DMCA Vs. The Sewing Underground 545
Roundeye writes "So the folks at monsterpatterns.com dumpster-dive to get envelopes containing discontinued sewing patterns and sell the envelopes via their website. The sewing pattern company McCall invoked the DMCA to get the site shut down. Monsterpatterns is now suing to protect their 'fair use rights' to advertise and sell the discarded patterns. You might recall that this isn't the first time the sewing industry has cracked down on bootlegging grandmas and their suppliers."
How is this piracy? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:5, Insightful)
No, Of Course Not... (Score:3, Funny)
1) Would have to be digital.
2) Have a copy protection mechanism in place. My favorite dumpster copy protection mechanism consists of broken glass, rusty razor blades and animal dung. This will protect the contents of your dumpster from copying by all except the most dedicated of dumpster divers. It also really cuts down on the repeat offenders.
IANAL yadda yadda.
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:4, Insightful)
Let's all write a letter to congress thanking them for passing a law which threatens ISPs with financial ruin if they do not comply with what a business says, but essentially holds those businesses unaccountable for abuse of that law.
Any takedown notice issued by a company whose revenue exceeds $1 million should be accompanied by a bond for $100,000. If the target of the takedown contests the takedown, the issuing company should have thirty days to commence litigation or forfeit the bond in its entirety to the defendant. This bond amount should not limit in any way the ability of the defendant to sue for damages. The bond simply exists as a token to ensure that corporations will perform substantial legwork before issuing a DMCA based takedown notice.
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:3, Funny)
Well, assume the lid has two states, closed (0), and open (1). 0 and 1! Digital! Bingo!
It could be argued that the lid has infinite intermediate states between open and closed, but a true digital signal doesn't really switch back and forth without being in between either, it's just a relatively short amount of time. Allow me to elaborate.
1) Dumpster diver sees dumpster. Lid is at closed state, and has been for an hour.
2)
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:3, Interesting)
I wondered the same thing, and was initially quick to jump up and shout "DMCA abuse," but as it turns out, from the article:
The companies invoked the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which shields Internet service providers from liability if they comply with takedown requests. It seems the long arm of the DMCA, which has been used to crack down on file-swappers, printer cartridge makers and font creators, is now reaching into the competitive world of sewing patterns.
So the DMCA does not in it
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:5, Interesting)
This part of the DMCA is very good and very clear. It is unfortunate that it must give such power to plaintiffs; however, due to the penalty of purjury assumed by the plaintiff illegitimate accusations can easily cause a counter-suit and thus the system is balanced.
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:4, Informative)
The copyright holder's obligations are spelled out at the Chilling Effect Clearinghouse [chillingeffects.org].
The lawyer representing the copyright holder has to claim under penalty of perjury, that they are authorized to act on behalf of the person they claim to represent. That is the only statement they have to make under penalty of perjury.
The takedown notice needs to describe the allegedly infringing activity, and the lawyers must state that they have a good-faith belief that the "use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law." [17 USC 512(c)(3)(A)(v) [cornell.edu]]. They do not need a good-faith belief that the described activity is actually occurring.
This RIAA takedown notice [chillingeffects.org] is an example of the law being abused.
The ISP is then required to take the content down for a minimum of ten days and no longer than 14 days in such period the plaintiff must file for a court order.
The ISP can only put the material back up if the subscriber files a counter-notice. In that case, the ISP must notify the complainant. Even if the ISP receives a counter notice, they can not restore the material until the complainant has had ten business days to respond to the counter-notice. If, after 14 business days, the complainant does not file suit, the ISP is required to restore the material.
The requirements for a counter-notice [chillingeffects.org] are more stringent than the requirements for a take-down notice. To file a counter-notice, the subscriber must state under penalty of perjury that they have a good faith belief that the material was removed by mistake or misidentification. The subscriber must also consent to local federal court jurisdiction.
For those of you thinking you could file a notice to shut down the RIAA's website for ten days, think again. The penalty for an ISP that fails to comply with a takedown notice, is that they cannot claim immunity from the infringing activity. I suspect the RIAA's ISP will take that risk rather than upsetting one of their well-endowed customers.
