copyright for crafters

copyright lite

Choose one of the following questions:

• what’s this all about?

1. Explain copyright in 20 words or less.
2. So what’s copyright infringement?
3. I’ve heard that it’s okay to share patterns as long as you don’t change the title, or claim that you designed it yourself. Isn’t that true?
4. Don’t you have to mark the pattern with a © to have copyright?
5. When I buy a pattern or a book, I become the owner. What difference does copyright make?
6. Why is it okay to lend my copy of the latest Stephen King book to a friend, but it’s not okay to give her a copy of my favourite pattern?
7. If sharing patterns by sending copies is stealing, isn’t taping a TV show on your VCR stealing, too?
8. Explain libraries, then. How come you can borrow pattern books from libraries, and use their photocopiers to copy them?
9. Well, what about people on fixed income who can’t afford to buy new patterns? It’s not fair to make them buy a pattern just because it’s copyrighted.
10. Well, I design things and give my designs away for free. Why should other designers complain about the free publicity they get when people give their friends copies of patterns?
11. What’s the big deal? Designers get their money anyway. Often, when I get a pattern from the Internet, the copy quality isn’t very good, so I go out and buy the original.
12. Copyright’s just about making money, isn’t it? As long as I don’t ask anyone for money for my patterns, that’s okay, right?
13. Oh, yeah? I’ve seen an article from Annie’s Pattern Club that says what I’m doing is all right. Got an answer for that?
14. But it’s okay to share patterns as long as you specify that it’s for educational use only, and not for resale, right?
15. I searched the copyright database online and didn’t find a record of a “vintage” pattern I have in my collection. That means it’s not protected by copyright and I can share it on the Internet, right?
16. I copied a single pattern out of a book and I want to distribute this copy. It’s less than 10% of the book, so that’s okay, isn’t it?
17. Well, I was told that a lawyer said it’s okay to e-mail and share patterns on Internet groups as long as you are not photocopying the patterns and selling the copies to others. Are you saying that’s wrong?
18. I can call a work my “own” if I change 10% (or 30%, etc.) of somebody else’s work, right?

what’s this all about?

Copyright lite aims to answer some of the most frequently asked questions, and some of the most popular arguments, about sharing crafting patterns on the Internet.

Some crafty Internet users scan patterns they’ve purchased and upload them to file-sharing groups, and call this “sharing"… the problem is, not everybody understands that most of this activity is illegal. It’s an infringement of copyright, and anyone who infringes copyright may be liable for damages in a civil court, or, if the infringment is treated as an offence, the punishments include steep fines and jail time.

Some people insist on infringing copyright anyway. But often, a lot of people just don’t understand what copyright means, and when they ask their fellow pattern-sharers for information about the law, all they get is misinformation.

For example, some people believe that if you use a disclaimer that the pattern you’re sharing is to be used “for educational purposes only, not for resale", then that makes sharing okay. That’s simply not true: see question 14 for the real answer. Or to take another example, some people believe that as long as you don’t claim you designed the pattern yourself, it’s okay to give copies to your friends. That’s not correct, either: see question 3 to learn the truth.

Hopefully copyright lite will address some of the common questions and misconceptions about copyright, so that all crafters will have a clearer understanding. If you’d like more information, try the knitter’s guide to copyright copyright basics or copyright faq, which has detailed explanations and many more questions and answers (it isn’t just for knitters!).

question 1: Explain copyright in 20 words or less.

Copyright gives copyright owners the exclusive right to control what copies are made of their works.

(That was sixteen words.) “Works", by the way, means any original artistic, literary, musical, or dramatic works, or any compilations of these works. So this includes patterns (written out or charted), photographs and drawings, and books or leaflets containing more than one pattern. “Copies” does not mean only photostatic or exact copies; it includes colourable imitations or derivative works.

question 2: So what’s copyright infringement?

Copyright infringement is doing anything without permission that is the copyright owner’s right to do.

