I made Maya a set from the PRR cherries twill, the twirly sundress from 2/2002 ottobre, along with the harebell hat from last summers, and a really cute pair of KS bloomers. Anyway, she wore it to a party last weekend, and we got TONS of compliments on the outfit! At least three mamas begged me to sew a set for their dd's, one offered $75 for a set:eek: . Anyway, I was pretty sure it was not ok to do for profit, but just wanted to seek out the opinion here. I also am emailing Tuula, to see what the official word from Ottobre is.

probably going to be in the minority here, but i say do it. and really, you'd be compensated for your time, kwim? it's not like you can just whip out a set in 5 minutes, so you should be paid for your sewing services.

Well, if you're being paid enough to make it worthwhile, you could always buy a copy of that Ottobre for each dress you make.

since a couple different people have contacted the copyright office and have all received the same answer (that the pattern itself cannot be copied for resale but that the clothing made from it can be sold) I would think it would be totally legal.

Might not feel right because all along everyone has assumed that the "for personal/home use only" printed on patterns was binding. But I have to say the fact that pattern companies print that on pattern envelopes as a "scare tactic" irritates me.

The person who designed the pattern has been paid. You paid Ottobre. The person asking you to sew for her isn't going to buy Ottobre so they aren't losing a sale. Really it would give you more reason to KEEEP buying their magazine.

Originally posted by Dannielle
since a couple different people have contacted the copyright office and have all received the same answer (that the pattern itself cannot be copied for resale but that the clothing made from it can be sold) I would think it would be totally legal.

Might not feel right because all along everyone has assumed that the "for personal/home use only" printed on patterns was binding. But I have to say the fact that pattern companies print that on pattern envelopes as a "scare tactic" irritates me.

The person who designed the pattern has been paid. You paid Ottobre. The person asking you to sew for her isn't going to buy Ottobre so they aren't losing a sale. Really it would give you more reason to KEEEP buying their magazine.

I agree.

I agree that you should do it. The best argument I've heard along these lines is that the pattern makers aren't in the business of selling clothes...just patterns. Therefore, they wouldn't be losing business if you sold clothes you made from their patterns.

I haven't found on my KS patterns anywhere that it's for personal use only actually. Haven't looked at Ottobre.

Hey I want to see a picture!!!!!

I agree! Do it, makes tons of $$$$
Did you ever post a picture? I'd love to see the dress and hat.
Mindi

If you feel it immoral send them my way, I need a house downpayment, LOL :)

No, I haven't shown this set yet, it is absolutely adorable though!! Here is the hat:

Anyway, the reason I am still unsure of the legalities is how do people get away with offering cottage licensing fees of hundreds of dollars if it is ok to just use the pattern?

Originally posted by mommy2maya
Anyway, the reason I am still unsure of the legalities is how do people get away with offering cottage licensing fees of hundreds of dollars if it is ok to just use the pattern?

I think what you're paying for is the right to use the name to sell your product. Take Cuddlebuns as an example, if you buy the license you can make the diapers and sell them as "cuddlebuns" diapers.

Jayme's right it's the ability to use the name you're buying.

So anyone can sew a cuddlebuns, call it by another name and sell them with no consequences?

You know what, Mary? There was a time when it seemed as though *you* were the copyright and license police. You weren't very nice about it, either...and because of that I find this post extremely hypocritical. I am sorry if this seems a little too straightforward, but it honestly hurt *me* to see how you were treating other mamas - especially sewing mamas - with your replies.


I know its been a while since those hot topics, but your post brought it all back up for me.

Kristin

So many diapers look exactly the same. How really could anyone tell if the Cuddlebuns pattern was used or not? Ive seen a bunch of fitteds here and they are all pretty much the same thing, ya know?

The cottage licenses are sold so that you too can latch onto the products positive reputation.

I agree that the pattern companies are out to make patterns, not clothing. All it would take is the tiniest modification and you could call it your own work anyway, right?

Well, the pattern sheets say "All commercial and industrial use is strictly prohibited."

But as others have pointed out, US made patterns say the same thing, and the copyright office says that making and selling clothes from them is legal.

