Designers group regarding copyright violations?

The story (and it is just a story, I don't know if any part of it is actually true) was that when Nora left her mom's company (TIAG) to start Mirabilia Marilyn sued Nora for copyright voilation because the faces of Nora's designs were too similar to the ones on the angels her mom puts out.

I've also heard some people opining that the reason the faces were so similiar is because Nora was the one painting them for her mother for years before she left.

Again, these are the rumors I've heard.

I think they are very funny, but am not sure as to their factual content.

Caryn

< unfounded rumor intentionally snipped>

I find it very disturbing that you would takes the time to write and post unfounded rumors about someone in a public forum. I hope no one ever feels the need to try to destroy your reputation in this way.

Mavia

I didn't miss a thing, and I didn't say you were lacking ethics - I said people who copy patterns do. I asked how you would feel if someone copied your patterns without paying for them. And I can assure you that while Marilyn may be the loudest voice on this subject, you have only to talk to a number of the other designers to find they feel much the same way.

In fact, there is a very neat book of patterns published by the INRG Legal Defense Fund specifically to raise money to fight copyright enfringement. 70 designers contributed patterns.

For more information see:

Bob & Marg Whittleton had some very interesting things to say about Re: Designers group regarding copyright violations?:

And you just blithely assume that I support such behavior, which I do not. The Holy MLI Herself stated that only thieves boycott Her. No room in Her worldview for someone either not liking Her designs (unimaginable heresy!) or not wishing to have any sort of connection with Her nasty behavior (or for the possibility that She has Herself scared off someone who might otherwise be a customer, if said prospective customer could find a design that fit her/his taste and wasn't just the same rewarmed stuff over and over).

Mavia, Caryn also took care to qualify her statements with the warning that the accusations *may* be unfounded. Why the snipe at her?

I've dealt with MLI when she was a poster on the AOL XS boards, and even though there are a couple of her samplers I would be inclined to have in my stash, because of those experiences I will never own anything by her. YMMV Darla Sacred cows make great hamburgers. Picture Trail Gallery:

User Name: Condorita Get naked to respond.

The copyright laws are like this. it has to doing it without the designer/singer etc saying it is ok.

1. a copy of pattern/cd/music use only for 1 person use is ok
2. if the pattern is changed by the user. it must be changed more than 3 times i.e.. how the pattern is layout i.e.. how the colors are arranged. color changing is a very grey area i.e. the words in a song

1. If a person or persons copy a pattern/cd/musice for disturbing. that is illegal. If you copy a pattern and give it to someone . You may be breaking the law. Now, if you go by state to state copyright laws change.

now for music files that is illegal on the federal copyright laws, but why, in the world, would download music?? when you download music you are download from PERSONAL computer. ie you download a virus/ you download music from a phreak or a cracker. nothing is free. Why do you think Napster went away and now it is back, and you pay for the downloading. anytime things are free there is always a sting attacked.

but this is something that is so murcky. if you copy and give only to sister, whose to say it is illeagal. Do we now how the pattern police who kick in doors. Go thru our stash and works. grill us over is that a copy.

ps, if they day it a free download and you have not paid a membership fee. worry hacker r us may be the downlaod you get . Dmc does mind if you download from them . hell , they want you to, buy more thread.

for the confusing stuff,

Copyright is a form of protection provided by the laws of the United States (title 17, U.S. Code) to the authors of "original works of authorship," including literary, dramatic, musical, artistic, and certain other intellectual works. This protection is available to both published and unpublished works. Section 106 of the 1976 Copyright Act generally gives the owner of copyright the exclusive right to do and to authorize others to do the following:

To reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords;

To prepare derivative works based upon the work;

To distribute copies or phonorecords of the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;

To perform the work publicly, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works;

To display the copyrighted work publicly, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work; and

In the case of sound recordings, to perform the work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission.

In addition, certain authors of works of visual art have the rights of attribution and integrity as described in section 106A of the 1976 Copyright Act. For further information, request Circular 40, "Copyright Registration for Works of the Visual Arts."

It is illegal for anyone to violate any of the rights provided by the copyright law to the owner of copyright. These rights, however, are not unlimited in scope. Sections 107 through 121 of the 1976 Copyright Act establish limitations on these rights. In some cases, these limitations are specified exemptions from copyright liability. One major limitation is the doctrine of "fair use," which is given a statutory basis in section 107 of the 1976 Copyright Act. In other instances, the limitation takes the form of a "compulsory license" under which certain limited uses of copyrighted works are permitted upon payment of specified royalties and compliance with statutory conditions. For further information about the limitations of any of these rights, consult the copyright law or write to the Copyright Office.

What does copyright protect? Copyright, a form of intellectual property law, protects original works of authorship including literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works, such as poetry, novels, movies, songs, computer software, and architecture. Copyright does not protect facts, ideas, systems, or methods of operation, although it may protect the way these things are expressed. See Circular 1, Copyright Basics, section "What Works Are Protected."

WHAT WORKS ARE PROTECTED?

Copyright protects "original works of authorship" that are fixed in a tangible form of expression. The fixation need not be directly perceptible so long as it may be communicated with the aid of a machine or device. Copyrightable works include the following categories:

literary works;

musical works, including any accompanying words

dramatic works, including any accompanying music

pantomimes and choreographic works

pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works

motion pictures and other audiovisual works

sound recordings

architectural works

These categories should be viewed broadly. For example, computer programs and most "compilations" may be registered as "literary works"; maps and architectural plans may be registered as "pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works."

Unfortunately, some of these statements are incorrect. I'll try to be helpful.

That depends. It may not be, although - in general - it is permissable.

