When does an altered pattern become your own?

[MrsM]

Yeah, I've been on forums where some of the regulars are attorneys. They always include disclaimers in their posts, if they do give advice.

 

We should have a "tongue-in-cheek" smilie. That would have been a good one for my last post

[Gail]

Since we all use the same stitches and shaping methods, surely its a matter of how different it is from the original shaping and use of pattern/stitch repeats? so if its simply a panel of an exisiting pattern, used in a different way, then it's still someone else's design.

we are all inspired by other people's work, and we all learnt using other people's patterns,. obviously some of that must rub off and stay with us?

When we decide halfway through a project that we like the stitch, but the shaping is wrong for us can set us on the path of new design - but on a sliding scale - if you decide to increase or vary the shaping, add sleeves or a different border (unless it is unrecognisable from the original) you still should acknowledge the inspiration.

Every one who designs our own patterns have to confess we all start with the techniques we learn from others, whether that's turning a square corner on an afghan, or making an amigurumi style head for a toy, we don't re-invent the wheel. After all, no-one can claim to have invented the idea of crocheting squares for an afghan, or the way they are joined together. The squares themselves are all variations on a theme aren't they?, so - at what point are they an original design - colour? ,stitch?, combination?

I think - within us -we always know how much we owe to someone else's design, and what we can honestly claim as original

[eurolyons]

Over 20 years ago I went to a class on small businesses...to the question of how much do you have to change whatever to make it your own, the answer then was

 

10%

 

A year ago I was reading an answer in one of Annie's Attic's magazine to this very question...the writer took the time to basically write up an essay on the subject...but the bottom line answer was:

 

50%

 

Recently on the Annie's Attic website, someone wrote about designing one's own patterns...the answer to this common question was...

 

All of it needs to be original...which to me, I'm sorry, is not a good answer...because there are things that cannot be copyrighted...but that answer to one who doesn't have a clue about copyrights would seem to think that if one designed anything, they'd entirely have to recreate the wheel...that's the confusing part to everyone...

 

Actually Yarnaholic (I think it was her) has a really good guideline and explanation as to what you can and cannot do...you cannot copyright a frog, but how you artistically express that frog...

 

 

It is quite possible that we are not asking the question in the right way...even reading over this thread, with everyone's answers, it's still confusing...and in my personal opinion, it's subjective...what one person designs and wants to do with that design will vary greatly from what someone else will want to do with it in terms of permission being granted...one will be okay with someone else selling the pattern or making things out of that pattern or making derivatives of that pattern, as long as permission is sought first and possibly a fee being paid, another person, nothing will be granted...

 

We are all inspired by everything around us when we create. But there is a fine line between looking at the basic form of a blouse, a sock, an animal, a dish cloth, whatever and saying, hmmm, what if I did this...and created something new and different, and saying, "Oh what a great idea, why didn't I think of that...hmmm...maybe if I change the color, I could claim it as mine and sell these puppies...

 

There is the flip side of this too where people really do create something entirely of their own, get it published and if it's successful, someone (or many someone's) crawl out of the woodwork and claim copyright infridgement...many of these cases are all but thrown out of court, as being shown to be nothing more than extortion...but a few people have had to pay through the noise...Helen Keller (yes, Helen Keller wrote a poem, it was published and she was taken to court for copyright infridgement, I don't remember if she won or lost the case...) Maria Von Trapp (the Maria from the Sound of Music) was taken to court for the Sound of Music, even though the story was based on her and her family's life!!!!) They settled out of court (because really, the other person just wants money...) and the one that I still feel was most unfair was George Harrison...he was found guilty of involuntary copyright infringement of lifting a piece of music from He's So Fine and making it My Sweet Lord...so again, to me what the courts decide (if it gets that far) anyone's guess...the law isn't always so clear...I never heard of Involuntary Copyright Infringement...but what all these had in common was the fact that all these things were financially successful...had My Sweet Lord or Sound of Music tanked and not made a cent, I'd bet my good crochet arm that no one would have said boo...

