I got myself into a long 'discussion' on Facebook last week.
I'm not sure why I bothered as the lady concerned still seems to think she's right in what she did. I'm afraid I disagreed strongly.
The issue I got my old knickers in a twist about is copy tatting. This is where people see a high definition picture of a piece of tatting and sit down and copy it by following the stitch counts etc. I can see that this could be considered 'clever' and probably helps that person to understand the construction of a piece BUT I feel it's so, so wrong as they are denying the designer his/her intellectual property/copyright rights. What's even worse is posting it on the internet and encouraging others to do the same.
If this becomes an 'accepted' trend in Tat Land then it's going to discourage designers from doing what they do best - sit for hours and hours, days, weeks and sometimes even longer designing, testing and perfecting their work.
While I see it's probably 'helpful' and is (to a small degree) clever I think it's appalling that the people who do it then post it on social media (or elsewhere) showing how 'clever' they are and then not accepting that it's morally WRONG.
Please - I ask for very little but I'd beg you to actively join me in discouraging this new trend of copy tatting, whether the original designer is named or not. I can see it leading to the demise of new patterns eventually.
Please - I ask for very little but I'd beg you to actively join me in discouraging this new trend of copy tatting, whether the original designer is named or not. I can see it leading to the demise of new patterns eventually.
No pictures today - there's nothing that fits with this as I don't copy tat.
Thanks for saying this publicly and for encouraging us to do the same 💕👍
ReplyDeleteI did that once. I had no idea where the pattern was from. Someone else saw it, told me where it was from (Ruth Perry) and what book. I already had the book! I just had not recognized that pattern. I also told Ruth about it at Tat Days a few years ago. I have not done that since. I would rather have a hard copy in my library.
ReplyDeleteAs a follow up, she did eventually apologize. So you have educated someone, hats off to you.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. I have seen all the work that goes into designing and I think it's shameful to basically steal what someone else has worked so hard on and then make it seem like it's your own design and work. I hope more people will see how much work it is and be more considerate. Maybe they ought to try designing their own and have someone do it to them.
ReplyDeleteI admit to copy tatting but only when I could not acquire the pattern. However I did not post my work not boast about being clever.
ReplyDeleteI agree heartily. In my early days I did this, but I tried to also post the name of the designer, because they had done the hard work up front.
ReplyDeleteAnyone capable of copy tatting is capable of designing their own lace. I can see that someone might find a design interesting and want to tat the lace and they might feel the cost of a book of patterns not worth it if they only want a single pattern. I feel for the ladies in countries where books aren't available who really want to tat the laces they see. Being a designer I can see the issue from both sides, but I agree with you that it just isn't right for people to copy tat, and far, far worse to flaunt their immoral and illegal actions particularly when they provide information on how others can do the same and that's what makes me really angry.
ReplyDeleteI have to say I have done this once, but with the designers approval and help. After my husband had a triple bypass (my husband was 82 and at a very high risk) in 2010 I wanted to make the doctor something special. I found a picture of a very beautiful heart, the Riccocoa (spelling ?). I do not remember the designer right now but I found his name and email then and wrote to him asking for the pattern. He wrote back and said he did not create a pattern but he had a much better picture of it he could send to me and if I could figure it out he was willing for me to make it. I greatly appreciated this and by my husband's three month appointment had finished it and sewn it to a satin pillow. To honor the creator I did not even take a picture of the finished product.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Jane and yes when I first started tatting I tatted from pictures but soon realized that what I was doing was wrong. I stopped and have since learned to read patterns and purchase patterns and books in support of the artist.
ReplyDeleteI am careful not to picture post a pattern and to always give the artist credit. I do provide a link where someone can find the pattern if it is freely available.
Please tatters, don't copy tat, or post patterns that are not your own.
As a designer and publisher, I agree with you, Jane. While it is flattering that someone may like a particular design, good manners, etiquette and international copyright should dictate that copy tatting is a no-no.
ReplyDeleteHowever, knowing that there are folks who do disregard the above, I never post photos of designs that I'm not prepared to 'lose'. If someone does purloin one of my designs, I would hope that he/she would at least courteously acknowledge me as the designer.
There’s a lady who has been selling tatting at a local fair for many years. The fair is a yearly occurrence and I like to go and walk around. Last year, I was surprised to see her selling a piece of tatting made from one of my Etsy shop patterns, except there was something off about it. There was a mistake that would be easy to make if one was trying to copy the photo, but shouldn’t be present if they had followed the pattern. When I got home, I checked my Etsy sales and couldn’t find anyone with her name or location having purchased the pattern, so I am almost certain it was copy tatted. I was mildly annoyed and also found it rather curious that a crafter in the business of selling tatting would take from another crafter in the business of selling patterns.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the input and support from you all. I don't write 'inflammatory' posts very often as I like a peaceful life.
ReplyDeleteRobin Perfetti - I think I would go back and take that woman to task. If nothing else it's rude. That's always been a thought of mine - wonder how many times the copy tatter ACTUALLY gets the pattern right and that the piece 'sits well' when finished. As you and I know, Robin, a stitch or two more or less can make a huge difference to how a piece lies at the end. Please tackle that 'lady' and make her realise what she's done and point out that she's done it wrong anyway.
Thanks for going to bat with the issue. Newbies may not know any better until they are taught. This is why I have stopped posting original designs until I am ready to advertise the book they will appear in.
ReplyDeleteJane, I do tend to pick and choose my battles and this one was just not worth it to me. Though I do appreciate others, including yourself, who speak out publicly when these types of issues arise.
ReplyDeleteIt’s much harder to do it face to face, Robin. If she does it again I’d take her to task, though, or she’ll never learn!!
ReplyDeleteI agreed with you on FB last week. It's totally wrong and immoral! Many years ago I was given a photocopy of a bobbin lace pattern on the strict understanding that I bought the book it was in! This I did, and I still have that book.
ReplyDeleteIf someone takes a photo of a piece and copytats it, they should at least have the decency to then go and buy the book, pattern or whatever! The piece in question wasn't in a completely out of print book... The book in question was reprinted only a couple of years ago, and is still out in tatland!!
There is no point excusing newbies when more experienced tatters do the same. It's a lack of respect for other people's work. Some of the articles which are copy-tatted never appear in books either: they are shared online, e.g. Pinterest, Craftree. While it's easy to say 'don't share', life would become very introverted without it.
ReplyDeleteI would be inclined to confront the copyists.