Weave restrictions
View previous topic | View next topic >
Post new topic This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> Knitting Circle
   
Author Message

Joined: March 3, 2002
Posts: 1000
Submissions: 244

Reply with quote
Posted on Thu Sep 02, 2010 6:08 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Phong wrote:
A common (and in this thread, undisputed) metric is that if you change 10 percent of a copyrighted design, that makes it a new (uninfringing) design. But what exactly constitutes 10 percent?


I'll dispute that right now then, though I believe it has already been disputed in this thread. That is total dren, it's a common misconception but it's totally false. If you base your position on that, then you're trying to build a house on quicksand.


www.mailletec.com

Y'know, that might just be crazy enough to work!

Joined: March 27, 2009
Posts: 1015
Submissions: 4
Location: Southeastern Minnesota

Reply with quote
Posted on Thu Sep 02, 2010 6:12 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

ZiLi wrote:
So I see this more as an inevitable independent discovery leading to a similar design.

I believe that was also the consensus the two parties reached in this matter.

Joined: January 21, 2004
Posts: 1061
Submissions: 75

Reply with quote
Posted on Thu Sep 02, 2010 6:24 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

ZiLi wrote:
Phong, please compare the two pendants again. You will maybe notice, that Sara arranged ring pairs around the two core rings, while Amy used single rings - so in fact both even used different weaves, as for Japanese family weaves it's usually differenciated, whether single or doubled rings are used, more than in other weave families.


The angle of the picture of Raine's pendant doesn't show it, but the small rings are also doubled. The other photos on her etsy show it better.

lorenzo wrote:
I'll dispute that right now then, though I believe it has already been disputed in this thread. That is total , it's a common misconception but it's totally false. If you base your position on that, then you're trying to build a house on quicksand.


Ah, reading over the copyright articles linked in earlier pages, you are correct on the 10 percent thing. However, we can still judge what counts as "different enough" based on the criteria Legba gave, regardless of what percentage change it ends up being. 180° turn, and change 1 ring out of 70 (and to play it safe, change metals and add an extra set of rings). Sounds pretty simple to me.

-phong



-- CGMaille tutorials now hosted here at MAIL! --

Joined: March 3, 2002
Posts: 1000
Submissions: 244

Reply with quote
Posted on Thu Sep 02, 2010 6:25 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Pauline wrote:
lorenzo:
I, personally, am extremely doubtful that such a copyright would hold up in court. Useful items such as articles of clothing, for example a shirt, are not protectable by copyright (in the US at least, Europe does apparently have some limited protection for "fashion" http://www.law.northwestern.edu/journals/njtip/v6/n1/7/ ). Only elements that can exist independently of the useful item and are protectable themselves can be copyrighted. So you couldn't copyright a t-shirt but a picture on that shirt *may* be protected.

Then add the fact that mail byrnies have been around a long time:
US Copyright Office
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap13.html
"1302. Designs not subject to protection:
Protection under this chapter shall not be available for a design that is —
(1) not original;
(2) staple or commonplace, such as a standard geometric figure, a familiar symbol, an emblem, or a motif, or another shape, pattern, or configuration which has become standard, common, prevalent, or ordinary;
(3) different from a design excluded by paragraph (2) only in insignificant details or in elements which are variants commonly used in the relevant trades;
(4) dictated solely by a utilitarian function of the article that embodies it; or
(5) embodied in a useful article that was made public by the designer or owner in the United States or a foreign country more than 2 years before the date of the application for registration under this chapter.


I am also extremely doubtful that such a copyright would hold up in court, I posted that mostly as a joke.

But he seriously has copyrighted a very generic byrnie design. Are you willing to be the one to be taken to court over it?

To illustrate my point, here is a patent, which is still in force that basically rips off techniques of maille armour that have been used for centuries.

Patent Number: US004841577

Go ahead and look it up, it's an interesting read.

This patent is like a bad joke, I would call it worthless except that I know it has already been used several times in successful litigation in Germany and the United States.


www.mailletec.com

Y'know, that might just be crazy enough to work!

