On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 9:43 AM, Gerardo @neorigami.com < [email protected]> wrote:
> Both Robert Lang and KDianne Stephens have answered my last message. Robert > Lang manifested it's a subjective question so whether "my contributions to > this artwork display significant creativity and novelty" or not would > depend. Dianne invited to review some legal cases related to derivative > works. Thank you both for your answers : ) > > Related to this conversation I wanted to ask through the list: do any of > you know any model that is made by folding one of the traditional bases and > following just one step after that? I'd love to know. > > That's pretty much my case, I fold a traditional base and I add one step > after that. > > > Thank you guys for all your help! > Hi Gerardo, When I come up with something that is different enough to bother sharing it, but still mostly the same as an existing design, I call it a "variation on ___" and treat the model as an extension of the original. For example, recently I tried to teach Sy Chen's Pureland Panda, and remembered it wrong, but the result wasn't so bad: https://www.flickr.com/ photos/ahudson/36114738513 In this case, I wouldn't publish diagrams of my variation without first asking Sy for permission. For a traditional model, do what you want, but I don't see a reason not to mention the design it's based on. --Andrew ______________________________ http://www.flickr.com/photos/ahudson http://ahudsonorigami.wordpress.com/
