I had a momentary topological lapse when seaming my version of
Norah Gaughan's Nespelem Cardigan. Can you tell what I did wrong?
It took 45 minutes with an audiobook to fix it.
NG's patterns are so well thought-out. Look at the way the sleeve echoes the details of the back and collar.
I learned something truly awful (and yet also exciting) in CopyrightX. Patterns are expressions of facts. So patterns themselves are NOT copyrightable, but the ways that they are expressed are protectable.
So photocopying a pattern to give to a friend is not allowed, but telling a friend how many stitches to cast on is legal.
That pattern facts are not protectable may be economically harmful to their authors, but it also allows others to build upon their work and move the state of the art forward. The fact that patterns are not protectable may contribute to the vibrancy of fashion arts. Food for thought.
If you need some drama in your life, seek out forum posts on Ravelry about copyright. I don't think discussions on copyright are even allowed on the main boards anymore, they degenerate so quickly into angry words. There are a lot of designers who are in denial about the reality that their designs per se cannot be copyrighted, only the written words and charts in their patterns. Lots of them persist in writing limits on use, saying that their patterns are restricted to personal use. Poor things, it seems pretty clear that there is no way that they can enforce such restrictions.
ReplyDeleteHere's a TED talk on the subject that you might enjoy. http://www.ted.com/talks/johanna_blakley_lessons_from_fashion_s_free_culture.html