So, I'm as confused as you are. I don't see why your question is hypocritical? You're asking a question based on new information we've learned on this board because other mamas have done more research.

edited for typo.

Originally posted by Kristin
You know what, Mary? There was a time when it seemed as though *you* were the copyright and license police. You weren't very nice about it, either...and because of that I find this post extremely hypocritical. I am sorry if this seems a little too straightforward, but it honestly hurt *me* to see how you were treating other mamas - especially sewing mamas - with your replies.


I know its been a while since those hot topics, but your post brought it all back up for me.

Kristin

Before, I would NEVER have thought twice about using a commercial pattern for profit. However with all of the news of late about the copyright office saying that is fine to use commercial patterns for profit, well, now I was pondering it. However, if I get an email back from Tuula saying it is NOT ok to use Ottobre patterns for profit, I won't do it.

I have always gone on what was legally ok, whether popular or not, as far as patterns for profit go. I don't see how it is hurtful to say something is illegal, as far as conventional wisdom is concerned, and that I do not support illegal activities? I don't think I was the only one who was ever outspoken against using commercial patterns for profit either.



As for changing one tiny thing to make it yours, I think it takes more than that. That would be a question that I think Theresa of LTK's knows more about, maybe she will comment?

I've posted so many time son this issue, LOL. There was a thread a while back (I think it was when someone called the copyright office and asked if it was okay to use patterns for sewing stuff for sale and they said yes) where I posted specifically the links to the sections of the copyright law that say it's illegal to make items from copyrighted patterns. I don't have time right now to go and do that again, so I'll paraphrase. Basically, the item sewn (knit, crocheted, etc) from a pattern is a *derivative work* and the copyright owner has the sole discretion in deciding whether or not to allow it to be used to make items for sale. So, if Mary emails Tuula and Tuula says it's okay, then it's perfectly legal. She's got permission from the copyright holder (who is the one who holds all the rights to the work, and it's derivatives.) However, if Tuula says "No way!" than Mary can't do it (well, she *can* do it, but it would be illegal.)


I think that might be the nuance that's being missed from the copyright office. You *can* do it, if you've got permission, and that permission part is what they are leaving out.

That's why I (and cuddlebuns, honeyboys, fern and faerie, etc) can do licenseing. We are being compensated for giving our permission to use the copyrighted work, and then subsequewntly, som eof us are also being compensated for the use of our biz name.

Now, as for that whole "change one thing" and then you're safe. That's no accurate. SOme say it's change three things, but generally, if you are basing you work substantially on another work, then yours would be a derivative (and covered under the original copyright.) There have to be significant changes. That's where it gets fuzzy and where litigation come sinto play, so the courts decide what is significant. Changing color, or fabric, or sequence of construction, or other things like that, would NOT consitute a significant change.

An example in knitting would be say you've got my apron top. You change the gauge, change the stitch pattern, and change the back closure, and then you'd have a significantly different work, that would be copyrightable as a new work. But if you just change the yarn from the suggested cotton to rayon, and add a button int eh back instead of the tie, then that's a derivative work and still covered under the original copyright.

Make sense?

Originally posted by dehart
I think what you're paying for is the right to use the name to sell your product. Take Cuddlebuns as an example, if you buy the license you can make the diapers and sell them as "cuddlebuns" diapers.

No you aren't. You are buying the right to produce clothing/diapers from the pattern. From the Elizabeth Lee Cottage License agreement:

"Elizabeth Lee Parry is the original designer and copyright owner of the Nursing Classics Pattern line and the copyright owner of the Babe Too! Pattern line. Whereas these works are owned by Elizabeth Lee Parry, she retains all rights to the development and sale of all designs constructed from these patterns and the sewing guides that are included therein. "

AND

"Elizabeth Lee Parry (LICENSOR) grants a limited license to the LICENSEE to manufacture clothing from Elizabeth's two pattern lines ..."

Yes, Allison! That's exactly the point :) Thanks for putting Elizabeth Lee's wording here, it's fianlly sparked soemthing in my brain, LOL!

The designer owns the design, in whole and in parts. S/he has the right to dictate how/when it is used. In selling patterns, she can dictate whether that pattern is allowed to be used for personal, business, or commerical use. It's silly to think that just because you buy a pattern you suddenly *own* that design. So if a designer says it's okay to produce commerical, then it's okay. If not, then don't make stuff to sell from it.