Infringement can include:

• photocopying a pattern to share with others
• scanning a pattern to share with others
• copying out a pattern by hand or machine to share with others
• plagiarism

It doesn’t matter if these activites are done for free. Copyright infringement does not depend on money changing hands.

question 3: I’ve heard that it’s okay to share patterns as long as you don’t change the title, or claim that you designed it yourself. Isn’t that true?

No, it’s not true. Copyright infringement occurs when someone makes a copy of a substantial part of a copyrighted work, without the copyright owner’s permission. You don’t get permission to copy a pattern just because you bought it: see question 5.

Copyright infringement doesn’t depend on changing the title, or lying to others about who wrote the pattern. It’s enough that you copied it and distributed it without permission.

question 4: Don’t you have to mark the pattern with a © to have copyright?

No. Copyright arises automatically. There’s no need to mark anything as being copyrighted. A copyright owner doesn’t lose his or her rights just because there’s no “© John Doe, 2000″. There was a time when subsistence of copyright depended on marking the work with a copyright notice, but no longer.

What this means is that you should assume that all your patterns are protected by copyright unless the copyright has expired. Usually this is at least 50 years after the death of the author, but you should check with a lawyer in your country to make sure.

Doesn’t seem fair? Well, remember that this includes any patterns that are your own original creation. If you write an original pattern, then you have copyright, too.

question 5: When I buy a pattern or a book, I become the owner. What difference does copyright make?

You’re only the owner of the physical pattern or book itself. You are not the copyright owner.

What’s the difference? Copyright isn’t about physical objects, like the paper the pattern is printed on. Copyright is about the contents of the pattern: the instructions, the charts, the pictures.

You can do what you want with the physical part of the pattern you bought. You can lend it to a friend, you can burn it, eat it, turn it into a paper airplane, donate it to a library or a church, sell it at a consignment shop, sell it at a yard sale, sell it to your best friend, give it to your best friend, give it to a complete stranger… all because you’re the owner of the physical part of the pattern.

But you can’t do whatever you want with the content. You can’t make a copy of it. You can’t scan it into your computer and send the scanned copy to anybody or put it on your website. You can’t photocopy it and give the photocopy to anybody. You can’t type the pattern out yourself and send what you typed to anybody, or put it on a website. You can’t do these things because you’re not the copyright owner.

question 6: Why is it okay to lend my copy of the latest Stephen King book to a friend, but it’s not okay to give her a copy of my favourite pattern?

Because it has to do with making copies. Remember, copyright gives the copyright owner to control the making of copies.

That Stephen King book… did you make a copy of it to give to your friend, or did you just give her the book you bought from the store? You probably just gave her the book you bought. That’s okay, because you didn’t make a copy of the book.

But that pattern… you wanted to share it, but you wanted to keep a copy for yourself, too. So you made a copy. Maybe by scanning it and e-mailing it, maybe by photocopying it and mailing it the old-fashioned way… but you made a copy of the pattern. And you didn’t ask the copyright owner’s permission beforehand. You took away the copyright owner’s right to control how copies are made of her work That is copyright infringement.

What could you have done instead? If you had just let your friend borrow the original pattern that you bought, without keeping a copy for yourself, then that’s okay, because you didn’t make a copy. Copyright law doesn’t stop you from lending your patterns or books to your friends. It only prevents you from making unauthorized copies.

question 7: If sharing patterns by sending copies is stealing, isn’t taping a TV show on your VCR stealing, too?

Yes, technically it could be considered a copyright infringement, too. A copy is made of a TV show without permission of the copyright owner. But legally, special allowances have been made for this kind of activity.

If you’re taping the show just so you can watch it later, and then tape over it once you’re done, this is a personal use that would probably be considered a fair use or a fair dealing. Fair use (in the U.S.) and fair dealing (in Commonwealth countries) are a limited exception to copyright infringement.

