Thanks to "Emptyhead51" for the welcome back and sorry for my long absence, those of you who care. ;) We've been getting a new roof put on the house, and today they're putting in a bathroom fan that -actually draws air-. ((Gasp)). It's also a great deal quieter than the previous one, which, by comparison, sounded like a jet intake. For all this noise, it was also incapable of so much as moving a Kleenex. Granted the Kleenex had -aloe- in it, but since the fan sounded like it was preparing for take off, it could have at least managed to make the tissue twitch feebly or something.
As I mentioned before, The MiniMonster is making great strides, so to speak, in getting toward standing and cruising, and I've been admittedly reading ahead a bit into the toddler books so I can foresee what I've got coming.
The Toddler books however don't include anything about random nesting instinct, or the vague prophet like certainty that we may someday be painting up a room for another kid, who in my crazed, nesting fashion I am somehow equally certain will be a girl.
... I don't make these things up. I wish I did. So yes, babies apparently make you CRAZY. It's true.
I also decided to have a fun round of "Open my Big Mouth" this morning and posted my two cents in a Ravelry Topic. The last month or so there have been several very heated debates on copyrights and knitting. Specifically the issue is weather or not a pattern designer can put a footnote on their pattern saying "You can't sell the finished product."
It's actually not that uncommon, and many designers are actually outright rude in the way they phrase these demands. I own one pattern actually with a particularly snarky footnote to that regard. I was irked and annoyed to find it, and ended up not trying (yet) to even make the pattern. Hell, there are even people who try and say "You aren't allowed to make MY design with, say Red Heart Yarn."
Now this is interesting because, and here's where the "Open my big mouth" part comes in.
Copyright law actually protects the knitter of the END PRODUCT in this case. Not the designer. The designer is considered to have received fair compensation for the PRICE OF THE PATTERN. And the finished products made from it are the sole property of the person who created them, who then has the full, LEGAL right, to sell them.
This has been confirmed by several peoples lawyers and even a letter someone got from the Bureau for Copyrights, or whatever they're actually called. ((I'm tired and I don't care to check right now.)) Which makes the resulting arguments from the handful of grouchy designers actually sound somehow more childish, since they all complain that it's 'not right', or it doesn't 'feel right'. Or even 'It's not moral'. None of which actually has the slightest bearing on the current state of the law.
...It also doesn't cause any of the complainers to stop trying to sell their patterns online.
That's actually where it kinda makes me roll my eyes. If you actually feel that the law is HORRIBLY wronging you by allowing people to sell what they make based on something you received money for, then stop selling it. Fight it if you want but no one's yet won that fight apparently.
Apparently however it makes far more sense to sit on your butt, and scream how horribly unfair it is that the product you were paid for can legally make someone else a profit.
...Somehow that sounds like bitching that the apple you sold someone was sold in a pie, and goddamn it, where's your cut.
I can kinda almost hear the people who like to know they're protected by the current law retreating from ever buying anything from those designers. Oops. More profit loss. So sad.
I CARE!! Hang on, my brain cell is in overload trying to understand the legal process behind all of this. Oh, keep in mind that "bitching" is part of being a woman! O; Sounds like you are in the process of doing a little remodeling, or is it just necessary maintenance? Any how, nice to have you back..
ReplyDelete<3 Yeah, we had to replace the roof because it had been re-shingled over old shingles, and both layers were completely shot, and well... the fan wasn't vented to the outside, which isn't actually legal.... it is now though. <:)
ReplyDeleteI had to look up the copyright information but here's part of the gist of it:
"Response via email from the U.S. Copyright Office: Copyright in a pattern normally pertains to the pattern itself, not to the object that you construct from the pattern. If the pattern, however, includes original artwork that would be incorporated into the work you make, then you may need permission to use it commercially. An example of that would be a needlework pattern depicting original artwork. An example of the opposite would be a dress pattern: the dress you make from the pattern is not subject to copyright protection. ********************************************* U.S. Copyright Office Library of Congress 101 Independence Ave SE Washington DC 20559 (202) 707-3000 www.copyright.gov"