This topic is so confusing. How is it then that artists can paint a picture with Han Solo and sell it for a profit, and we can't? I don't get it. How about a tatoo artist who puts a picture of Mickey Mouse on some biker's arm? Is that wrong?
- Status
Those artists get sued sometimes. People generally get away with it if they are doing this small time. That doesn't make it legal. I am not debating what I think is right, BTW, just what my understanding of the law is. Lucas was in the news just a few days ago for going after a company for making a real laser that looks like a light saber.
I just read through a complicated Wikipedia (ALWAYS accurate) article, about Derivative work.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_work
the gist of it was that most copyrighted materials are property of the owner until you change something, or add something different.
There was some lady who took some Logo, and put them on ceramic tiles and they ruled that just putting the logo on a new material is illegal.
But you can change the product a little bit, and it is completely legal.
100% legal
lol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_work
the gist of it was that most copyrighted materials are property of the owner until you change something, or add something different.
There was some lady who took some Logo, and put them on ceramic tiles and they ruled that just putting the logo on a new material is illegal.
But you can change the product a little bit, and it is completely legal.
100% legal
lol
Last edited:
Dan,
100% ? Pardon me for not feeling comfortable. My guess is it's never over 80% even if the law is technically on your side.
But check the title - this thread is about ethics. So I guess the real question is whether or not it it makes a difference to us as craft persons if a design is a copy or derivation of someone else's design that won't receive any proceeds.
100% ? Pardon me for not feeling comfortable. My guess is it's never over 80% even if the law is technically on your side.
But check the title - this thread is about ethics. So I guess the real question is whether or not it it makes a difference to us as craft persons if a design is a copy or derivation of someone else's design that won't receive any proceeds.
Last edited:
After careful consideration and an edit I am going to reopen this discussion as I feel if it stays on track, has a chance to be a great discussion. Please stay on topic and keep the topic on ethics, legality etc., not on the topic of lawyers themselves.
Legal: what is expected of everyone. Reputation.
Ethical: what one expects of themselves. Character.
One of those demonstrates consideration and concern, the other doesn't.
When one lays their head on their pillow at night and they have done what is legal, they still sometimes find peaceful sleep evasive. If one has done what is ethical then sweet sleep comes, as they are at peace with themselves.
I've heard it said before that reputation is what mankind says about us; character is what mankind knows about us. Reputation is variable and unreliable; character is constant and reliable.
So legal vs. ethical is our choice...but the consequences that we live with are our choice as well.
MTCW.
Ethical: what one expects of themselves. Character.
One of those demonstrates consideration and concern, the other doesn't.
When one lays their head on their pillow at night and they have done what is legal, they still sometimes find peaceful sleep evasive. If one has done what is ethical then sweet sleep comes, as they are at peace with themselves.
I've heard it said before that reputation is what mankind says about us; character is what mankind knows about us. Reputation is variable and unreliable; character is constant and reliable.
So legal vs. ethical is our choice...but the consequences that we live with are our choice as well.
MTCW.
Completely agree. :icon_thum :icon_thum
I guess this is a touchy subject. I am not trying to tick people off... so sorry if I did.
I think this is a complicated issue, and I totally respect and agree with Cathy for not giving away someone else's work.
I am personally a little bit naive when it comes to this subject as I have never followed through, and scrolled out something from a design I made.
My goal this weekend is to design, and scroll something in order to remedy this ignorance.
Jerry, that was nicely phrased.
Dan, I believe this point of contention is fairly unique to scroll saw pattern designers, but I really don't visit other disciplines to know if that's true or not. I try to bring a pattern to life when I scroll it, but am and will continue to be in awe of designers.
Dan, I believe this point of contention is fairly unique to scroll saw pattern designers, but I really don't visit other disciplines to know if that's true or not. I try to bring a pattern to life when I scroll it, but am and will continue to be in awe of designers.