Neither fair use nor fair dealing, however, would apply to sharing patterns by sending electronic or paper copies to your friends. This isn’t a personal use. You’re making the copies for somebody else’s use. So that’s why it’s still infringement.

question 8: Explain libraries, then. How come you can borrow pattern books from libraries, and use their photocopiers to copy them?

You know what? It can still be copyright infringement if you photocopy patterns from library books. The photocopiers are provided to allow patrons to take away small portions of information with them instead of taking books home… within limits, and as long as it’s for personal use. These limits are part of what’s known as fair dealing. The mere fact that a public institution, such as a library, has provided you with a photocopier to use does not mean that your actions can’t infringe copyright. It’s still up to you to monitor your photocopying.

For example, let’s say you’re using a pattern from a library book. It’s probably okay to make a copy of the pattern to work from, as long as you throw away this copy once you’re done. It’s okay to photocopy a few pages from an academic journal, or a reference book, to take away for your own private study. But it’s not okay to pass that working copy of the pattern on to a friend to use. That’s no longer a personal use. It’s not okay to photocopy a whole chapter of a book. That’s too much.

How much you can photocopy from a library book (or any book, for that matter) for your own personal use is not an easy question to answer. It really depends on the facts, such as how much you copy and how you’re going to be using the copy. It’s safe to say, though, that the copy you make should be for your own, private, use. If you’re in doubt, consult the copyright guides that are likely available at your local library; ask your librarian; or ask a copyright attorney.

question 9: Well, what about people on fixed income who can’t afford to buy new patterns? It’s not fair to make them buy a pattern just because it’s copyrighted.

Well, here’s a question in return. Not everybody can afford a car. Do you think it’s unfair that they have to take public transit while everybody else can drive? And if that’s so, are you willing to donate a car to one of these people?

It’s the same thing, just on a different scale. Not everybody can afford luxuries in life. We have to make do with the money we have. New craft patterns aren’t a necessity–we’re not talking about food, clothing, or shelter.

There are alternatives if you can’t afford to buy new patterns. There are free, legal, patterns available on the Internet. If you can get into Yahoo, you can into the rest of the Internet. Some people trash-talk these patterns by claiming they’re ugly and not very good. Don’t take their word for it–check it out for yourself.

And check out the websites of the companies that make the patterns you like. They might have some free sample patterns for you to download. Or go to second-hand shops and used bookstores.

Or why not try your hand at designing yourself? Try adapting your own design. If you do cross-stitch, plastic canvas, or another craft with square-grid charts, buy a pad of graph paper–that’s cheaper than buying a pack of printer paper–and a pencil and make your own charts. Start with a simple sketch or picture, or better yet, ask your child or grandchild to draw a picture for you to chart and stitch.

question 10: Well, I design things and give my designs away for free. Why should other designers complain about the free publicity they get when people give their friends copies of patterns?

It’s really nice that you made the decision to share your patterns for free. But that’s your choice to make. It is the copyright owner’s right to choose whether she will allow her designs to be freely copied, or whether she wants to have tighter control over how they are distributed.

The fact that you share your own work for free is no justification for taking away a fellow designer’s legal right to control how copies are made of her patterns.

question 11: What’s the big deal? Designers get their money anyway. Often, when I get a pattern from the Internet, the copy quality isn’t very good, so I go out and buy the original.

Copyright isn’t about whether the designer loses money. Copyright is about the copyright owner’s right to decide how copies are made of her work.

It’s also the copyright owner’s right to decide how she wants to advertise her work. Maybe she doesn’t want her patterns distributed for free, even if, as you might claim, it results in increased sales.

And if it were true that people who get copies of patterns from the Internet buy the originals in the store once they decide they like them, then why are copies of the entire pattern posted? Logically, all you need is one picture to decide if you like the pattern or not.

If you really think that people sharing patterns is just a tool to decide whether you want to buy, why don’t you search the Internet for online shops and catalogs? Many needlework companies show their wares on the Internet now, allowing you to shop at home.

question 12: Copyright’s just about making money, isn’t it? As long as I don’t ask anyone for money for my patterns, that’s okay, right?

