On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 20:18:01 -0700 (PDT), Bev wrote: >Steph wrote: > >> When someone buys a pricking (whether in a book or as >a single piece of paper) they buy the right to make lace from the >pricking. >However they do not buy the right to copy in any other way. That's why >putting a picture of finished lace on a website is a breach of copyright >if > >From what you say, my bookmark made from a purchased pattern - a pricking >- is a 'copy' of that pricking? This is, to me, an unusual definition of >the word 'copy.' I would consider it a 'use' of the pattern (of the >pricking) - that I have bought the right to use the pattern - and the >result is *my* piece of lace (made from the purchased pattern). I've used 'copy' as shorthand for the full wording which extends to reproduction in whole or in part in any medium, electronic or otherwise, or deriving any work from the copyrighted work. By making lace you are deriving a work in thread from the pricking.
>The topic is getting worn out but I'd like to make another point (silly as >it might be) - if I were to sew an outfit from a purchased dress pattern, >post a picture of myself on a website, a photo of me wearing this garment >at a lace event (for instance) ought I have asked the pattern company >permission to do so? In theory yes. In practice pattern companies don't bother about this sort of usage. But put that dress on a model in a fashion magazine and they will sue. -- The future will be better tomorrow. - Dan Quayle Steph Peters, Manchester, England [EMAIL PROTECTED] Scanned by WinProxy http://www.Ositis.com/ - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