IANAL
This part of the DMCA is very good and very clear. It is unfortunate that it must give such power to plaintiffs; however, due to the penalty of purjury assumed by the plaintiff illegitimate accusations can easily cause a counter-suit and thus the system is balanced.
I agree that the way you described it, the law would be fairly good (really the ISP shouldn't need to take the material down if they recieve a counter-notice). Unfortnately, the balance you refer to does not exist.
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:5, Informative)
It's kinda similar to books with the covers ripped off, which are not supposed to be sold since they were written off by the publisher. But it still happens. And McCall is out on a weak limb here -- if they wanted to sue someone, they should go after the store for not properly discarding the material. Or maybe they should've had it shipped back to them (at their expense) so they could discard it properly (at their expense). Once it's in the trash, it's usually considered fair game.
It really is another horrible example of the DMCA though. Yeah, I couldn't care less about the patterns, but as you said it's a law that assumes guilt (and while, admittedly, this would be a civil case where the burdon of proof is not as strong as in a criminal case, it's still a very wrong methodology).
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:5, Interesting)
It's just the same in this case: the hobby store probably had an agreement to destroy unsold patterns, and violated that agreement by simply discarding the patterns. As a result of that violation, anyone who wanted to could legally take ownership of the discarded patterns - and this company did.
That's the copyright case. The paracopyright (DMCA) case has no leg to stand on, because there was no actual copyright infringement. The right answer, before running off to court, is to send a DMCA counter-notice [cmu.edu] stating that McCall's does not own the copyright to the web pages in question. These pages are copyrighted, not by McCall's, but by Monsterpatterns; they do not themselves contain the copyrighted patterns. (If Monsterpatterns were disseminating the patterns themselves on their website, then this would constitute copyright infringement, since digitial distribution implies that a copy is made. The same is not true of distribution of envelopes that are not copied.)
Re:How is this piracy? (redux) (Score:3, Interesting)
Even in paperback books with the covers ripped off, the language warning against stripped books doesn't mention copyright liability. Here's the language used by one publisher:
The sale of this book without its cover is unauthorized. If you purchased this book without a cover, you should be aware that it was reported to the publisher as "unsold and destroyed." Neither the author nor the publisher has received payment for the sale of this "stripped book."
Many publishers amplify on th
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:3, Informative)
I don't know if there are laws for destruction of other works that are similar to the book thing but
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:2)
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:2)
It's not even a digital product... (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't see that resale of merchanside is hacking or infringing copyright.
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:5, Interesting)
bzzt. incorrect analogy. the guy isn't photocopying the "master" pattern. he's selling the envelopes. a better analogy would be if you threw away your cd collection and somebody picked it up and sold it.
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:5, Interesting)
And so you throw your CDs in a recycle bin, trusting that they'll be destroyed. But then some college students dig through your recycle bin and salvage the CDs, the CDs that someone else already paid for, the CDs that you have made a comittment to destroy.
That is piracy, at that point.
And that's how far you have to take tha analogy to make it accurate.
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:4, Interesting)
And so you throw your CDs in a recycle bin, trusting that they'll be destroyed. But then some college students dig through your recycle bin and salvage the CDs, the CDs that someone else already paid for, the CDs that you have made a comittment to destroy.
That is piracy, at that point.
Ok, but who is the crook here? The dumpster-divers are just taking what they believe to be trash. You (the CD-thrower-outer) didn't follow through on your committment. Where do you get the right to call the dumpster-divers crooks?
--
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:4, Insightful)
If placing things in the garbage is, from a legal standpoint, a valid way to destroy them, then removing things from someone's garbage has to be illegal in at least some cases -- you are "un-destroying" something that has been legally destroyed. Cause a segmentation violation in the law's view of reality, go to jail.
And, if placing things in the garbage is, from a legal standpoint, a valid way to destroy them, then many operations become cheaper to execute (eg. the "take the cover off the book and throw the rest away" maneuver that bookstores go through).
So, there are real economic reasons for this to be the way things are set up from the standpoint of the law, even though it artificially creates a situation where rooting through random garbage can actually be labeled as stealing or piracy.
The cost to society of having the law work this way may actually be lower than the cost to society of having the law be "sane". (Not saying that that's actually the case. Just pointing out that it might be the case -- it's at the very least not clear-cut.)
