| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Chayah
Permanent Resident
1924 Posts |
 Posted - 06/20/2011 : 10:21:08 AM
|
This is all very helpful to me. I make lots of hats, and started giving some to my synagogue to sell at their winter sale, the money goes to help the school. I don't take any money myself. I began to wonder if I was violating any rules. Most of the hats are the kind one makes easily because we've been knitting a long time, but some come from patterns, so the information about clothing patterns is very useful. Many thanks, Chayah
"Each breath really is a new beginning of the rest of our lives." Jon Kabat-Zinn |
 |
|
|
Kade1301
Permanent Resident
France
1426 Posts |
Posted - 06/21/2011 : 05:24:08 AM
|
The important difference between Koinonia's experience and knitting is that the mural is a work of "fine art", whereas knitters generally produce "useful articles" which are expressly EXcluded from U. S. copyright protection.
Bye, Klara
http://www.lahottee.info |
|
|
|
mathiemom
Chatty Knitter
USA
229 Posts |
Posted - 06/23/2011 : 10:18:25 AM
|
The legal distinction between "useful articles" and "fine art" is very interesting, and IMO mirrors our culture's inclination to label knitting and other fiber arts as "craft" rather than "art", thereby assigning those who participate in knitting to lower status as crafters vs. artists. I've wondered whether this was a gender issue, i.e. creating useful articles has historically (at least for the last few hundred years) been considered "women's work", while the more cerebral and valuable fine art was, until recently, created mostly by men. But now I'm wondering whether this idea is rooted in a slightly different cultural construct, namely, that for an object to be considered "fine art" it can't serve any useful function (except to be viewed, admired, pondered, reacted to, etc.). I would argue that there is a lot of knitting out there, including wearable knitting, that truly is fine art.
I'm not necessarily advocating for a change in the US copyright laws - just wondering about this. Sorry to roam so far OT!
Wendy |
|
|
|
Kade1301
Permanent Resident
France
1426 Posts |
Posted - 06/24/2011 : 04:55:59 AM
|
Actually, you are probably right in that "fine art" is not supposed to have any practical purpose. In French there's three categories, which I once (only half jokingly) defined as: "art" (= painting, sculpture, music etc.) - beautiful but useless, "artisanat d'art" (= pottery, knitting, glass blowing etc.) - beautiful and useful, "artisanat" (welding, masonry work, carpentry etc.)- useful and ugly. Obviously that's oversimpplifying it (the grilles in front of my shop entrance and window are certainly beautiful, but nobody would put them into the "artisanat d'art" category).
But as for useful articles not being copyrighteable, I believe it's simply because the design of the article is generally at least partly determined by its intended use. The vast majority of pullover sweaters have a hole for the head and two sleeves, as well as fabric to cover the body. Now where would we be if somebody claimed copyright protection for their sweater and stopped the rest of the world from knitting items with the same basic shape?
Bye, Klara
http://www.lahottee.info |
|
|
|
pqpatch
Seriously Hooked
USA
616 Posts |
Posted - 07/15/2011 : 5:11:44 PM
|
| I have seen circular baby afghans for sale on Etsy that I know are from a Herschnners pattern book. How do they get away with this? |
|
|
|
Kade1301
Permanent Resident
France
1426 Posts |
|
|
agnesgooch
Gabber Extraordinaire
570 Posts |
Posted - 07/16/2011 : 07:16:45 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by pqpatch
I have seen circular baby afghans for sale on Etsy that I know are from a Herschnners pattern book. How do they get away with this?
I saw a seller on Etsy that was selling items made from Drops patterns. S/he did not have the actual finished product on her site, but said s/he would make them to order. I wondered how she could do that. I looked on the Drops site and it did indeed say that one could sell items from their patterns. Here's what it says:
"The sale of garments based on DROPS DESIGN is permitted as long as they are sold as single items or per order. Further commercial use of the patterns is not permitted. It has to be clearly stated that the garment is made based on a design from DROPS DESIGN. The use of DROPS photos for marketing purposes/sales is only permitted when only DROPS yarns have been used. The photo may not be cut or edited and the logo should be clearly visible. The use of clothes labels of which DROPS DESIGN forms part is conditioned by the inclusion of the following text: “A DROPS DESIGN made by …..”.
We reserve the right to withdraw the permission for use at any time, notwithstanding the reason."
http://www.flickr.com/photos/24181181@N07/ |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| Knitter's Review Forums |
© 2001-2013 Knitter's Review |
|
|
|
|
puzzled about copyrights
