Question. If a pattern is published in 2004 and then a person finds out in 2020 that it was published under another name in a book in 2014 who owns the copyright?
To add to this conundrum - the publisher of the 2014 version (a very close variation of the 2004 one) says that the designer did it in 1997 but it wasn’t published until 2014.
How would the 2004 designer have known about the 1997 version if it wasn’t in the public domain?
Also how does this all relate to Intellectual Property. I'm NOT asking this to stir up ANY trouble as it's already been discussed with the publisher and it was just a discussion and ended up with our own conclusions BUT answers and opinions happily accepted.
Having asked this question I may end up here!!!!
Hmmm....
ReplyDeleteA lot of dates there, but I would think that the copyright belonged to the designer of the 2004 version. Maybe.
ReplyDeleteI think I haven't had enough coffee to work out a reply to that one! ;-)
ReplyDeleteHmmmm, is what I think too, Jane!!!
ReplyDeleteThat’s what I think too, Maureen but .......
Diane - I’ve had numerous coffees, teas, wine and gin and one of those helped either!!!
It is not possible to know every design that has been made since the beginning of time. Say 1) that I make a design. I do not know that anyone else has done something similar just that I have never seen anything like it. Is that my copyright? Yes? Say 2) I see a design, copy it, and claim that it is mine and that I have never seen anything like it before. Is that my copyright? No? Say 3) I make a design that I think is mine, but it is inspired by something I have seen before but forgotten. Is that my copyright? No? Maybe? As I see it, it is the first author of a design that has the copyright but that the rest of us need to be humble to the fact we can all make unintentional mistakes when claiming a design as our own. Claim copyright if you truly believe it is your design, but give credit to the original designer if such is found. It is better to be kind if you think you found a copyright infringement and remember it might not be intentional. Point the designer to the original, and ask him/her to give credit.
ReplyDeleteIn science circles, it's generally the first to publish who is credited with the new discovery.
ReplyDeleteAgreed Martha. we only have a note in 2014 that it was done in '97. This isn't proven, whereas the 2004 version can be proven as it's dated and published in 04!
DeleteI love these sort of discussions, Anita and thanks for offering your comments too. Another thing to run past you is that the 2004 pattern was put on the internet then but the 2014 is in a book!!! So, if the infringement is in a book the original ‘claimant’ will never be recognised unless the book is reprinted with an addendum!! All this is very unimportant in many ways but does show the morality (or not) of what we do!!!! It’s like one of my designs which was unique when it was first done having part of it taken and called something else. Now the new ‘owner’ has used my efforts (and considerable work) to claim the newly NAMED (but exactly the same) as hers!!!! Well, actually two people have done that.
ReplyDeleteWish we were in science circles, Martha.
personally there isn't enough caffeine for me to answer this question. My thoughts are swirling as to why my doily isn't laying flat. That little wiggle in my brain is saying if I had the energy I would tat it again. Possibly add more picots or something to the curve of the oval for the next round. And that is too much for my brain this morning ;))
ReplyDeleteGood discussion and I enjoyed the read and comments
Thanks for your comment Cassandra. Take another cup of coffee is my recommendation!!!! It’s a conundrum and I’ve enjoyed hearing other people’s comments too. I’m too lazy to do much about these sort of issues - my life is getting too short to get my aged knickers in a twist anyway!!!
ReplyDeleteI would say the first to publish has the copyright. Unless, the other party had timestamped/dated proof to the claim. There are a lot of other parties taking patterns given as "free" and combining them into books and selling them, giving no credit/profit share to the designers who's patterns they use. Since tatting is basically different combinations of rings and chains, it's possible that certain patterns come around again. The second person, not doing any research or caring to, thinks they've "discovered" something new and claim it as their design. In the end, unless others know it was created by a different party before publication, copyright goes to whomever publishes first.
ReplyDeleteThat’s what I think Imoshen but some of the problems could come about because things are published on different platforms too. Gone are the days when it was ‘just books’ which were easy to track down. There again - not everybody had access to books all the time. See - I’m tying myself up in knots again and not the sort of knots I really like!!!!!
ReplyDeleteHaving published designs and patterns, I agree. Advice to all who design - keep your rough sketches and trials in a dated book/file. Never throw them out!! They will prove useful if (or when) such a situation should arise.
ReplyDeleteA note jotted down in a paper doesn't count in a court, anybody can add a date in any moment. I never think to "future" when I jot down and almost never write a date in my notebook. I just have fun. I just love drawing tatting and it's my duty googling if there's something similar designed before. Don't have chairs' designers the same duty? If I had to snail mail myself a letter for every pattern I jottet on my notebook, maybe I'd had ruined my enthusiasm. I think, we should play and have fun, the others can copy one single of your thousands dear maestra Jane, you have ideas, indeed. In any case, I agree, the first who published is the owner, any medium/platform. Now going to have a coffe, to rest this headache.
ReplyDeleteWell, Ninetta, it doesn’t happen very often and when it does then things usually work out if you have a conversation with the other person. Understanding goes a long way. I’m just glad that I never sell my work although that does seem to make people think it’s not worth anything so they can steal it. I love your work and it’s so original so keep jotting those notes down. I never do that I just start with a couple of shuttles and a vague idea in my head!!!
ReplyDeleteWow. I'm glad I have a web publication trail leading up to my recently published Endless Hearts! I've got rough sketches and samples - but not dated...
ReplyDeleteI once offered to put some tatting designs by a lady on my blog. But when I looked at them, they seemed very familiar... She herself honestly didn't remember that they had come from anywhere other than her own head... In the end, I did nothing about it. I didn't publish them on my blog, and I'm embarrassed to tell her so.
Grace
Grace even with an obvious internet trail this wasn't picked up by the book publisher which is bad practice, I think.
ReplyDeleteThe way round the designs by the other lady is to do a thorough search to find the originals. It does take time as I know full well,
Yes, Jane, you're right - I should have done a thorough search to show her - "See, I found this in Monica Hahn's book; I found that in this other book…" But I was only visiting, and I didn't have the time... Ah, well.
ReplyDeleteWell actually, Grace it's the lady concerned who should've done the research. We can't and don't have time to babysit this sort of thing!!!! The best thing you did was NOT to publish them on your blog. That's what I'd have done.
ReplyDelete