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:5, Insightful)
Breach of contract, I believe.
To refine your analogy into, well, basically what is happening now. You own a store, and enter into an agreement with the publisher that you will attempt to sell their product, but if it doesn't sell they must refund your money and you will destroy the recordings. This is a very common arrangement in the publishing industry, where the publisher assumes some of the risk for a new product. The store fails to sell-through 90% of said product. You then tears off the covers to send to you as proof of sell-through rates, and instead of adequately destroying said material as per the contract you simply throws them in the garbage. Kids dive through your trash, and claim the abandoned material. Kids sell material to eachother and other kids.
If it is your job to destroy property X, and you fail to do so instead abandoning it, person Y has every right to pick it up and claim it. Piracy is the willful copying of an expressive medium for which you do not hold the right to do so. You were contractually obliged to destroy the medium upon which the copyrighted material was located, but failed to do so. In your MP3 situation, you violated copyright law by selling MP3's without adequately destroying the source material (abandonment does not equal destruction). In the above mentioned situation, and indeed in the one in real life, the company that threw away the patterns is guilty of breach of contract... failure to adequately destroy said property.
The dumpster divers should be in the clear on this one, in my NSHO, but the company that threw it out needs to get an incenirator or contract to a garbage company who will come onto their property to collect the dirty goods.
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it's not piracy. Piracy involves people with one eye and a peg leg who go "har." Or perhaps more specifically, a robbery at sea, often accompanied by violence. Fight the co-opting of the term "piracy" for copyright violations. It is just meant to incorrectly associate a purely non-violent, non-threatening, non-property depriving (not revenue depriving, although I think that can be debated) crime with something that is far more serious and violent.
Say "copyright violation" instead of "piracy" and no one pays any attention. And that's as it should be.
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the point is that he's selling copyrighted material (the patterns) without the copyright holder's permission...
You don't need the copyright holder's permission to sell. You only need permission to copy, perform, or create derivitive works [cornell.edu].
Right, but these aren't licensed copies (Score:3, Informative)
Quite right. However, your analysis applies to something that is legitimately licensed copies, which these sewing patterns are not. The question in this, which is what makes it so much of a brainbender: by using a non-licensed copy of something, are you a pirate?
Ostensibly, the store is transferring the rights of the "original" back to the manufacturer - in effect, the product
Re:Right, but these aren't licensed copies (Score:5, Interesting)
The book/CD goes back to the USPS, who then takes out the scrap of paper saying you returned it, and they toss the book/cd in the recycling bin. They would report to the publisher that the product was destroyed, but you would still get credited for returning it. It's amazing that it costs less to just discard the book/cd than resell it.
So, the recyclers were getting these books and CD in their recycled material. Instead of just baling the books and cds, several I know were actually taking the books and cd's out and selling them on ebay and amazon!
Lawyers eventually came to one of the recyclers I worked with. The laywers say they are only purchasing waste paper and plastic in the recycling, and that they cannot sell the products as books and CD. The recyclers say they bought the material and that they own it and can sell it as anything they want.
Well, in my local case, the recycler decided not to fight due to the high court costs and the probability of losing.
I would blame the USPS - they should be rendering the books and cd's unserviceable before selling them to someone else.
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:How is this piracy? (Score:2)
I knew it! (Score:5, Funny)
this... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:this... (Score:2)
just because we cover ourselves with all kinds of waste (even rotten food!!!) in the process of trying to recover 5 year old laser printers (so we can casemod them and put linux on them) doesn't mean we're not worried about our image.
Re:this... (Score:2)
on a more serious note, we try to avoid any dumpsters with food in it.
Bootleg grandmas? (Score:4, Funny)
The DMCA (Score:2, Funny)
Re:The DMCA (Score:4, Funny)
I see a real pattern of misuse of the DMCA.
-schussat
Re:The DMCA (Score:5, Funny)
--
Evan
Re:The DMCA (Score:3, Funny)
Re:The DMCA (Score:3, Funny)
DMCA confusion? (Score:5, Interesting)
What, are they claiming that a dumpster is copyright control?
Re:DMCA confusion? (Score:2)
What, are they claiming that a dumpster is copyright control?
Not exactly I think they are saying you are violating copyright laws if you get into your neighbors garbage and selling whatever you find.
