Catherne Barley, I have to say that I think you have been more than generous
with this person who has egregiously infringed upon your copyright! This is
looked upon poorly in the US, and definitely is prosecutable. At the minimum,
I think you should ask that it be removed from her book...even if it means that
being self-published, she has to take a razor or X-acto and cut those pages
out. No publisher would allow this kind of infringement because of lawsuits,
and a self-published person should be even more concerned, as even if a SubS
corporation, the consequences of such expenses could infringe upon their home
and savings.
There is increasing infringement going on as new designers here jump on the
wagon, just modifying the 10% approximately it takes to modify. I have seen
exact duplicates of patterns where only one stitch is changed in a popular
knitted chart, and they think it is enough to with counter copyright. It is
just morally wrong. The problem is this...if the person got away with it once,
they will think they can do it again. Perhaps since you are across the pond
they thought it would take longer to catch, but with the internet and
increasing demand for lacework on both sides, it is really akin to Russian
Roulette.
*****
On the other hand, I have two friends who are patent/copyright atty's and one
is a knitter, and they have supplied information to various lists, often to the
chagrine of some publishers who host them, as they have a vested interest in
overstating the law.
Simply stated, in the US, copyright is set up for others not to profit from
one's own work, and that typically includes duplicating the pattern and taking
credit for an original by someone else, making mass copies of it for resale,
and using that pattern for mass production of items for sale/profit.
Statements that one is allowed one working copy and must destroy that after
it's use (often done to save wear and tear on the original), is considered
overstating the law. I can understand why one would hesitate to do so as
logically one often has comments or modifications on their working copy,
similar to what one would do with a cooking recipe.
There are people who make copies for friends in groups, and morally that is
wrong, as designers making profit from what are not considered volume sales
makes this even less so, and this is done often times within groups of friends
or guilds. Though not prosecutable by law, as first one needs to prove it, and
then justify the large amount of money it would take to prosecute and then be
compensated makes it legally a more moot point.
The core issue here is that it is immoral, as people unconsciously (and often
consciously) participate in it, without thinking of how they are cheating
someone who put unending work into producing such a fine thing, as it is often
the superby done things that seem to get infringed upon.
The Golden Rule comes to mind.
On the other hand, I can understand frustration when a pattern is no longer
available, the author has passed, and because of various laws, things are tied
up between countries, or families and the designer, and unending situations, so
that something is no longer available. I wonder to myself if I designed
something had died, and it was no longer available ever again, versus it being
shared judiciously by someone who would obtain great pleasure from it and pass
the work on, if I would be overly upset, looking down from Heaven. <smile>
Not to condone, but food for thought perhaps.
Ultimately if we lived by our conscience, less of this would become a problem
at all, and infringements left perhaps to a Power Greater Than Us, in the
afterlife. <smile>
Best,
Susan Reishus
---------------------------------
Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos.
-
To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line:
unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