OK allison so will you make some patterns for us? :D

\

Originally posted by warneral
OK allison so will you make some patterns for us? :D

\

Honestly, all this talk of people wanting to use any ole pattern as their own makes me not want to. I actually wouldn't mind so much if someone made 1 or 2 for their friends (like mary is asking about) but it would annoy me majorily to see someone making and selling them for their biz. I just don't feel like dealing with it.

I don't know, I am still mulling it over.

What about if the person who wants the outfit purchases the pattern & materials & pays a seamstress to make it for them? Does that qualify as "home use", as in I want this for myself only but can't sew so I'm going to contract it out to someone who can?

Chole

Originally posted by choleblack
What about if the person who wants the outfit purchases the pattern & materials & pays a seamstress to make it for them? Does that qualify as "home use", as in I want this for myself only but can't sew so I'm going to contract it out to someone who can?


That is exactly how it is supposed to work!

I don't know what the copyright office is talking about when they say it's OK to use commercial patterns for business use. It is NOT OK without the copyright holder's permission. So unless you're getting permission from Simplicity, Butterick, whoever, it is NOT OK to use those patterns for profit.

Originally posted by arasmama
Honestly, all this talk of people wanting to use any ole pattern as their own makes me not want to.


These were exactly my feelings about my cloth pad pattern. The thing about this pattern is - it does me no good just sitting here at my home. There is no way to make money from it unless I publish it (because I don't want to go through the FDA approval process - plus making pads is too time consuming for a mama of five, etc.)

Kristin

Originally posted by littleturtle
Yes, Allison! That's exactly the point :) Thanks for putting Elizabeth Lee's wording here, it's fianlly sparked soemthing in my brain, LOL!



I don't necessarily think that putting what the designer states on the back of their pattern is a definitive answer to anything. They can print basically whatever they want on the back of the pattern, but it is just their interpretation of the law, not the law itself...

Also, I am wondering where a design patent comes into all of this? As I understand it, a design patent covers a set of instructions to reproduce an object?

It's a matter of integrity.

I don't care what answer the copyright office gives today. If I'm going to base my business on a product, I'm going to be darn sure it's either a licensed product or my own original design. I will not make money from someone else's inspiration or hard work.

And as for buying & using another WAHM's pattern- it is not easy to create a good, well-designed informative easy-to-use pattern. I worked on the update to the HoneyBoy pattern- a design that was already established- and it was a ton of work. I would NEVER infringe on the work of any of the hard-working wahm's on this board- they created the design, tested it and took a chance to create a pattern for home use. all while juggling family demands. Blood, sweat, tears, late nights and money creates these patterns. How dare anyone else profit from it!

Copying someone else's design for profit is inexcusable IMO.

Using an existing pattern and making a couple of changes- snap placement, rounded tabs vs. squared? It's still a copy.

Want to make your own diaper design? Start with your own baby's butt! Lay em down and trace it! Than add pattern ease, allowances and design details. then make a copy, test the fit, and tweak and test ad infinitum. then work on sizing. then get testers. and make more, and tweak more until finally you have a workable product. Now, you have a viable product.

OK, start finding suppliers. monitor coops and see what goes on coop when. accumulate threads and a snap press and all color snaps- oops! you really should have labels- both business name and size- add that on. Ok. now make a good opening inventory.

oh, but now you have no market! So take the time to go online and post and make a name for yourself. take pics and spend the time to learn how to create a website. do all this at 2 am while your children are in bed. And maybe you'll start here and there with a few sales. After 5-6 months, maybe you'll start being known and make more sales. After a couple years, maybe you'll have enough to say you are actually starting to turn a profit.

Oh, did I say profit? Haven't even started to include T-A-X-E-S!

Being a WAHM is not easy. Being a successful, profitable one is quite difficult.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Now, regarding the original ?- IMO, making one of two of a commercial pattern for friends doesn't qualify as a business. Making them for sale on EBay, a website, an in-home clothing show, b&m, etc all are businesses. Multiple copies of a pattern. I think it's the intention here.