Re:DMCA confusion? (Score:5, Funny)
dumpster millenium contorl act
good god, i slay me.
This just goes to show... (Score:5, Funny)
-JT
Other Reasons for Decline (Score:4, Insightful)
The old article stated that the Internet is responsible for declining sales of patterns for doilies and other sewing patters. Here's two reasons i think this is BS.
1.) Given the median age of the people who still knit and sew, i'd say that few of them use a computer, much less the internet.
1.) The people who do sew, are so old they're probably just dying off anyway, thus leading to the declining sales.
Re:Other Reasons for Decline (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Other Reasons for Decline (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Other Reasons for Decline (Score:5, Interesting)
The latest model sewing and quilt machines can download patterns and sew just about anything. Why a guy can use one of these things and feel pretty good about himself! Ahem... not like I've done that or... anything.
Re:Other Reasons for Decline (Score:5, Funny)
- Who'll be the first to get Mom's Singer to boot Linux?
- Who'll write the first sewing machine virus, which copies the contents of the pattern directory and sends it to a IRC bot in #SeW1NGH@CkOrZ
- WHo'll be the first overclocker to break the 200Msz barrier (200 Million Stiches)? And will the machine be water cooled?
- And, of course, the mandatory case mods so the lady next door's sewing machine is also her fishtank
Hmm...this could almost be cooler than I thought at first...Re:Other Reasons for Decline (Score:3, Funny)
Who'll write the first sewing machine virus, which copies the contents of the pattern directory and sends it to a IRC bot in #SeW1NGH@CkOrZ
... or that takes over the machine and sews "ur sw34t3r 1s 0wnz0r3d" into whatever you're sewing.
Thanks, Slashdot! Now I see... (Score:3, Interesting)
Let's just say I won't be buying any McCall's patterns for quite awhile. I think I'll stick to Burda. (Burda 0wNz0rZ j00!)
Re:Other Reasons for Decline (Score:2, Interesting)
My wife and I have a 1947 Singer. STEEL, baby, 100%. Doesn't reverse, doesn't buttonhole, uses a legbar for control instead of a foot pedal.
That sucker stitches through leather WITHOUT a leather needle. My wife made a 32 foot long x 17 foot high x 13 foot wide "French Bell" pavillion on it, and it just needed an
Re:Other Reasons for Decline (Score:2)
Re:Other Reasons for Decline (Score:5, Insightful)
And no, she's not that old... in her 50s I believe.
I agree that the number of people who sew are on the decline, but I've known several people (all female, unsurprisingly) my age who sew, knit, or do other such things as hobbies. And they're all from large cities (2M+), not country bumpkins.
Re:Other Reasons for Decline (Score:2)
- Robin
Re:Other Reasons for Decline (Score:5, Insightful)
1.) Given the median age of the people who still knit and sew, i'd say that few of them use a computer, much less the internet.
Okay, bring on the data. What is the median age of people who knit and sew? What percentage of them use computers? What percentage use the Internet? Actual figures from a reliable source would be useful. I just don't buy this argument without seeing some evidence. After all if none of McCall's target audience used the Internet, they'd hardly be worried about a company that sold old sewing patterns on the Internet...
1.) The people who do sew, are so old they're probably just dying off anyway, thus leading to the declining sales.
That assumes that no-one new is taking up the pasttime. Again, do you have any evidence to substantiate this?
Re:Other Reasons for Decline (Score:4, Interesting)
It is much easier to search the internet for patterns than going to the fabric store. (http://www.simplicity.com or http://www.voguepatterns.com) I can search several different sites that can create custom patterns that are the printed on plotters via AutoCad - http://www.cochenille.com is one of the best. For the patterns that have been discontinued - that has been one of the sour points of the industry. I find something that I like - and McCalls has allready discontinued it, or it's used as an example of restyling a design, can't be done.
If it's been thrown away in the trash -- it's public. That's been proven in several U.S. courts (which is why the police do not need a search warrent to go through someone's trash).
McCalls' -- get over it. Your patterns have not been the greatest for the past ten years. To blame your main customers for the decline is like the RIAA blaming their customers for producing insipid music and loss of sales!!!
