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

Copyrights and the Sewing Industry Susan Wigley of Paragon Patterns has a dog in this fight which she does not admit. She designs and sell patterns. Her view is not only biased but very wrong.

If you are planning to sell the items you sew,...Don’t use commercial patterns unless you have permission in writing, because copyright laws protect them.

No where is there a statute that supports the claim that you need permission to sell what you make from patterns you purchase. And why does the pattern manufacturer even care? They sell patterns, not end products.

In fact, the major pattern companies are aggressively defending their copyrights by hiring people to go to trade shows and craft fairs to search for violators.

A major lie. Neither McCalls, Butterick, Simplicity or Vogue have a single limitation on product use on their web sites. Nor do they claim rights under copyright law about the use or "licening" of their patterns. And just how would one of these "people" going to trade shows prove the item was made from one of their patterns? By carrying about thousands of patterns? This does not compute. Scare tactics from Susan Wigley of Paragon Patterns.

The fines for copyright infringement can be very steep, upwards of $60,000.00 in U.S. Funds. It definitely isn’t worth the lawsuits, fines, and other legal problems that can result if you get caught.

A fine is for criminal copyright infringement. Granny sewing a girl's dress is not going to get whacked with anything. And, just where are the newspaper articles about all of this policing of craft shows by the pattern companies? Certainly those arrests, law suits and fines would be great stories. But there are NONE.

It is a direct violation of copyright laws to manufacture sewn products from a commercial pattern and claim it as your own design.

No. It is a violation of copyright laws to make copies of the pattern and sell or give away those copies.

Most pattern companies, including the small independent pattern companies, have strict policies that prohibit the use of their patterns for manufacturing.

Actually, no. Neither McCalls, Butterick, Simplicity or Vogue have a single limitation on product use on their web sites. And what Susan Wigley of Paragon Patterns fails to tell you here is that those policies are unenforceable.

You can, however, sew custom garments for customers using a commercial pattern if you buy one pattern for each person. For instance, if you are making four of the same style of bridesmaid’s dresses for four different people, you need to purchase four separate patterns, one for each bridesmaid.

Other than for health and medical considerations, there is not a single product that you are required to throw away after you use it even though it is still usable and in good condition. So why do pattern manufacturers make this totally unsupported claim? This myth was started by pattern designers in order to sell more patterns, more patterns, more patterns.

It’s also important to remember that these Designers make their living designing patterns, and it dilutes their ability to make a profit when you use their work for your business. Product development is a lot of work and often hundreds of hours go into developing one single design. So give them a break and be prepared to pay for the right to use their designs. That’s only Fair.

Waaaaaaaaaaaaa! Fair? Just like the false claims by the pattern manufacturers.

According to the United States Copyright Office in Washington D.C., copyright protection lasts from the moment the work is created, until 70 years AFTER the last surviving author’s death. For anonymous works the copyright can last between 95 and 120 years depending on whether or not the work was published. So it’s possible that copyright laws protect even old designs from the late part of the 19th century.

This paragraph shows just how uninformed Susan Wigley really is. Copyright exists from the moment a work is "fixed", not created. There is a difference. However, the big faux pas is the last sentence. ALL works published before 1923 are public domain, regardless. Works published between 1923 and 1986 could be public domain depending upon a number of factors.