Joined: March 3, 2002
Posts: 1000
Submissions: 244

Reply with quote
Posted on Thu Sep 02, 2010 6:35 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Phong wrote:
Ah, reading over the copyright articles linked in earlier pages, you are correct on the 10 percent thing. However, we can still judge what counts as "different enough" based on the criteria Legba gave, regardless of what percentage change it ends up being. 180° turn, and change 1 ring out of 70 (and to play it safe, change metals and add an extra set of rings). Sounds pretty simple to me.

-phong


It does sound simple but I don't think the logic is sound. Try applying it to a literary work like a harry potter novel.

"Flip the book over and change 1 word out of 70(and to play it safe, change papers and add an extra chapter)."

Nope, you're still gonna get sued.


www.mailletec.com

Y'know, that might just be crazy enough to work!

Joined: May 07, 2008
Posts: 3615
Submissions: 149
Location: Germany, Herxheim

Reply with quote
Posted on Thu Sep 02, 2010 6:45 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Phong wrote:
ZiLi wrote:
Phong, please compare the two pendants again. You will maybe notice, that Sara arranged ring pairs around the two core rings, while Amy used single rings - so in fact both even used different weaves, as for Japanese family weaves it's usually differenciated, whether single or doubled rings are used, more than in other weave families.


The angle of the picture of Raine's pendant doesn't show it, but the small rings are also doubled. The other photos on her etsy show it better.


Ah sorry - I thought to have seen single rings around the cores. But after magnifying to 400% I saw evidence that there are really doubled rings used, also in that piece - the earrings show that clearer.

What would you think about that design IF it had used single rings as I assumed? What would you think, if there were alternating single, and doubled rings? Would that be enough? Where's the border? Who decides? Like Lorenzo, I doubt the validity of a 10% rule, if these 10% cannot be even quantified - Is it possible to quantify art at all?

I see the similarities, but there are a minimum of three minor differences (if one wants to quantify that as being minor or major). And for me the (quantifiable) sheer number of differences is significant enough - for someone else maybe not.

-ZiLi-


Maille Code V2.0 T7.1 R5.6 Ep Fper MAl Ws$ Cpbsw$ G0.3-6.4 I1.0-30.0 N28.25 Ps Dacdejst Xagtw S08 Hip

Human societies are like chain mail.
A single link will be worth nothing.
A chain is of use, but will break at the weakest link.
A weak weave will have the need to replace weak links.
A strong weave will survive even with weak links included.
-'me

Joined: October 05, 2009
Posts: 20
Submissions: 0

Reply with quote
Posted on Thu Sep 02, 2010 7:31 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Guys,

You’re all talking about "minor difference here" and "small change there" but all of that is subjective and will end up causing trouble at some point.

I believe that Chao and DL (I think it was those two guys) had the form of the right idea when they said:

If it goes in the database, it is free to use.
If it is not free to use, then it should not go in the database.

Would this then be driving the need for all submitters to grant free unrestricted use to all submissions?

I would go so far as to recommend that anything submitted should be useable or modifiable without limitations. If someone credits the original submitter, then that is a good thing. But there is no way of knowing if the submitter is actually the inventor so demanding a credit reference may not actually apply. Any attempt at defining a %change adds subjectivity to the equation and will, more than likely, lead to an argument of some kind at some point.

Joined: July 27, 2009
Posts: 28
Submissions: 0
Location: Ontario, Canada

Reply with quote
Posted on Thu Sep 02, 2010 8:30 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

lorenzo wrote:

I am also extremely doubtful that such a copyright would hold up in court, I posted that mostly as a joke.


I was fairly sure that was the case and had intended to include a comment to that effect but forgot. I happened to come across that section in copyright law shortly after reading your post, felt it was relevant, and it is part of what my opinion is based on so I included it. I did remember to try to make it clear that it was my personal opinion. Smile

Pauline wrote:
I, personally, am extremely doubtful that such a copyright would hold up in court. ...


I only intended to convey my opinion and provide some information. My sincerest apologies if it came across as anything else.

lorenzo wrote:

To illustrate my point, here is a patent, which is still in force that basically rips off techniques of maille armour that have been used for centuries.

Patent Number: US004841577

Go ahead and look it up, it's an interesting read.