Copyright isn’t about whether the designer loses money, or whether you’re making money from copies. Copyright is about the copyright owner’s right to decide how copies are made of her work. Copyright infringement occurs when a substantial part of a copyrighted work, such as a pattern, is copied without the copyright owner’s permission.

question 13: Oh, yeah? I’ve seen an article from Annie’s Pattern Club that says what I’m doing is all right. Got an answer for that?

As a matter of fact, yes. This was an article written by a woman named Kris Carter, who is described as a needlework instructor. Nowhere is it suggested she has any legal expertise, or any copyright expertise.

Read the article carefully. What the author is actually saying is yes, copying a pattern for your friends is copyright infringement, but then she suggests that the chances that you’re going to get caught are almost zero, and just cautions you to keep your activities “legal"… whatever that means. She never explains it. Is she telling you to break the law, and just make sure you don’t get caught?

This article was published in June/July 1981, long before public use of the Internet–and long before people discovered they could exchange illegal copies of patterns on the Internet. You know what? It may be easier to send your friends illegal copies of patterns now, but it’s also easier for copyright owners to track you. The chances today that you will be discovered are much, much greater.

If you’re caught, you could be sued, and the cost of a lawsuit in terms of lawyer’s fees and damages is way more than the $15,000 claimed in that twenty-year-old article. You could lose your Internet or e-mail access. Once you’ve been pegged as an infringer, copyright owners might start monitoring every thing you ever post to any discussion group or bulletin board. Do you want to take that risk?

question 14: But it’s okay to share patterns as long as you specify that it’s for educational use only, and not for resale, right?

No. You may have seen notices in books or other publications, usually on the same page as the copyright notice, that read “For educational use only” or “Not for resale” or “Reproduction of this work in any form whatsoever is strictly prohibited". These are statements used by the copyright owner to tell you how they are allowing you to use her work. They can only be used by the copyright owner. Only she can tell others how to use a copyrighted work.

If you use these statements when you share copies of patterns with your friends, they have no meaning. These are not magic words that make your copyright infringement “all right". Infringement is infringement. Although there are exemptions for fair dealing with a copyrighted work for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, simply saying that this is what you’re doing is not enough. It has to be true.

question 15: I searched the copyright database online and didn’t find a record of a “vintage” pattern I have in my collection. That means it’s not protected by copyright and I can share it on the Internet, right?

Wrong.

You’re probably thinking of the online copyright registration database that is maintained by the Library of Congress. This database records certain information regarding copyright registrations in the United States.

However, the mere fact that you didn’t find a certain work listed in that database doesn’t mean anything, except that you didn’t find it in the database. If you use the database as your only resource, you cannot be certain that you will obtain an accurate picture of a work’s U.S. copyright status. Furthermore, the data might have been entered incorrectly in the database, preventing you from finding it, or you might be looking under the wrong author’s name or title. Not only that, but individual works that were published as part of a compilation (for example, a single pattern in a book or magazine of patterns) may not be listed separately. For other words of warning about U.S. Copyright Office searches, read this.

In any event, remember that the Library of Congress database only includes records from the United States. It does not contain any information about copyright in other countries, and the rules for granting copyright protection vary from country to country. Therefore, even if you’re certain that a pattern is no longer protected by copyright in the United States, you could still be infringing copyright in other countries by making a copy of the pattern available on the Internet.

question 16: I copied a single pattern out of a book and I want to distribute this copy. It’s less than 10% of the book, so that’s okay, isn’t it?

No.

Each individual pattern may be considered to be an independent work protected by copyright. The pattern book is a compilation (also protected by copyright) of individual patterns. Therefore, while you may have copied only a small portion of the entire book, you have still copied an entire copyrighted work and therefore may still be infringing copyright.