[eurolyons]

Oh and one more, even more unfair...John Fogarty of Creedence Clearwater Revival was taken to court of the rights of his music from Creedence...and I remember clearly him coming out on the stand and saying that certain musical phrases he used were how he wrote...it would be like someone coming out and telling me I couldn't sign my name the way I signed it because I didn't own the rights to that signature anymore...or worse, I didn't have the rights to my own fingerprints...that's what he was basically arguing in his court case...he was fighting with the publishing company over the rights of his songs...which is one thing, but even scarier was the company, in trying to protect the their rights were trying to control how he could create...I call that blackmail myself...

 

Copyrights are to protect intellectual property, there is such a thing as Fair Use, which no one ever seems to really want to protect or talk about. Copyrights are not suppose to stifle creativity, but sometimes, in worse case scenerios, that's exactly what it does...

[monael]

You know, this is exactly why I have all but given up on making money from crochet. I have done a few things that were my own "pattern", but I wonder if a person with a similar pattern or design would claim I was infringing their copyright because they made something like it.

 

I have seen so many patterns that to me look about the same, that I don't see how they could claim a copyright, or publish it as their own. For example, a basic granny square blanket, I have seen so many "patterns" out there. Also, ripple blankets. And basic double or single crochet scarves. A lot of beanie hats look the same to me. Now I know that maybe the starting chain might be a little different for a scarf, or the number of stitches worked into the beginning ring for the hat might be slightly different, but they are basically the same thing. So if you have to "alter" a pattern by any particular amount, would changing the starting chain from say, 40 to 45 for a scarf make any material difference?

[Amy]

The issue of a pattern for a basic granny square or beanie hat can get confusing. In most instances, those patterns probably only have very limited copyright protection. As in, the written words cannot be copied and passed off as belonging to someone else. But there wouldn't be protection against selling granny square or beanie hat items.

 

Now, if there were some unique design feature, that could possibly have copyright protection. But if you were just making single-color beanies with no embellishment, or with embellishments of your own design, it wouldn't be possible for someone to claim copyright infringement, in my opinion. (Otherwise, there would only be one manufacturer of crocheted beanies allowed in the whole world!)

 

As always, if you're (general you, not anyone in particular) going to be selling an item and have any concerns about whether you're infringing upon a copyright, contact the copyright holder/designer/publisher or seek the services of an intellectual property attorney.

 

Also as always, these are my opinions, and I am NOT an attorney! So take them for what they're worth.

[funkyreporter]

This subject suddenly becomes of personal interest to me because I am making a cape that has three distinct stitch patterns but I"m sort of "frankensteining" the pattern... what I mean is the top of the cape called for a stitch that I didn't understand, and once I did understand it, I didn't care for it... so, for the top seven inches I used a stitch from a pattern in another book - I had to improvise how to do increases with this stitch but figured it out and got to the next part of the pattern.

 

While the top part goes from the neck to the curve over the shoulder, this next part is the 'length' of the cape - and it only goes down to the elbows... I want a much longer cape so I've decided to do this section of the pattern down to my rear.

 

The bottom pattern section has a lacy look and then the very last is picot stitches around the border. I will keep that section but I will do the picot edging along the opening all the way up to the neck and not just the bottom border.

 

The cape finally calls for a chained draw string and two pom-poms, and I don't do pom-poms:no . So I've decided I will do a button closure on this near the top by the neck - perhaps two buttons.

 

So does this make it my original pattern? I don't think so. I'm just utilizing other people's ideas and modifying them to suit my needs. When I do a "show and tell" on the 'Ville I will credit both the book where I took the first section of stitching from and then the book and pattern I used to make the garment and I'll include what changes I made!

[Butterfly5776]

Well from what i can tell, it appears you used the shawl for inspiration but created a diffrent product all together. I am not a lawyer but in my own honest opinion you created your copyrightable product. As long as you write what you did in your own words. Now if you had copyied the shawl and then tried to write a pattern that would be copyright infringement.

 

Again seek professional counsel on this most will give you a complementary hour.