The Sticky Topic of Copying

[garishglobes]

I'd agree - and this would seem to be a good illustration of what the writer of that article felt was wrong.

[SilverGems89]

I wondered if this site would be pertinent to this thread
http://www.creativecommons.org.uk/
Its a new way of looking at copyright.

I use creative commons licences on my photographs when posting them on the internet, Deviantart even have them now "built in" you just choose what level "coverage" you want when you upload, i think they are great! i hadnt thought about using them for beads but its not a bad idea!

[noora]

I saw an interview with a lady who made knitted sweaters with fancy patterns. They asked her how she felt about being copied. She said it's inevitable, but when it happens she moves on to the next pattern. Her intention wasn't to make one pattern and try to make a living out of mass producing that. Artistry is about being able to create new patterns, and as long as she was creating new patterns she wouldn't run out of business. I think that's a sound attitude. An artist's specialty isn't a specific pattern or model, an artist's specialty is to create new patterns and models.

Which of course doesn't mean that it's okay to copy It's just a good attitude to have if you have been copied and find you can't do anything about it.

[Ian Pearson]

Not sure if this site has been posted but found it useful http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/protect/p21_protecting_ideas
Copying my work hasnt been an issue and it is the way we all learn but I would question why there exists the need to copy. The reason may not be fair and I have attempted to protect certain methods of making items in order that people can not make similar items and sell them as the same as mine. The patent process is so time consuming and expensive that its not worth it for me. I always sign my work, making everything an "original" so a copy is just that.

Ian

[Trudi]

I recently listed a bracelet on Etsy, it had some tiger beads I made. I got an email from another Etsy seller to say that the tiger beads where a copy of hers!!!, I have seen many people make these beads, there are at least 3 tutorial free on the internet and several in books. It's such a common style. I didn't do anything about it. She said she would report the item to Etsy.

I did use a tutorial, Did I copy? or was I inspired? I'm more confused than ever.

It is a widely known style - I first saw them in Passing The Flame. I make Tiger Beads too, but I use goldstone instead of SIS, and I do different shapes and styles. The seller obvioulsy feels threatened - tell her to get a life, and perhaps point out that she is copying!

If we're all honest about it we are all inspired by things we see everywhere, not just from other beads, but from wallpaper designs, fabric etc etc. And even from other beads we see - you learn from "copying" trying to learn a technique - we all so, but you make it your own when you develop these techniques into your own designs.

[Kaz]

I saw an interview with a lady who made knitted sweaters with fancy patterns. They asked her how she felt about being copied. She said it's inevitable, but when it happens she moves on to the next pattern. Her intention wasn't to make one pattern and try to make a living out of mass producing that. Artistry is about being able to create new patterns, and as long as she was creating new patterns she wouldn't run out of business. I think that's a sound attitude. An artist's specialty isn't a specific pattern or model, an artist's specialty is to create new patterns and models.

Which of course doesn't mean that it's okay to copy It's just a good attitude to have if you have been copied and find you can't do anything about it.

I entirely agree. A few people have asked me why I list the names of the glass used in my murrini (I do it so beadmakers can then make matching twisties, cane or stringer and don't end up with a clashing bead!) when people can then easily work out the design and copy it. If someone starts doing that, then OK, I will drop that design (first slashing the price of any existing stock to spoil the copyist's market of course!!!) and then move on to the armful of other exciting ones I already have simmering on the back burner!!!
Kazx

[ScarletLeonard]

Julie, That is a fantastic post and is the view I have lived by, there are some things I won't say exactly how it is done but if you have the intelligence as an artist to see how the mentioned techniques have been pulled together then go for it and develop.

I use creative commons and have one on a particular style of earring I only did this because I had never seen anything like them and I gave them a special name, the CC is more on the name than anything else because even though I haven't seen the design I can't be sure it isn't out there somewhere.

I was also accused of copying once because of similar end products that were technically nothing alike, I told her almost where to stick it and carried on with my day. I've found that while some cases of copying may actually be the real deal and it has a malicious intent either as revenge or forgery, the vast majority are down to similar teaching, technical limits or serendipity.

Be inspired all you like, but try and be me and I will come down like a tonne of bricks. 