These points are myth. You can't take a melody and re-write words. You CAN take a melody and make a parody of it. You CAN take most writing and make parodies. But for designs - better come up with your own.

Now, if you want to take designs (a leaf from this one, a tree from this one, a sky from this one) and make something for yourself, that's fine. If you then want to sell it, you might be in trouble. Depends upon how much changing was done. As you can see, it's really just best to come up with your own ideas. Pretty tough for the average person to do - which is why we pay designers for all these beautiful designs we use to embroider. They earn it through their talent.

I think you are misunderstanding copyright law, which is a Federal statute, not having anything to do with individual state laws. The law doesn't change between states.

Yes, if you are distributing "copies" of originals, it is illegal unless you have permission from the author, singer, designer, photographer, et al.

You can give away an original pattern you have. You can even exchange an original pattern with someone else. You can even sell an original pattern. What you CAN'T do is copy it and sell, swap, give away the copy and keep the original for yourself (or the reverse - give away the original and keep the copy).

There's nothing murky about copyright law.

It is illegal. It's done all the time, but it's illegal.

The needlework industry has lost tons of revenue as a result of copyright violation. Although they cannot hunt down every single person who has made an illegal copy for a friend or relative, they ARE trying to fight against major theft of their property by those clubs which are set up for the sole purpose of mass producing (copying) and exchanging (swapping) their designs.

In the meantime, it would be helpful if we all kept in mind that artists can't keep producing if we don't pay them by purchasing their designs. Dianne

Darla, it wasn't a 'snipe' at Caryn. I was expressing my opinion of her post. When rumors and false information are repeated often enough people presume they must be true. Putting qualifiers on them doesn't change that. I find it disturbing that anyone would take the time to make that kind of a post regardless of who it's about.

Mavia

Darla,

Thanks for trying!

I was answering a specific question from Lizard-Gumbo, making it as clear as I could in my answer that it was rumors and opinions, rather than cold-hard facts. There are some who will take anything I say and find some objection to it. I sometimes think some folks would try to take me to task if I stated that the sky was blue! LOL

Oh well, no skin off my nose really! Let the sort that insists on nit-picking have their fun, right?

Caryn

Hey Caryn--Is your sky blue? I'm a transplanted New Yawka and my sky in Brooklyn was kind of a grayish mud color.

But please don't accuse me of being a nit-picker ;^}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

Lucille

>

And I will take the blame for stirring pots that needn't be stirred. I'd read many people state that one had sued the other several times, but never WHY. I Googled and came up empty. I combed the archives and came up empty.

I kinda found it weird that it was stated but it was never stated why, so I asked.

Regardless, I thank those of you who answered for doing so and those of you who pointed out that it was bad taste to ask for doing so.

ROFL!

On good days it is, today it's sorta hazy, as we are having a heat advisory (92 degrees, but heat index is 104).

The smog that lingers over DC isn't all that bad here in semi-rural Northern VA tho!

Caryn

on 7/2/05 11:16 AM, Cyn at snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com posted:

I don't specifically remember anyone on RCTN actively pursuing copyright stuff - besides the discussions. However, Tink Boord-Dill runs a yahoo group for designers, the link is:

there have been several discussions, etc. about copyrights in theneedlework industry in that group. Also, TNNA, which is a trade organization for designers, manufacturers, suppliers, etc. published a booklet on copyright law, and the needlework industry, last year. They have a "professional" group effort that has been looking into and trying to preserve copyrights. The needlework industry does get into plenty of confusion. Essentially, most designers' take is you can make a working copy of a chart you've bought - but not extra copies. You're not supposed to stitch and then gift the chart away - that again runs into the murky area of being similar to copying/distributing - but it's not something that people really pursue. Generally you cannot sell for profit an item you stitched of someeone else's design - unless you get their permission. OTOH, if you buy a chart and stitch it multiple times, well, and people see it, then that works to market/publicise for that designer. If you sell a chart, then you don't have the right to retain a copy and stitch from that - even if it's a reseale.

So, you can contact TNNA - I think copies of their copyright pamphlet are available from members, or their office. I've pretty much been on hiatus this year due to other bits of life and consequently my design stuff, is all packed up in storage til we move, or I'd offer to send a copy.

Ellice

on 7/25/05 4:32 PM, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com at snipped-for-privacy@aol.com posted:

*snip*

What smog - out there in the rural crescent. But it's so hazy with humidity here - in the urban part of DC the blue just shimmers with moisture. I think today is supposed to be the hottest day so far - no wonder I'm not outside finishing the pressure washing of all our brick courtyard & walkways. Even the dog finds it oppressive.

Ellice

Oppressive is exactly the word. I wilt every time I walk out the front door. And heaven help us, but we're about to head to Florida for a week :-/

Best wishes, Ericka

on 7/26/05 7:58 PM, Ericka Kammerer at snipped-for-privacy@comcast.net posted:

Well, in FL you'll have the nice sea breezes. I grew up there, and it seems to me that in the summer the humidity is actually worse here in DC. For the foreign service this was considered tropical duty until the latter part of the 20th century, since much of the area is actually below sea level, or just barely at it. When we would visit our family/friends here in the DC area, my folks would always comment on the humdity/heat combination being worse here than at home in South Florida. Not to say that it's not plenty hot and sticky there, but....

Not to gloat, but we've actually been using the pool for late night adult swim time. But Puckster - the springer spaniel - is quite a water dog, and insists on patrolling, and diving in periodically. We just hope he doesn't bother the neighbors.

Oh, well, at least for our last summer in this house we're using the pool - last summer with being Cicada graund zero we really only used it for a few weeks in late August.

stay cool - ellice