By the way, those “rules of thumb” about only copying 10% of a work to avoid copyright infringement are just that–rules of thumb. Infringement isn’t determined by simply computing the percentage of a work that is taken; it’s determined by the qualitative aspects of what was taken, as well.

question 17: Well, I was told that a lawyer said it’s okay to e-mail and share patterns on Internet groups as long as you are not photocopying the patterns and selling the copies to others. Are you saying that’s wrong?

Yes, it’s wrong, if that’s the complete statement.

First of all, this alleged “lawyer’s advice” is often second- or third-hand information posted to an Internet forum or group; and the person posting this “advice” is rarely the person who allegedly sought the advice in the first place. You don’t know that this really is what the lawyer said, or whether the advice was restricted to a particular pattern, or one particular “sharing” or copying activity. You don’t know what the lawyer was told by the client in order to procure this alleged advice.

If we were to assume that this was the complete statement, there are some problems with it:

This advice seems to be drawing a distinction between “photocopying” and “e-mailing” or “sharing on the Internet.” That’s not correct.

A photocopy is a copy. When you make a photocopy of a pattern, you now have two copies where you previously had one.

An e-mail is a copy. When you e-mail a pattern, you create at least two copies where you previously had one.

“Sharing” on the Internet means you are sharing a copy. It can potentially mean that dozens, if not hundreds, of copies will be created.

When you e-mail a pattern or post a pattern to an Internet group, how did it get into a form that could be transmitted on the Internet? It was either scanned, or it was transcribed by an individual reading the pattern and typing it into a new message. Both of those are copies. If you scan a pattern, you now have two copies where you previously had one. (By the way, photocopiers also work by scanning the paper you’re copying.) If you transcribe a pattern, you now have two copies where you previously had one. One of the copies is an electronic file, but it’s still a copy.

When you e-mail a pattern, you create a new file containing the pattern that is transmitted to the recipient. That creates yet another copy. When you post a pattern to an Internet group, you are also posting another copy of the pattern to the group. Each person who accesses and views the posted pattern on their own computer then generates yet another copy.

So, photocopying, scanning, e-mailing, and “sharing” on an Internet group all do the same thing: generate copies.

The next problem is that this advice indicates that it’s not copyright infringement if you give away copies for free. That’s not correct, either: go back to question 2 and question 12 to remind yourself about what types of acts can constitute copyright infringement. While some copying for your own use may be permissible, it doesn’t mean you’re free to start handing out your “personal” copies to your friends: go back to question 8.

If you still have doubts about this, consider the number of individuals that have been sued by the music recording industry for copyright infringement, because they were “sharing” music online. Those individuals weren’t photocopying. They weren’t charging money. They were “sharing” with other people on the Internet. And they were sued. How are knitting and other craft patterns any different?

question 18: I can call a work my “own” if I change 10% (or 30%, etc.) of somebody else’s work, right?

Wrong.

Or more correctly, not necessarily. In brief, there is no law that says you can avoid copyright infringement by changing a set amount of someone else’s work. There’s no 10%, 30%, 50%, or 70% law. There’s no law that says you’re safe calling something your original work if it was derived from somebody else’s work, but you changed three, five, seven, or ten features of that work.

When copyright infringement is assessed by comparing an infringing work to the original work, it’s not simply assessed on a mathematical or quantitative basis. The significance of the parts that weren’t changed has to be evaluated.

Besides, applying a percentage rule is rather nonsensical. If you translate a pattern from one language to another, in a sense you’ve changed 100% of the pattern. Does that make it original to you, or prevent the translation from being a copyright infringement? No. If you change the colours specified by a pattern or chart, but leave everything else the same, again you could argue that there is a 100% difference. But while the selection of colours might have been your own idea, the rest of the work remained unchanged, so that doesn’t mean you’re at liberty to distribute the pattern or chart yourself with your own colours.

use your browser's back button or use the navigation panel on the right

terms of use & disclaimer