Showing posts with label copyright. Show all posts
Showing posts with label copyright. Show all posts

Saturday, May 24, 2008

Crafting Copyright Confusion Causes Katian Craziness

(Don't hit. How often do I get to be that alliterative? ^_~)

Mini rants:

Rant 1: The need to slap up an "I am not a lawyer; this is not legal advice" disclaimer on stuff like this. Why do we live in such a paranoid society? Frivilous lawsuits are actually very rare. And usually started by corporations, not individuals out to make a buck.

Rant 2:
  • Clothing is a useful good.
  • Useful goods cannot be copyright.
  • Therefore, a clothing pattern with a standard "all rights reserved" copyright notice and nothing supplemental to that covers the pattern itself, but NOT the finished item. It is not "always illegal to make something for sale from a copyrighted pattern."
  • Many designers now do include extra licensing terms. How legal these are remains to be seen, but in a society that allows click-through licenses to add additional conditions with no additional return, the odds are good they would be binding. *eye roll*

Rant 3: There is a difference between 'legal', 'ethical', and 'moral'. Going to the almighty dictionary:
  • Legal: conforming to or permitted by law.
  • Ethical: conforming to accepted professional standards of conduct.
  • Moral: of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior.
Ideally the three coincide, but something can be any one without being the other two. Especially easy to conflate are ethical and moral, but they are different. Indeed, many ethical practices are immoral. For example, a doctor or hospital who refuses to treat a mortally ill patient who can't pay may be ethically in the States (acceptable behavior of the profession), but I will look askance at you if you think that is moral.

The other thing to remember is that morality is changeable and individual. There are certain big things that society as a whole considers immoral (example: murder), but even those are changeable and debatable given the circumstances (example: killing during a war).

If you ever want to see the stages of moral development in action, watch a copyright and licensing thread on a craft board. I would probably help my sanity a lot of I'd remember that many people don't make it past level 4, "legal = right".

(In general, it's sad how many people never get past the second stage - "What's in it for me?".)

Tuesday, April 1, 2008

Men's Crafts versus Women's Crafts

OK, first off, apologies for the title. Naturally there's no such thing as a "man's" craft or a "woman's" craft. I don't know of a single craft done with the use of a penis, and you could probably use a dildo if there was. Likewise female genitalia is not used in any craft I can think of. So properly speaking, the title should be "Predominately men's crafts versus predominately women's crafts." But that's not as pithy and doesn't fit in the subject line as well. And certainly doesn't let me share the mental image of penile and vaginal craft projects.

Anyway, what I'm actually hear to talk about are attitudes towards intellectual property rights in scroll sawing and wood carving (traditionally male-dominated crafts) and knitting, crocheting, and sewing (traditionally female-oriented crafts). For some reason, women seem to be a LOT more stingy about the IPRs. You would be hard pressed to find a modern fiber craft book that does not have a "patterns may be made for personal use only" disclaimer in the front. I've seen ones that try to put limits on how many copies you can make for yourself to mark up as you work -- copies no one else ever even sees.

On the other hand, you pop open a scroll saw book or magazine, and there's good odds that there's advice on how to sell what you've made from the patterns. (For example, Scroll Saw Scandinavian has a nice little section on how best to display the items it's giving you patterns for.) Not to say I've never seen the complaint about someone making money off of a designer's work. I did once, from someone who walked into a Hallmark store and saw hundreds of lasercut ornaments made with his pattern and without a license.

Ladies, what are we doing here? They're worried about mass production; we're worried about a church raffle. Why is this?

I know it's not that the men's crafts are harder or slower. I've been knitting and crocheting since I was a kid, but give me a choice of making a coaster with an elaborate design with yarn or on the scroll-saw, and I'll be down making some sawdust. It's so much faster.

Are men more secure in their IPs? I'll be the first to admit that men's crafts are more respected; it's much rarer for a woodworker to be told "you know, you can buy one of those" compared to a yarn artist. The hypothetical coasters: I strongly suspect the scroll-sawed one will get more wow's than the yarn.

I don't think the men's crafts have a larger customer base, and I'm quite certain that's not the cause in any event. In the 1980s, when knitting was a terribly niche market, many American patterns had a limited license (allowance to make 100 items/year for sale, or for 'pin money', or some other non-mass-production commercial use OK).

Is it related to the way women are taught to hate each other and view each other as competition? This is the one I always suspect, although I wouldn't try to say whether it's an effect or part of a cause. Is it really that horrible for your work to help another woman ease her financial burden? It's insanely rare for a crafter to be in direct competition with the designer selling the finished article, and the sort of person who would buy the pattern is not the sort to buy the finished article. (Otherwise we wouldn't be in this knitting thing; it's faster and cheaper to buy sweaters from the store.) So why not let other women sell what they've made?

I'd really like to see women's crafts open sharing back up. I mean, isn't it cool to think that the thing you designed has helped pay for another woman's car, or a meal, or a doctor's visit? Or even just a couple of balls of yarn? Designers don't have to close it off to individuals in order to prevent mass manufacturing. Heck, you will almost never see me suggest this, but grab a Creative Commons license. Instead of worrying about small losses, let's think about the big helps we can provide.