Be Excellent To Each Other

Hi people,

I am reading a discussion about the legalities of sharing magazines.

The basic gist is that someone has posted (on a knitting forum) that her friend subscribes to a knitting magazine, that they read it together, and that she is hoping to knit a hat or somesuch featured in the magazine. The magazine is out of print (four months old) and they have no back issues remaining, and she wants to know if it would go against copyright to follow the pattern from the magazine as she herself did not buy the magazine.

Now, just for asking the question she has an inbox full of abusive messages (seriously, just in case you ever wanted to, never post a copyright question on a knittign forum because they will eat you alive - I mean, they are bordering on the insane.

I know a few people here have written pieces for magazines in the past, I think there might even be a journalist among our number, but I do not know if the same rules apply. Even if nobody has a clue on that, where do you stand on the ethics of such a thing.

I almost want to start a sock-puppet account and post a copyright question because I want to understand just what kind of abuse it is that these people always get - it happens all the time, and most people know not to even approach the subject, but it should be in the welcoming 'noobs beware!' message.

Speaking as a non-lawyer but rational person, what the fuck?

I can't see how purchase of a magazine containing a pattern confers exclusive permission to a single individual to use said pattern. It's ridiculous. One way or another the pattern has been released into the public domain for the very purpose of being used, so it's unthinkable to speak out against it.

If Friend A made the pattern, and then sold the magazine to Friend B, is Friend B suddenly allowed to use it and, not being in possession of the magazine any longer, Friend A not?

The whole question is absurd. If these people are seriously getting angry at the suggestion, then they need their brains scooping out with a very sharp spoon.

Oh, Comical - they are the most irrational group of people I have ever met - I use the site because it had the worlds largest database full of free knitting patterns in the world, but the forums are a car-crash of rationality and intelligence.

I send the poster a consolation message of 'sorry these people are being such an arse, report them', but I fear she is rather upset. It especially bugs me because she went to the trouble of actually seeking guidance on opinion from the members specifically so she did the right thing (I would have no qualms about just knitting the pattern if it were my friend that had the magazine), but just for even asking the question she gets the flame treatment.

OK, I was wrong with the facts in the first post - the magazine is a back-issue from SIX years ago - she has been trying to buy her own back issue copy for four months, and contacted the magazine publishers within that time.

They said that the pattern is their property for 6 months from publication, but were unsure on the legalities of who she should contact after that time - did it revert back to the designer, was it public domain? They had no information. So, for ll this time she has been trying to contact the designer. She must be a very honest and righteous person as I know I would not have gone to any of this trouble. I try to do the right thing as much as I can in life, but I'd have just knit the pattern! I don't even think I'd give a second thought to it.

Surely it would be about as wrong as leafing through a magazine in a dentist's waiting room.

I don't know, the girl who asked the question reads her friend's magazine, but wasn't sure if she was doing wrong by actually utilising one of the patterns in there.

I guess the only way it could be a legal issue is if she was intending to use the pattern for her financial gain. In that case, there might be some sort of issue with it, but I can't see any other way that it could be contentious.

That's just such a baffling level of honesty that I can barely comprehend it. It's not like she is posting the pattern online or making dozens of hats to sell. If you can just try and convince her not to worry as the only people who will ever care are the uptight idiots on the forum.

I have contacted her and told her really not to worry about it, that it is a forum full of nutters.

She actually wanted to make the item for her mum, bless her, so no profit to be made and not made in any number, either.

It just seems really odd, my mum (who is the sort of person who would drive back to a shop if she got too much change) used to knit and swapping patterns with her friends was part of it as I recall. I don't think they ever really thought anything of it.

I hope she realises she's funding terrorists.

No no -- pirate DVDs fund terrorists. Pirate knitting patterns fund paedophiles.

As someone in this game, my thoughts are: if your actions cost me money, that pisses me off; if they don't, I really don't care. In other words, downloading the current issue of Retro Gamer and sharing it with your mates = bad; downloading a copy of Arcade because you've been trying to find it on eBay for months without success = fine.

Legally speaking, however, it depends entirely on the contracts between contributors and the magazine in question, and they vary by publisher. With Future, for example, everything I write reverts to me (at least, the unedited form) after six months, and I can do what the hell I like with it. With others, the rights are permanently held by the publisher.

With regards to this specific incident, there's a kind of similarity to some of my stuff, and I often get people asking whether they can use something I did for .net for the basis of a project. Invariably, while this output is not in the public domain, I usually say yes, but only if it's not for a commercial project. For your friend, I'd suggest they just use the pattern, as long as they're not going to be selling it or something based on it.

EDIT: Well, that's what happens when you have a reply waiting and then get a one-hour call from your parents. Anyway, hopefully the above is still of some use!

The fact that it's a knitting pattern makes it a slightly different case but the general area's an interesting one, isn't it? That and book sharing ought to be brought up whenever the record or games industry bangs on about piracy in ill-advised ways - plenty of people share magazines, with the result that some people might not buy one when otherwise they would, but others get to know about something they might otherwise not have taken the punt on by buying. Do book publishers think charity shops are doing them out of profit by selling on second or third-hand books? Full credit to her for trying to find out the legal position and do it all correctly.

Indeed, the moral answer is of course that it's no different whatsoever.

Given that it's perfectly legal to lend a DVD to someone else, and have them make use of it by watching it, it's also perfectly legal to lend someone a magazine and have them make use of it by knitting the pattern. There's no grey area of legality whatsoever as far as I can see. Reprinting the pattern would be entirely different.

Depends on the terms. Many specifically state no hiring/lending.

Yeah, but that what they state and what the actual law is is different surely?

My ability to lend (i.e. Give away and they be given back) is inherent (regardless of whatever they right on the dvd start screen), as long as no money changes hands (so no hiring). At least that is what I thought.

I always figured it meant companies like Blockbuster couldn't hire them out. Not that you can't lend them to a mate.

PM, sent to me this morning.

Yup, now I see, it is exactly the same thing... and a fair reponse to what I had written:



I honesty can't imagine what was said to the girl who posted. Really, really unhinged.

Hang on, photocopy? That changes things entirely, she's probably a terrorist.

I have found the design in question;

1) Copyright is clearly indicated
2) You were right about the terrorists.

This has reely needled me.

What a yarn, to think that her fellow knitters think she's pulling the wool over their eyes.

She should tell them to get knotted.

Gee, I'm in stitches.

Oh God, here we go...

Would you rather I weft or do you secretly like my purls of wisdom?

you guys are a right bunch of sew and sews, although there are a few pearls in there and I won't get too crossstitch over it.

Malc

She should try a different career as a Singer and then see how copyright issues affect her.

9.9/10

Try telling that to the woolly liberals.

knitting.