Re:Other Reasons for Decline (Score:4, Informative)
I personally know 8 people who sew as a hobby. Only one is over 60. Two others are over 40. The other 5 are in thier 20s to mid 30s. Of the 8, 7 use a computer on a regular basis, 5 of them at home as well as work. 3 of them (that I know of) are part of online sewing/knitting groups. One of them is a software contractor. there is a (fairly large) niche market for pattern-making/designing software. There is also a fair-sized market in machines that you can program with said patterns. The 60+ YO's machine can do just about everything except go to the store and buy the fabric.
I don't pretend to follow it all that closely, but the whole sewing/knitting hobby/subculture is alive and kicking. It probably rivals the Ham people in numbers.(Yes, yes, I know "Ham is dying, film at 11")
That said, if the internet "is responsible" for declining sales, it's because they have failed to adapt to a changing business environment.
Re:Other Reasons for Decline (Score:3, Interesting)
My wife, for example, is a professional seamstress and in her late 20's. Her job is in the costume/theatre industry. At least half of all the costumes at every show across the country has been at least altered for the actor in that show, unless the show is set in the current day and the costume designe
Re:Other Reasons for Decline (Score:3, Insightful)
The idea that knitters and sewers are dottering old ladies is just as much a myth as the idea that all Linux users are thieving communist hippi
The Supreme Court ruled.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:The Supreme Court ruled.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps even theft..
But it don't have diddly to do with DMCA.. This is getting way out of hand.. 'guilty until YOU prove innocence'.. and no recourse for lost revenue during the process.
Re:The Supreme Court ruled.. (Score:5, Interesting)
For my own curiosity, does this include dumpsters? I mean, technically, you could be taken for trespassers if the dumpster is on the property (which it probably is). A friend and I were caught dumpster diving a few years back, and though the cops didn't do anything except get our information (we had no ID on us, and they gave us a hard time about that, but since that's not illegal -- yet -- there was nothing they could do). But they told us that we were trespassing and if we did again they'd arrest us. I'm guessing they were bull-sh***ing us, but I don't really know.
Anyway, I guess my question is, what's the definition of a "curb"? If you hire a dumpster, does that mean the stuff in the dumpster is PD? Or does it belong to the dumpster owner?
Re:What about home security cameras? (Score:3, Informative)
Joy. (Score:2)
Needlework and Player Pianos (Score:2)
I've described the copyright battles over cross-stitching, player piano rolls, Happy Birthday and guitar sheet music as being good analogies for what "kids" are doing today with MP3s, Kazaa and keygen cracks.
The thing is: will you respect the current legal rights of the publisher, or will you create a new paradigm?
Who said, "The reasonable man adapts to his environment. The unreasonable man tries to adapt the environment to himself. Thus, all progress has been made by unreasonable men"?
sue 'em good (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:sue 'em good (Score:2)
If you've thrown it into the trash, I don't think you can later claim the garbage men came by and stole it.
Re:sue 'em good (Score:3, Funny)
Same thing as copying the DVD you purchased. You're removing the movie from some invisible trashcan stored on the DVD.
Laws were meant to be broken.
See!?!!? (Score:2)
Supreme Court? (Score:5, Interesting)
It Takes Something This Ridiculous... (Score:5, Interesting)
That's usually what it takes -- an application of the law so abusrd that even Joe Average realizes it's a bad law. Remember the Life Begins at Conception laws where people started claiming their unborn children on tax returns for the year where they were in the womb, and female prisoners claiming that their unborn children were unlawfully imprisoned because the mother was?
Call it the Law of Unintended Consequences Applied to Law Law.
Sewing Stealers (Score:2, Funny)
Depends if the dumpster had lots of water in it (Score:3, Funny)
I think for international open-sea salvage laws to apply, they'd need to demonstrate dumpster diving was in fact some form of underwater diving.
Any reference to treasures and pirates as in "Pirated sewing patterns" can only help Mosterpatterns demonstrate the applicability of sea-faring rules. Was there a captain in the dumpster at the time of the escapade?
I'm glad to see this... (Score:3, Insightful)
Wow Granny your 1337!! (Score:3, Funny)
Now, sitting here wearing a shirt she made me, I wonder: is this covered under fair use or are they going to take the shirt off my back? How does one check if a garment was reproduced from a licensed patern? You have to wonder how many copywritable permutations of the shirt there really are.
Maybe this is why Granny wanted Kazaa loaded and that 120GB hard drive for Mother's Day?
how to ruin your own case (Score:3, Interesting)
While this doesn't qualify as official company policy (employees referring customers to the site on their own, rather than the company telling the employees to refer them), I think it badly undermines the pattern companies' case. Obviously they knew about the site for a long time, they knew what it did and what it offered, and they turned a blind eye towards it.
Suddenly, some lawyer realizes it might be grounds for a quick courtroom profit and announces they're suing under (of all things) the DCMA. As if throwing boxes in the trash could possibly constitute encryption....
So let me get this straight... (Score:5, Insightful)
1. I find a bunch of old magazines in someone's trash.
2. I take the magazines and list them on my web site hoping to sell them.
3. I'm guilty of a DMCA violation?? This doesn't make sense! People are using the DMCA as a 'catch all' law to make EVERYTHING online illegal. This law must go away!
LEAVE MY GRAMAMA ALONE B*#@&! (Score:5, Funny)
This is good... (Score:3, Interesting)
At least there's one Senator that wants to limit DRM and DMCA.
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105_2-1013037.html?t
Bad for Karma, but I'm on McCall's side... (Score:4, Insightful)
Apparently, McCall has a similar process for excess patterns. The understanding with the merchants is that the excess patterns are NOT to be sold. Monsterpatterns is disrupting this process. While other means could be used (e.g., shredding the patterns) this would increase costs for the merchants. And is not a good thing.
So while DMCA may be hated on Slashdot, I believe McCalls has a right to protect their copyrighted materials, which they want to have removed from the marketplace.
Re:Bad for Karma, but I'm on McCall's side... (Score:3, Funny)
I disagree. To use your book example, who would buy (at full price, or even half off) a new book without the cover? Nobody would, that's why the practice works to a large part.
If the pattern industry were going to do something similar, they'd require that the patterns be ripped in half.
Regardless, if I have the physical material, I can sell it for whatever I can get. That's why it's called "owning" something.
Also, once you stick it in the dumpster, it's fair game. You might be able to do the "tres
Re:Bad for Karma, but I'm on McCall's side... (Score:4, Insightful)
IANAL, of course... (Score:5, Insightful)
But Monsterpatterns is not a party to the contractual agreement between the pattern manufacturer and the pattern retailer. If the retailer fails to execute their part of the agreement, no third party is bound to abide by the agreement in their stead.
"They're doing something that's not illegal but it's messing up our business model" is not a justification to sue. It's a sign that the business model needs to be altered.
('altered', ha... tailoring humor... thank you, I'll be here all week)
Re:Bad for Karma, but I'm on McCall's side... (Score:3, Insightful)
Remember the hassle over used records an dthe stores that sold them? That's what McCall's is trying to do - prevent resale in order to keep profits up.
As this is what I do... (Score:3, Interesting)
First - dumpster diving has nothing to do with the DMCA. Nothing. What monsterpackets is doing is no different from me grabbing a turntable that someone tossed and selling it on eBay.
Second - if this is such a *huge* problem, why not FIX it?
Shit, this DMCA crap is tired already - it took me two minutes to think of these things, and I haven't even started drinking yet.
Sewing cost (Score:4, Interesting)
I mean, supplies are expensive, the cost of sewing machines can be incredible (cheap ones in the hundreds, up to thousands for higher-end though), and patterns are definately a rip.
Maybe we need an "open pattern site" - anyone got a link?
Maybe McCall should take a lesson from Madonna... (Score:5, Funny)
The whole pattern pirating industry would be shut down in an instant as soon as some grandmother that downloaded a pattern called "Playful Kittens" and spent hours stitching it out, ended up with a pillow that says "WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU DOING?"
myke
So does this mean... (Score:3, Funny)
I'm suing!
This is really weird (Score:4, Interesting)
Monsterpatterns is selling stuff for "30-40% off retail"?? If that's cover price, that's highway robbery, never mind where the patterns came from. McCall, Butterick and Vogue patterns are *normally* sold for 50% off cover. Most places (JoAnn, Hancock, etc.) have rotating sales where one particular line is a buck a pattern.
I guess Monsterpatterns (and the sewing stores) are targeting the folks that want a particular pattern RIGHT NOW and are willing to pay the fairly-outrageous cover prices ($9-15) on them.
(In other Slashdot-relevant news, I'm trying to decide on an appropriate "open-source" license for sewing patterns.)
needlework design generators? (Score:3, Insightful)
Okay, let's get the story RIGHT, shall we? (Score:5, Informative)
McCall's isn't saying the patterns can't be sold. Wait. Let me say that a little louder.
MCCALL'S ISN'T SAYING THE PATTERNS CAN'T BE SOLD.
Their gripe is with Monsterpatterns putting pictures of the patterns on the website. You know: reproducing (as in making a COPY of) the copyrighted art/photographs on the cover of the patterns.
It's still a bit underhanded, but it makes a certain sort of sense, far more than "you can't resell the physical pattern."
Here's the forum message [sewingcommons.com] where the rep (owner?) says "Today The Mccall pattern company through their attorneys have told our web host company that we are 'infringing on their copyrights' by displaying pictures of patterns that we own."
Boycott McAll's (Score:5, Funny)
Anyhow to all you grandma's that read slashdot out there... don't buy McAll's patterns! Buy from your local neighborhood needlepoint store!
Perhaps I can invoke the DMCA on them! (Score:3, Funny)
Cheers,
Ian (McCall)
DMCA does not apply (Score:4, Insightful)
"Doctrine of first sale" applies: no infringement (Score:3, Insightful)
With few exceptions, once the item has "entered into the stream of commerce", the holder of copyright can not prevent further sale. See: USA Copyright law [cornell.edu] And it's backed up by a Supreme Court decision from 1905 or so.
The doctrine allows the legitimate owner of a particular lawful copy of a work to "sell or otherwise dispose of the possession of that copy" without the permission of the copyright owner, and produce images of it for purpose of aiding the sale. It does not permit copying the item in its entirety.
If the city codes allow dumpster diving and if they declare that the contents are "abandoned property", then the divers ARE the legal owners of the patterns and can tell McCall's to take a flying leap.
This issue comes up frequently on eBay. One $$$ fabric maker was invoking the DMCA to get auctions for items made of their fabric shut down. Their claim was that the photos showed their copyrighted fabric designs. It only took a few sellers ordering eBay to restore the content and to tell the fabric company that it was fair use (citing chapter, verse and Supreme Copurt decision number) and to go ahead and file to convince them they were out of line.
Re:I'm sorry but... (Score:2)
OK. It was my mom's birthday.
Re:sad, really (Score:5, Funny)
;)
Re:Throwing away = giving up your rights. (Score:2)
Thus, this is equivalent to someone driving up to bookstore or Sam Goody's, after they've either gone out of business, or have discarded old stock, and then reselling goods thrown away in the trash, which the end retailer decided was worthless. This is nothing more than selling surplus - no piracy involved here. There i
And will probably be registered by Buffalo Bill (Score:4, Funny)
CLARICE Good afternoon... I wonder if you could help me. I'm looking for MacCall, the sewing pattern company?
MR. GUMB They don't live here anymore.
Mr. Gumb starts to close the door, only to have Clarice push back against it, politely but firmly. She holds up her ID.
CLARICE Excuse me, but I really do need to talk to you. This was MacCall sewing pattern company. Did you know them?
MR. GUMB Just briefly. What's the problem, Officer?
Clarice and Mr. Gumb, still eyeing each other through the door crack...
CLARICE I'm investigating a violation of the DMCA. Who are you, please?
MR. GUMB Jack Gordon.
CLARICE Mr. Gordon, do you know anything about MacCall dumpster-diving for sewing patterns?
MR. GUMB No. Wait... Was it those stupid little drawings made up of broken lines? I may have seen them, I'm not sure...
Mr. Gumb glances briefly over his shoulder, towards his kitchen, then turns back to Clarice with a smile.
MR. GUMB MacCall had some employees, maybe they could help you. I have some cards somewhere. Do you mind stepping inside, while I looks for it?
CLARICE Thanks.
Moments later...
CLARICE - looking up from the bottom of a hole in the basement.
MR. GUMB It rubs the DMCA on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it is told.