copyright infringement?

[BDAZ]

Trying to understand the point of the current discussion?

Edited May 25, 2020 by BDAZ

[Atalanta]

Very interesting topic. I see this come up in EVERY craft forum I encounter.

What I understand from what I've read over the years (and put together from the cases that were called as examples):

1. Changing X% is NOT OK. The example for this was a case where beader B took beader A's pattern, changed the orientation of the beads, and claimed they could do that. The beader B lost soundly.

2. As has been stated, you can copyright the written directions and your rights are covered. You cannot re-sell their instructions as your own (or pull the "change x%" myth). Can you resell their patterns as their patterns? That's more of a grey area and while I'll gladly sell a Simplicity or Folkwear pattern that I don't need/use/want, I'm not going to sell a Dieselpunk.ro file.

3. Take an extant pattern, create something, and sell the something. Hell yes. I don't pretend to be a pattern drafter, there are other ways I'd rather spend my time. Most patterns I've used have not had any restrictions on the use of what I make from them. I paid plenty of book bills in college with my construction skills (shirts, leather armor, etc).

4. I thought the bit on the using a trademarked image was interesting. Not something I would touch. I was going to make tower coozies for kegerators but when I saw in rather prominent print on the sports fabric NOT TO BE USED FOR RESALE, I decided that wasn't an ulcer I wanted. Let other people do the "if you didn't want me to sell stuff with it" excuse.

[ejleather]

Ok what about if I wanted to make a holster from a 20 year old movie and no one Else makes this specific holster movie correct but me can I put a copyright onto it To stop people from geting my pictures and making it?

[Aventurine]

US law differs from elsewhere and is far more protective of designs as personal property, for a longer time after the death of the creator, than elsewhere.  However the shape/form/construction of fashion items  (basically,. anything you can wear on your body) is not protected.   So anyone can mimic the style of a Prada bag or an Armani blazer.  Or a gun holster.  But no one can mimic the design printed on the bag or stamped on the buttons of the blazer or tooled on the holster,  because designs and decorations and images applied to the surfaces of  items are protected;  they are owned by the original creator unless they sell those rights (or unless a lot of time has gone by...you can copy 19th century tooled leather bookbinding decoration all you want). 

In the US, the creator of an original image doesn't even have to explicitly apply for the copyright --  ownership is automatic. So the woman that designed the Welcome to Las Vegas sign -- unless she signed an agreement to the contrary with the city or whoever actually made the sign, she in fact still owns the design and could enforce her private use of it. That's the design itself.  She can't stop anyone taking a photo of the *sign* and putting it on a tee shirt and selling the tee shirt, because the sign is an object in public life and a photo of the sign is the original art of the photographer.

Registered trademarks such as stamps and signatures are, of course, specially protected from replication.  If I closely copy  Ralph Lauren's pattern of blanket stripes on a wool coat, it's copyright infringement, but if I put Ralph Lauren (TM) 's name on it, it's also fraud.

Colors...that is a subject of increasing complexity.  Some colors are limited, not in themselves, but in their use on objects that might be mistaken for  objects marketed by different creator or manufacturer for whom that color is a strong consistent characteristic.  So if, for example, I make a belt and color it the same yellow as a Caterpillar tractor, I'm safe.  But if I make a tractor and paint it Caterpillar yellow, I'm in trouble.

https://copyrightalliance.org/is-fashion-protected-by-copyright-law/

Then there is the infamous example of Anish Kapoor:
https://news.artnet.com/art-world/anish-kapoor-vantablack-2391684

and the delightful response of this designer:
https://www.culturehustleusa.com/products/pink-50g-powdered-paint-by-stuart-semple

Edited July 29, 2024 by Aventurine
adding link

[Darren8306]

I may have infringed. I wanted to 'carve' a swimmer, but can't draw. I found one online that looked simple enough to trace, then printed, traced, carved and beveled.

Made some running ones, too.

Later, a pal said 'hey - that's the garmin guy'. When I looked at the garmin connect icons, they were VERY close. 

This gives me the feeling I should maybe stay out of the US for a few years. Lay low.

[BDAZ]

There are a lot of different applications for this graphic, including municipal signs and other companies. There's better reasons to stay away from the US than Garmin!

[Darren8306]

9 hours ago, BDAZ said:

There are a lot of different applications for this graphic, including municipal signs and other companies. There's better reasons to stay away from the US than Garmin!

Can't be too careful...;)
I think for me, anything I copied by hand, and did not profit from, is fair use. I understand that 'fair use' as a legal term may have different boundaries, but in my real life, I do whatever I want, and only try to limit myself to such legal boundaries if I were trying to sell.

A friend with a gallery asked me to get a stamp done up of his fox image. I did so, and the cnc enthusiast who did it for me (out of scrap maple) also added the artists signature as another stamp. The artist, who didn't ask for that, ended up asking for a few with the signature.

So I think it's fine in development, as when the artist first saw the stamp, he said he wasn't interested. When he saw it applied to a product, he liked it enough to ask a few. Of course, this particular artist seems to have no fear of someone stealing his art. He once put a class on to teach people how to paint in his style. 

[BDAZ]

There are two reasons to sue for intellectual property infringement and AFAIK, this is a trade mark not an image, that can be or should be "circle C" I have to renew my trademarks every few years or risk losing them. 

 

The first reason is to prevent fiscal damage to the company by utilizing their trade mark on a copy or even counterfeit product. The second is the responsibility of the holder of intellectual property protection to prosecute any serious infractions  or risk losing the protection. 

I wouldn't worry in the least! I did a quick search of Garmin trade marks and they hold over 7,000. Many are dead (abandoned) and ona quick search I couldn't find any any trademarks resembling your design..

Good luck!
bob

[Darren8306]

On 3/10/2025 at 10:39 AM, BDAZ said:

I wouldn't worry in the least! I did a quick search of Garmin trade marks and they hold over 7,000. Many are dead (abandoned) and ona quick search I couldn't find any any trademarks resembling your design..

Good luck!
bob

Yeah, if I worried about it at all, I would simply send them a wallet, and ask them if it was a bother. Most copyright holders (or trade mark holders) are clear about that, either way. I didn't call garmin because I'm reasonably sure no-one would care at this scale.