In a message dated 29/08/2003 23:34:37 GMT Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Whether Buck's pricking of the Channer Mat is even copyrightable by Bean > or > Buck is a thorny legal question, since Channer had published the mat > previously and it was already in the public domain. I believe that the copyright is of the interpretation / version published. If you had access to the original pricking and trued up a pattern from there and published it with the permission of the owner of the original pricking (who owns the original pricking and therefore the copyright to that) then you would own the copyright to your version. But if you are going to court then don't quote me - get legal advice Liz - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
