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.

sunflowerexpress joined Etsy February 9, 2009 and is located somewhere in or near College Park, Maryland (Go Terps!). sunflowerexpress specializes in "felt jewelry and accessory needs" and giving bad information on the Esty boards.

"Fashion designers are constantly battling on these issues and winning too BTW... There are several Exclusive Designer patterns and they have and continue to protect their copyright. A pattern is a design, a design is copyrightable, while the garment is not. But you can bet your behind that someone can come after you if you use a pattern for profit without contacting said pattern maker to work out a deal. Protecting your copyright is hard... It requires a team of people to scour the internet. Can you do this and get away with it yeah. But one day you will design something original and may end up rethinking your stance on this. It's an ethical issue when it comes to art, design and crafting." Posted at 1:52 pm, February 23 2010 EST "HOLY CRAP AND HERE WE GO. If I create a really unique signature pattern for a very expensive dress, and I create multiples and then I think oh cool I can make this a pattern and people could make their own version from fabrics they can afford... YOU ONLY GET TO MAKE THE DRESS FOR YOURSELF. If you sell said dress cut from said pattern YOU ARE VIOLATING A COPYRIGHT... PERIOD. You didn't design it, you didn't create it. What makes you think you should profit off of it???? This isn't a land grab situation. If your creativity is limited to what you steal from other people well I see that as a problem, in a lot of ways." Posted at 5:35 pm, February 23 2010 EST (page 24)

Point 1 - Actually fashion designers rarely win in court and if they do it is because of trademark issues, such as trade dress or passing off. "Fashions" generally do not qualify for copyright and that is why you see knockoffs of designer dresses the day after they debut. 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 - "Ethics": the last refuge of the frustrated designer. They have talent and you do not. When all else fails, say it is not "ethical" and that stops all discussion. However, what we quote is what the law and the courts say is legal. Point 4 - Temper, temper. If you cannot discuss the issue rationally, scream and yell. But the indicator of her real bias is the statement, "What makes you think you should profit off of it?" Actually, sunflowerexpress, the law says it is legal. You rant and rave about how you would like the law to be, not how it is. Go sit in the corner for a time out. 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."