JMO.

Good post, Lilmunchkins - it describes how it often goes for WAHMs. It isn't the easiest thing to do.

Oh, and I wanted to let everyone know...it is not only a violation of copyright law to sell pads made from my pattern, but it is also against the law since my pattern is not FDA approved.

I have reserved all rights on my pattern and it is clearly marked on every page.

Kristin :)

Originally posted by Shelly
I don't necessarily think that putting what the designer states on the back of their pattern is a definitive answer to anything. They can print basically whatever they want on the back of the pattern, but it is just their interpretation of the law, not the law itself...

I think you are missing the point. First, Teresa is saying it ISN'T an interpretation of the law, it IS the law.

Also, that is not from the back of a pattern, that is from the Elizabeth Lee licensing agreement. I posted that in response to "you are only paying to use the name".

So, back to the original question of "if it is okay to use a pattern for business use, why do people pay for a cottage license?"

Originally posted by arasmama
So, back to the original question of "if it is okay to use a pattern for business use, why do people pay for a cottage license?"

Aside from the right to legally use an established pattern for biz purposes, I would think the purpose of a cottage license would allow the use of the name. For example, to many, there is more attraction in a name brand diaper (cuddlebuns, honeyboys, etc.) than, say, a WAHM no-name diaper, ya know? Not to downgrade anybody's work, but I know that "label shoppers" are out there.

I agree with the matter of integrity. One could easily get away with selling anything made from a commerical or WAHM pattern. On a smallish scale, it would be easy to "fly under the radar". That being said, morality and integrity should step in to stop that from happening. That doesnt always happen, but the standards have to be there.

*~No flames, please. I mean no disrespect to anyone. Its just not my nature ;) ~*

Originally posted by Jennbenr
Aside from the right to legally use an established pattern for biz purposes, I would think the purpose of a cottage license would allow the use of the name.

This is only true of cuddlebuns though. With elizabeth lee you aren't buy the right to use the name, only the pattern. So, if it is legal to use any pattern, why are people bothering to pay $100/yr to use her patterns? They are stupid? They like to throw money away? It really is illegal to use? No one needs to answer that, I know no one really knows the answer since we are getting conflicting views on whether or not it is illegal.

This all seems so complicated.

Isn't it just this simple: If it is written down and published by someone, it *is* copyrighted. If it is copyrighted you cannot, under any circumstances, use it in whole or in part for profit/business without specific permission from/of the copyright holder?

Edited to add that last part. sorry.

Mary, did you ever hear back from Tuula?

Just to share a "this is my experience" story: I contacted Magic Cabin about using their patterns to make Waldorf-style dolls for sale. I had been asked if I might be interested in doing so after I made a doll for a trade with another mama, and she liked it. Magic Cabin's answer from Judy Krause was, "You can produce and sell Magic Cabin products BUT, they can not be
marketed or advertised as Magic Cabin Products. That would be a violation of
our copyright and would be subject to action." (Direct quote from her email.)

I personally don't understand why/if it would be wrong to have another mama pay me to sew for her, given that she purchases the pattern and the fabric. I don't see any ethical problems with that. If there is, could someone please explain it? I might be dense.....

I personally don't understand why/if it would be wrong to have another mama pay me to sew for her, given that she purchases the pattern and the fabric. I don't see any ethical problems with that. If there is, could someone please explain it? I might be dense..... [/B]

it's not unethical. your two examples are fine. the first is that you contacted Magic Cabin, the pattern designer, and requested permission to use the pattern to make sale products. they granted you that permission, but restricted it to say that you may not use their name.

the second example, of having another mama pay you to sew for her when she purchases the pattern is also fine. she has purchased the pattern and the rights to use it for home use and is paying you as a seamstress your time to make it up (either of you may supply the fabric)

The issue comes in in using a purchased pattern without the consent of the pattern designer as the product for your business- the intention to make repetitive products from the design to sell for profit. For example, (let's forget the whole FDA issue for a moment) if I were to buy Kristin's Cloth pad pattern and use it to make cloth pads for sale in my business without Kristin's permission.

hope that defines the difference!

Ah ha!! NOW I understand!! Thank you!! :-)