gift. In none of the arguments I listed above is this acceptable, as I think we all acknowledge that it's not. Those who practice this on a large scale basis know what they're doing is wrong and attempt to justify it on one level or another or simply thumb their nose at the law and do it where they're out of reach.

I must admit I'm really rather stunned about the quilt thingie, which brings to fore yet a fourth argument (which I have heard expressed and in a very detailed manner):

Argument 4: One pattern = one finished work in the exact manner which it was written (i.e., in no other medium). No conversions, no floss brand alteration, no fabric change, no change of any type; any and all of these may be considered copyright violations.

My level of comfort as a designer/charter is at Argument 3. There is no way I'm going to police my charts or track where they go in order to make a point that's riven with inconsistent legal interpretation.

So do copy stores like kinko's. I worked at one for 3 yrs in college and we were really strict about not copying anything with a copyright, unless the person asking produced ID to prove they owned it.

Self-serve was another story, but we were supposed to monitor it, and stop people from copying an entire book!

Caryn Who once understood, sorta, "fair use."

snipped-for-privacy@doma> Libraries have to follow copyright laws too. next time you are in your

Dear Librarian,

Please tell me where I used the word "photocopy" in my post?

"Work" does NOT mean photocopy, it means STITCH.

This is the semantic point that I am trying to make: that a chart grants explicit permission to work (stitch) it. In fact, to stitch it as exactly as two different stitchers can work one design. A book of charts grants the same explicit permission, and in a library, there will be multiple users/stitchers.

Another legal point is, that when a book is resold, its author remains identifiable. Its author and publisher retain the right to control UNAUTHORISED duplication. But the fact that a needlework pattern is published for the express purpose of encouraging other people to stitch it (for their own use) also remains for the lifetime of the book/chart.

So here's our choice: either accept that the passing of original-copy patterns from person to person is a compliment to the designer, or create designs in a medium that will guarantee a single use per purchase. Like printing on canvas/fabric instead of paper. Any takers??

Irene

Only a few designers explicitly insist this should be the case--and it seems to me the assumption is that if you are stitching a chart that many times, you are doing it commercially, which is not necessarily so. One's designer's argument is that if you stitch a picture for sale, the cost of the chart is part of your material cost, which in turn determines your selling price. And of course the designer profits from your purchase of the chart If you stitch the same picture again for sale, and sell it for the same price, you have made an unfair profit because there is no cost of the chart a second time.

I cannot see how those of us who stitch for pleasure not profit are affected by this argument.

Dawne

It is very hard to control the usage of a chart once it has been put onto the internet or into a book or kit. I think for as many of us that care, there are more out there who don't care. Now that I think of it, I have been to many, many craft shows over the years. I have seen people who sell little items, ornaments and the like, with the same design. They have, maybe, 20 of each item. I believe most of them used someone else's design. This goes for all forms of crafts, Xstitch, knit, crochet, plastic canvas, etc.

It is sad for the designer, and it reminds me of the music piracy out there. Libraries also put out CD's for patrons to borrow. One would assume that some are copying it. Either way, the designer (singer) loses out :(

Diane

Dawne Peters> >

Diane wrote "> It is sad for the designer, and it reminds me of the music piracy out

Our public library has introduced a service whereby you "borrow" a recorded book on-line, into your Windows Media Player. You have it for 2 weeks, then it disappears. I'm really looking forward to trying it. The library's website says the file can be transferred into quite a range of portable players, but unfortunately it is not compatible with IPod. DAwne

Our library has that and we love it! We can borrow a book and never leave home. We can have it for three weeks, though, before it disappears.

Lynn in Lancaster PA

Dawne Peterson wrote: > Our public library has introduced a service whereby you "borrow" a recorded

While I understand why the library would do it -- less hassle with lost items, more people can check it out at the same time, etc -- it would do me no good. I like to check out music cd's and audiobooks to listen to at work, where I am not at the computer. And I'm not going to buy an mpeg player just to check out library items that I should have access to for free.

That would never do for me! I like actual books, with pages, which I can read while sitting on the couch with my feet up, or in bed all cosy.

Olwyn Mary in New Orleans.

That is absolutely still the best (although there is also in the bath up to your chin in bubbles with a nice bath pillow, but only for your own cheap paperbacks)--but I love to listen to books while walking the dog or doing mindless house chores. While my puter won't be out with Emma and me, it can play while I do house stuff. Dawne

I agree - I once did a chart 20 times (very small one :)) as a gift for teachers for Teachers Week at my kids' elementary school.

I've done duplicates for ornaments, coasters, and bookmarks.

We only use the mp3 books for trips in the car. DH drives 45 minutes each way and he loves it. I much prefer real books, but it's so hard to read them and drive at the same time!!! (And while I meant that to be funny, I have seen people really doing it and it scares me to death!)

Lynn >>That would never do for me! I like actual books, with pages, which I can