This has been a very thought provoking thread for me . Thanx for opening it back up and keeping us on topic :icon_thum 
ccasion1
My thought processes on this have led me to believe that I am not really a designer but a manipulator :eusa_thin. I do a lot of work from photos so the basic image has already been designed and created for me. Photo quality and composition is an art form all it's own. My talent is largely in the conversion and adaptation of that image to a different medium while being true to the original image. I am careful to use only public domain photos and personal photos with permission. There are design elements involved but that doesn't make me a designer any more than kittens born in an oven can be called biscuits :rolf:
A true designer like Steve Good, Sheila Landry or the Fowlers start with a blank piece of paper and an idea and work that to a cutable pattern
Like Cathy I try to bring a regular scrolling pattern to life and that is accomplished by how I interpret it in the final cutting. I rarely do a pattern exactly as it is drawn, preferring to add my own unique tweaks in an effort to move away from the cookie-cutter final result . Now I will claim the creation as my own but with the footnote " adapted from a pattern by XYZ " when it is necessary to label or make written reference to the finished piece
If I have a bird feeder pattern with a heart on the end and I wish to place an elk there instead to match the theme of my yard then it is perfectly OK and ethical to do so as patterns are merely guides for a lot of us . To republish or sell that pattern as my own creation crosses the ethics line in my opinion . When I share that adaptation with a fellow scroller I trust that person to keep it in the "personal use" mindset and use or sell only the finished creation. I will make sure the person is aware of where the basic pattern came from and trust them to pass that along when asked about it . Something to the tune of " a fellow scroller adapted this from a pattern by XYZ "
To address Dan's original point as to the ethics of recreating a geometrical design for personal use , I think that is perfectly acceptable if you have the time and skill set to do it . It is ( in my opinion ) OK to sell the finished work . Where the line is crossed is when you try to sell or publish the pattern as your own creative genius . It is also unkewl to post that pattern publicly as your own work . This is where Cathy is at when she doesn't share something from another source without permission to do so. Her ethics are beyond reproach in this instance and as a result I would trust her with any pattern in my personal catalog :icon_thum The point has been well made that designs occur naturally all around us and it is impossible to assign ownership to each and every one of them ...although " Mr Tree " seems to think otherwise :gar-La;
The very fact that Dan questions the ethics of his thought process speaks volumes to his ability to be a steward of another's work and would put him on my list of trusted scrollers :eusa_clap
There is no hard and fast on this. If it doesn't feel right you probably shouldn't take it to the public arena:nah:. There are no " pattern police " , just the trust and admiration of your fellow scrollers, peers and the person you say goodnight to in the mirror :wink_smil
Legality unfortunately does have a place in the grand scheme of things but keeping a handle on your personal ethics will most certainly negate any need for that discussion. Yeah , it may be legal to put a mustache on the Mona Lisa but your credibility suffers in the eyes of the world when you call it your own . I would much rather be respected amongst my scrolling peers than to be legally correct
I sincerely thank everyone who has weighed in on this issue . I value all of the input and perspective and it has fueled thought processes for me that have lain dormant for far too long.
BTW Cathy , you took a blank Excel spreadsheet and used it to create a scrollable pattern . Hate to be the one to tell you kiddo, but that makes you a designer in my book :gar-Bi More so than me as I have never thought to do that :icon_thum
ccasion1 My thought processes on this have led me to believe that I am not really a designer but a manipulator :eusa_thin. I do a lot of work from photos so the basic image has already been designed and created for me. Photo quality and composition is an art form all it's own. My talent is largely in the conversion and adaptation of that image to a different medium while being true to the original image. I am careful to use only public domain photos and personal photos with permission. There are design elements involved but that doesn't make me a designer any more than kittens born in an oven can be called biscuits :rolf:
A true designer like Steve Good, Sheila Landry or the Fowlers start with a blank piece of paper and an idea and work that to a cutable pattern
Like Cathy I try to bring a regular scrolling pattern to life and that is accomplished by how I interpret it in the final cutting. I rarely do a pattern exactly as it is drawn, preferring to add my own unique tweaks in an effort to move away from the cookie-cutter final result . Now I will claim the creation as my own but with the footnote " adapted from a pattern by XYZ " when it is necessary to label or make written reference to the finished piece
If I have a bird feeder pattern with a heart on the end and I wish to place an elk there instead to match the theme of my yard then it is perfectly OK and ethical to do so as patterns are merely guides for a lot of us . To republish or sell that pattern as my own creation crosses the ethics line in my opinion . When I share that adaptation with a fellow scroller I trust that person to keep it in the "personal use" mindset and use or sell only the finished creation. I will make sure the person is aware of where the basic pattern came from and trust them to pass that along when asked about it . Something to the tune of " a fellow scroller adapted this from a pattern by XYZ "
To address Dan's original point as to the ethics of recreating a geometrical design for personal use , I think that is perfectly acceptable if you have the time and skill set to do it . It is ( in my opinion ) OK to sell the finished work . Where the line is crossed is when you try to sell or publish the pattern as your own creative genius . It is also unkewl to post that pattern publicly as your own work . This is where Cathy is at when she doesn't share something from another source without permission to do so. Her ethics are beyond reproach in this instance and as a result I would trust her with any pattern in my personal catalog :icon_thum The point has been well made that designs occur naturally all around us and it is impossible to assign ownership to each and every one of them ...although " Mr Tree " seems to think otherwise :gar-La;
The very fact that Dan questions the ethics of his thought process speaks volumes to his ability to be a steward of another's work and would put him on my list of trusted scrollers :eusa_clap
There is no hard and fast on this. If it doesn't feel right you probably shouldn't take it to the public arena:nah:. There are no " pattern police " , just the trust and admiration of your fellow scrollers, peers and the person you say goodnight to in the mirror :wink_smil
Legality unfortunately does have a place in the grand scheme of things but keeping a handle on your personal ethics will most certainly negate any need for that discussion. Yeah , it may be legal to put a mustache on the Mona Lisa but your credibility suffers in the eyes of the world when you call it your own . I would much rather be respected amongst my scrolling peers than to be legally correct
I sincerely thank everyone who has weighed in on this issue . I value all of the input and perspective and it has fueled thought processes for me that have lain dormant for far too long.
BTW Cathy , you took a blank Excel spreadsheet and used it to create a scrollable pattern . Hate to be the one to tell you kiddo, but that makes you a designer in my book :gar-Bi More so than me as I have never thought to do that :icon_thum
FYI-I am the designer of the pattern that was in question. Cathy did the right thing in not sharing the pattern and she did pay for the pattern.
There are several versions of the copyright law and I too am not an expert. The one thing to remember is- if it feels wrong, don't do it.
Karl
There are several versions of the copyright law and I too am not an expert. The one thing to remember is- if it feels wrong, don't do it.
Karl
- Status
