Old Patterns Keep Resurfacing as Original

[RoseRed]

Is it enough that if you want to sell a design that has a million different write-ups for the pattern, and aren't sure who credit for the design goes to, to at least make a tag or something for the item saying you made it, but it was "inspired by" some other pattern or designer?

 

Inspired by falls into the category of Derivative Works.

 

Personally, I don't think it means a designer "has gall" by designing and providing instructions for basic patterns. There are so many people out there who are afraid to venture out on their own to create something, and are much more comfortable following instructions written out by someone else.

 

These basic patterns provide a much needed product for a number of crocheters. Just because one person has written up instructions for a basic scarf or granny square does not mean that everyone else in the world should never be able to do the same.

 

Basic patterns aside - I've seen intricate patterns that have been scalped with only several changes made to them and called original. To me - that is gall.

 

Now, for basic patterns - I think writing up your own version of a simple or basic pattern is an excellent way to get started designing. You have to crawl before you walk and walk before you run. It's just the natural progression of things.

[LizaKaye]

I was able to purchase several (30+) issues of crochet magazines from the early 80's (when they didn't have much photography) and you can't believe how many of those patterns I have seen that have been passed off recently as originals.

[RoseRed]

Amazing, isn't it?

[Chiscrochetcrazy]

The thing that bothers me is when someone uses a pattern to make their so called pattern. That does Not make an original pattern.I would never use another pattern to start my own process of designing.

[DebraKay]

I don't even mind when a current magazine prints a pattern for something very basic or a golden oldie that has been passed down through generations. There are always some new to crochet or who might have missed a basic along the way. I do mind that someone wants to put their name to it like it was their unique idea. I especially mind it when they add the claim that the item cannot be made for sale without their permission when it was something I was making before they were born.

 

I have seen a couple of designers add designs like that on their websites and then make a nice statement that it is a pattern from long ago and they are making no specific claim to it. It is nice to have those old patterns available so we can still make them when we have lost the pattern, or forgotten the memorized scheme. I just don't think people should take credit as the orginator. Maybe they could write it up and list it "my version of an age-old favorite" or something like that and then NOT try to limit what others do with the design. That is what the strawberry hotpad "so called designer" should have done. I appreciated finding the pattern as it was easier than counting stitches in the intricate pineapple design from the very used one I have from 30-some years ago. But I did resent that someone was trying to claim they just had the idea in 1999!

 

I recently did as another poster said and contacted a Ravelry member to tell her the (very detailed) afghan pattern she was selling was also in a book I own from the 80's. I gave her the book title, author and dates. She just said "great minds think alike" or something to that effect.

 

Here is another question....what if one pattern is knit and the other is crochet, but the pattern is exactly the same? I have seen that several times as well. Most that I have noticed though, were nice enough to credit the original designer and say it is their "crochet" version of the original "knit" version (or vice versa) but a couple of times no such credit was offered. I am not sure of the "law" on that kind of conversion.

 

I know there are plenty of ethical designers that work very hard to come up with unqiue and original ideas. I am grateful they make the designs available (whether for free or profit) so I can make beautiful things too! I need a pattern, but I am honest about it and give credit where credit is due! I have been amazed at the talent here! Beautiful work and awesome ideas! Between this site and Ravelry -- the artistic talents are awe-inspiring! I am afraid I am spending more time admiring than I am crocheting!

[klouised]

This type of thing is what is so scary for the designers who try hard to be honest. I've gotten to the point where I can't allow myself to look at anyone's instructions. If someone ever accuses me of copying their work, at least I know for sure that there was no chance that I did. You get to a certain point where you can look at a lot of work and figure out how it's made, anyways. It's pretty basic.

 

I have had it happen where I got inspired with a "new" design, made it, then saw online that lots of people haf already been inspired by that "new" idea. sigh. It kinda pops your bubble. lol. I like to think that I'm more original than I really am. ha ha.

[RoseRed]

DebraKay - I totally understand where you're coming from. Those of us that design with integrity would never that. There's a huge diff between opinion or what would seem fair and right and what the copyright law actually says.

 

What's been bothering me lately is seeing scalped patterns in the catalogs now.

[Amy]

I especially mind it when they add the claim that the item cannot be made for sale without their permission when it was something I was making before they were born.

 

Actually, what they're saying is you can't sell something made from their specific instructions without permission. If the designer has taken their knowledge, skills, time, and (possibly) money to create a new, easily-understood pattern, I believe the designer is well within his/her rights to place restrictions on whether/how others can profit from their work. The restrictions only apply to something made from the pattern; not if the item is made in any other way.

 

Obviously, the designer can't prevent anyone from selling a finished item if that item was made without using the designer's pattern: someone came up with their own pattern for something similar, someone found a different but similar pattern that gave permission for finished items to be sold, someone has been making something very similar without using a pattern for the past 30 years, and so on.

[chrisdfriend]

This is why I work hard to make sure my designs are original, I can easily tell if someone has copied my work because of the wording. I do allow people to sell things made from my patterns and get emails from folks asking permission to do so which is very nice. Of course all my patterns are free on my website and blog and so far I haven't had any issues with them. I have seen other peoples works stolen and the sellers even had the nerve to steal the original photos too. That is blatently wrong. A lot of my designs are used by charity groups which is the main reason I provide them for free. It makes me very happy to know the items are going to help people in need. I will continue to post new free patterns as often as I can because I know that many crafters are on a very limited budget and can't afford to buy them.

[RoseRed]

Actually, what they're saying is you can't sell something made from their specific instructions without permission. If the designer has taken their knowledge, skills, time, and (possibly) money to create a new, easily-understood pattern, I believe the designer is well within his/her rights to place restrictions on whether/how others can profit from their work. The restrictions only apply to something made from the pattern; not if the item is made in any other way.

 

Obviously, the designer can't prevent anyone from selling a finished item if that item was made without using the designer's pattern: someone came up with their own pattern for something similar, someone found a different but similar pattern that gave permission for finished items to be sold, someone has been making something very similar without using a pattern for the past 30 years, and so on.

 

I think what we're talking about here is someone claiming a derivative work as their own and then placing licensing restrictions on someone else's work that they're claiming as original.

 

This is not most people. Or at least not the people that I know and associate with. It happens far too frequently tho.

[Katchkan]

I personally don't even allow myself to cruise the net or crochet books anymore so I know in my heart of hearts that all my designs spring from my soul and imagination. I never want someone to say I imitated someone else's designs.