Interesting, yes....and kinda depressing. My personal opinion is that it's terrible such a patent using historical techniques got approved.
Glove of chain armour structure

For those who would like more info on the patent vs copyright thing, this is a pretty good article:
COPYRIGHT vs. TRADEMARK vs. PATENT

The following is a summary of my personal understanding of patent vs copyright:
Patents are not copyrights and provide protection for different things in different ways. Patents go through a lengthy approval process (up to several years) and so provide much more protection in court. Ideally, patents pretty much have to be proven to be protectable or they aren't approved (or at least shouldn't be approved).

Copyrights are pretty much only checked that the application is filled out properly and the cheque doesn't bounce. Unfortunately, this means that the only way any copyright can be held as valid or not is by having a court decide. Even then, in many cases, it's entirely possible that one judge could rule one way and if it had been another judge the ruling would be different.

Joined: March 27, 2009
Posts: 1015
Submissions: 4
Location: Southeastern Minnesota

Reply with quote
Posted on Thu Sep 02, 2010 9:34 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

I saw a cool article once that talked about the 10 percent change thing. I can't find it atm, but this link says basically the same thing.
About.com wrote:
Question: Artist's Copyright FAQ: If I Change 10 Percent, Isn't It a New Image?

Answer: The belief that changing 10 percent of an image means you've created a new one is a myth (as is changing 20 percent or 30 percent). The fair use guideline is that you can use 10 percent of something.

It's certainly not a legal test, but as a rule of thumb consider whether, if your painting were put next to the painting or photo you're copying, would someone say you'd based it on the original? If so, you're risking copyright infringement. Don't fool yourself with this 10 percent change myth.

Joined: December 24, 2009
Posts: 68
Submissions: 0
Location: Folsom, CA

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Sep 03, 2010 2:40 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

Pauline, thank you for your helpful posts and links Smile

Joined: March 3, 2002
Posts: 1000
Submissions: 244

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Sep 03, 2010 5:05 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

No worries Pauline, I didn't take offense.

That's some pretty good information you posted overall, I was just trying to make you aware that there are exceptions to those rules, even in our own narrow field relating to maille.


www.mailletec.com

Y'know, that might just be crazy enough to work!

Joined: October 05, 2009
Posts: 20
Submissions: 0

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Sep 03, 2010 4:41 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Great collection of information....

But how can any of this be used or adapted to help with the ISSUE here on MAIL?

What recommendations do you smart people have?

I put forward a thought a few pages back (actually a though from DL and Chao). Of course I am a little peon here and prone to abusing members, so my comments will probably be ignored.

But all you Gawds of the website are just talking history and not future.

What can MAIL do to prevent this in the future?

Joined: August 31, 2010
Posts: 7
Submissions: 0
Location: Evansville, In

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Sep 03, 2010 5:40 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Mykal wrote:
Great collection of information....

But how can any of this be used or adapted to help with the ISSUE here on MAIL?

What recommendations do you smart people have?

I put forward a thought a few pages back (actually a though from DL and Chao). Of course I am a little peon here and prone to abusing members, so my comments will probably be ignored.

But all you Gawds of the website are just talking history and not future.

What can MAIL do to prevent this in the future?


I second the thought Mykal has, that the more experienced members here take the RELEVANT info here and figure out what we can do about future issues.

Joined: August 30, 2008
Posts: 3138
Submissions: 20
Location: Burlington, ON, Canada

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Sep 03, 2010 7:21 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Mykal wrote:
Great collection of information....

But how can any of this be used or adapted to help with the ISSUE here on MAIL?

What recommendations do you smart people have?

I put forward a thought a few pages back (actually a though from DL and Chao). Of course I am a little peon here and prone to abusing members, so my comments will probably be ignored.

But all you Gawds of the website are just talking history and not future.

What can MAIL do to prevent this in the future?


SILENCE INFIDEL! Coif LoL

There's an ongoing Content Policy thread which I posted in yesterday, actually...
See: http://www.mailleartisans.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=15075&start=30#205055

And you know why they were called peons, don't you... Very Happy



Joined: January 21, 2004
Posts: 1061
Submissions: 75

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri Sep 03, 2010 8:33 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Daemon_Lotos wrote:
And you know why they were called peons, don't you... Very Happy


The disappointingly urine-free story.

-phong



-- CGMaille tutorials now hosted here at MAIL! --

Post new topic This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
Jump to:  
Page 12 of 13. Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 11, 12, 13  Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Sat Jan 25, 2020 7:29 pm
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> Knitting Circle
Display posts from previous: