Tabberone Logo

Tabberone is pronounced tab ber won
not tay ber own

Tabbers Temptations     www.tabberone.com/Trademarks/ Home | Site Index | Disclaimer | Email Me!
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing"
Edmund Burke



Etsy Misinformation Mavens
Hall Of Shame Member

ChristinaPerdue


Last Updated February 24, 2010

The comments here are not intended to be a negative reflection of the person or the products made and/or sold by the person but rather their terrible habit of posting misinformation.

ChristinaPerdue joined Etsy August 30, 2007 and is located somewhere in or near Knoxville, Tennessee. ChristinaPerdue specializes "in fine art photography" and giving bad information on the Esty boards. She also has quite an attitude problem.


http://www.etsy.com/forums_thread.php?thread_id=6446081&page=1

"If you create a pattern from scratch that pattern is your intellectual property and you get to determine how it is used.

It's not uncommon to charge more to someone who wishes to use something for commercial purposes rather than for just personal use.

Posted at 11:40 am, February 23 2010 EST"

"Oh and the only scary thing about this is your lack of respect and regard for others' intellectual property and rights."

Posted at 11:42 am, February 23 2010 EST

I find it pretty appalling that you are handing out legal advice here.

Posted at 12:10 pm, February 23 2010 EST

Point 1 - Once the pattern "creator" sells or gifts the pattern, the "rights" to that particular copy are vested in the new owner. The new owner may make as many items they want from the pattern because the pattern no longer belongs to the "creator". Permission to make and then use, or sell, items is not required. See 17 U.S.C. § 109 "Limitations on exclusive rights" also known as the First Sale Doctrine.

Point 2 - Patterns are not generally copyrightable because they are utilitarian, or a useful item. The pattern is part of a process for making something. A process cannot be copyrighted. See the 1995 letter from the Register of Copyrights explaining why clothing patterns are not copyrightable. See also Kemp & Beatley v Hirsch, 34 F.2d 291 (E.D.N.Y. 1929) where designer was claiming copyright on a dress design.

Point 3 - The "commercial purposes rather than for just personal use" dichotomy is a favorite of the Misinformation Mavens. Commercial use is evil because you are profiting from the work of another. It is not illegal but to them it is immoral. However, they rarely state this as opinion but rather that it is fact under the law.

Point 4 - The charging more for commercial use is an exaggeration. Unless you sign a written agreement when you purchase the item, any claimed restrictions upon its use are not enforceable.

Point 5 - Little Miss Snotty passing judgment on others because they are not behaving in the manner she commands.

Point 6 - And Little Miss Snotty, just what are you doing? Handing out legal advice!

Do Not touch that dial. Here is more about ChristinaPerdue!

http://www.etsy.com/forums_thread.php?thread_id=6255835&page=5

"My common sense tells me you shouldn't be able to do whatever you want with copyrighted works and profiting off of someone else's work it wrong.. it works both ways.

No one here is going to be able to answer your question because they are not lawyers.

If you go the route of contacting one magazine you'll need to contact them all as one cannot speak to the rights of the other. :)"

Posted at 4:10 pm, August 20 2009 EST

Point 7 - Your "common sense"? The discussion is not about your common sense, or lack thereof. Your notion of what someone can and cannot do with copyrighted works conflicts with what the law and the courts say can be done with the works. But your notion is based upon your bias based upon your belief you are some great artist.

Point 8 - "profiting off of someone else's work" - Again, the mantra of those "gifted" souls who dislike the lack of originality of us common folk. How does someone "profit" from the work of others when they have sold you the work in the first place? They have been compensated for the work they voluntarily sold. You make it sound like their work was taken from them forcibly. See American Footwear Corp. v. General Footwear Co. Ltd.,, 609 F.2d 655 C.A.N.Y., 1979, where the court stated, "...one can capitalize on a market or fad created by another...". See also New Kids v News America, 971 F.2d 302 (9th Cir 1992), "Where, as here, the use does not imply sponsorship or endorsement, the fact that it is carried on for profit and in competition with the trademark holder's business is beside the point." See also Ty v. Publications International, 292 F.3d 512 (7th 2002), "...a copyright owner plainly cannot prevent others from entering those fair use markets."

Do Not touch that dial. Here is more about ChristinaPerdue!

http://www.etsy.com/forums_thread.php?thread_id=6286881&page=2

"I don't have to cite anything. I'm not a lawyer and neither are you so stop handing out legal advice.

You can call it whatever you want. I call it stealing and unethical."

Posted at 11:25 pm, September 21 2009 EST

Point 9 - This was her childish response to a challenge to back her comments with court cases. But there she shows everyone why. Her comments are not those of someone who is trying give constructive advice to those seeking it but rather to give them guidance towards a path in line with what she believes they should be following based upon her bias and her opinion of what is "stealing and unethical."

General

Articles | Cease and Desist Letters | Federal Court Cases | FAQs & Whines | Glossary | Hall Of Shame | Contributions

Corporate Lawyers
Cartoons | Code Of Ethics | Courtroom Remarks | Definition Of A Lie | Jokes | Lawyers | Lying | Who Have Lied

eBay - Land The Game

Definitions

Trademark Definitions
Blurring   |   Confusion   |   Damages   |   Dilution   |   History   |   Initial Interest Confusion   |   Likelihood Of Confusion   |   Material Difference Standard
Parallel Imports   |   Post-sale Confusion   |   Puffery   |   Secondary Meaning   |   Subsequent Confusion   |   Trademark Abuse
Unauthorized Use   |   Unfair Competition   |   What is a Trademark?
Copyright Definitions
Angel Policies   |   Contributory Infringement   |   Copyrightability   |   Copyright Extortion   |   Copyright Misuse Doctrine
Derivative   |   The Digital Millennium Copyright Act   |   EULA   |   Fair Use   |   First Sale Doctrine   |   Product Description
Registration   |   Registration Denied   |   What is a Copyright?   |   What is not Copyrightable?
Other Issues
Embroidery Designs   |   FAQs & Whines   |   Image and Text Theft   |   Licensed Fabric   |   Licensing & Licenses
Patterns   |   Patterns Index   |   Profit   |   Quilting   |   Selvage   |   Stanford School of Law Case Outline
Tabberone Disclaimer   |   Trademark Extortion   |   Urban Myths   |   What To Do If You Are Veroed

Federal Court Cases
Alphabetically | by Federal Circuit | by Subject | by Court Quotations

Federal Statutes
Copyright Act 17 U.S.C. 5 | Digital Millenium Copyright Act 17 U.S.C. 12 | Lanham Act 15 U.S.C. 22

VeRO (Verified Right's Owner Program)
VeRO Commandments | VeRO-Verified Rights Owners Program | Counter Notice Letter
Counter Notice (pre-2003) | Counter Notice present | On-Line Survey from 2004 | Articles about VeRO | What To Do If You Are Veroed

Original material by Karen Dudnikov & Michael Meadors is © 1999-2019

 

 

vBulletin statistics