[Kaz]

Just thought I'd open up another potential contentious discussion here and ask what people think about tutorials and classes.
In my view, if you write and sell a tutorial - either privately or to a magazine, then you have given carte blanche for people to make those beads and to sell them if they want. If I bought a tutorial and it had a rider on it saying you could not make and sell the beads, I would ask for a refund. That would be like buying a recipe book and being told you can't sell the victoria sandwich at a cake sale!!!
If you deliver/take a class, is this the same? or is it more about learning techniques than a recipe for a particular bead(s).
As someone who has taken a lot of classes, I am not quite sure where I come down on this. In a couple of cases, I have paid £120+ for a day only to come away thinking that I could not make beads using the techniques learnt as they would look the same as the teacher's and then struggling to find other ways of using the techniques I have been taught. Perhaps part of every class should be about teachers working with the students to consider how the techniques can subsequently be applied to the student's own style of beads?
Kazx

[Pandanimal]

Building on your thoughts, Kaz, and taking from a thread I remember reading here on frit happens- what about selling on tutorials?
I know that a lot of people think this should not be done. But think of it this way, would you buy a book from a second hand shop? The author of that book gets nothing if its sold second hand, or if it is lent privately.
I'm playing devils advocate a little on this one I think. What do you think?

[Billie]

First off, with e-tutorials, I think the problem with selling them on is, unlike with a physical book from a second hand shop, who is to say you haven't also kept a copy of the file on your computer.  I think that's where selling on e-tutes becomes contentious.

As for selling books made from tutorials, then I think most authors ask you to credit them in your description of the bead... "this bead was inspired by the tutorial by Flossy Smith" kinda thing.  I haven't come across anyone who has advised the beads made by following a tutorial cannot be sold... Or have I failed to read the small print somewhere    Same with techniques you learn in a class.  I'm sure most lampworkers teaching classes expect you to expand on and develop from the techniques shown to you and if you are making exact replica's, again I guess it's a form of etiquette to say this bead was inspired by a class taken with that Flossy bird    It's so difficult to exactly replicate your own beads, let alone replicate another artists but if in doubt, I would suggest contacting the artist... although there was a thread on LE many moons ago where a lot of artists said if you had to ask, then you already knew the answer... so perhaps not...  Have I just gone around in a circle there 

[turnedlight]

I like your victoria sandwich analogy Kaz! Very apt. I know a beadmaker who spent a lot on going on a course, I don't have a clue who with, anyway, they made him sign something that basically forbade him to use what he learnt! He felt very ripped off. That does seem daft to me, what exactly have you spent your money on in that situation?

[noora]

What about crediting? And where do you draw the line? When is a technique advanced enough to demand credit? I can't exactly mention my first lampwork teacher every time I show a bead even though everything I do is related to what she taught me (the basic round bead...).

Is it as simple as only giving credit if you learn a technique or design from someone who invented it themselves? Or are there situations where you should credit the teacher or the one you're inspired by when they in turn learned the technique or design from someone else? Perhaps crediting them for being such great teachers?

It's so much simpler in science, where you publish your findings in a paper and include references to all your inspirations and even to related work that didn't influence your work at all... When artists write "about me"-texts they usually mention their inspirations, influences and teachers, but sometimes I get the feeling it's more to brag that they've taken classes from this or that great artist or to explain to the viewer how they should be viewing the work. Like, "I'm inspired by Picasso" - "Oh, so that's why her eye is on her belly and her nose on her shoulder."

[Krysia@No98]

What about crediting? And where do you draw the line? When is a technique advanced enough to demand credit? I can't exactly mention my first lampwork teacher every time I show a bead even though everything I do is related to what she taught me (the basic round bead...).

And if we start going down that road do we need to mention who taught them?  Can you imagine  you'd end up with an educational version of a family tree!

I think that lady that got upset about the tiger bead needs to read passing the flame.    And if she still isn't satisfied then bagsy me for copyrighting beads with splodges on!

[soulsilver]

Having read through most of this thread I feel compelled to answer. I had a horrible experience not that long ago when I plucked up the courage to post a picture of some of my beads in a forum that I had not posted in before, I have lots of positive responses to my post and then out of the blue I had a very angry response from someone claiming that my beads were a direct copy of one of her "unique" designs. I had not seen her work before despite the fact that there were undeniable similarities. I can only say that it was a horrible situation to be in, this person refused to come outright and accuse me of copying, but she did feel that it was appropriate to have a dig on the forum. Another member of the forum comments stayed with me......she said that however aggrieved this person felt (justified or not) airing her anger in a PUBLIC forum was just not appropriate, its something that should be addressed in private first and discussed rather than just jumping in with an accusation. The way that I look at this is that none of us are re-inventing the wheel, glass beads have been around for thousands of years and it would be very naive to think that we are the only person to have ever thought of putting spots - dots - stripes etc on a bead.
I do not think that it gives us carte blanche to copy other peoples work and this is and will always be a contentious issue, I do think that we have a choice how we handle it, we can air any grievance we have in a very public forum (where it generally stays..) or we can talk in private messages and behave like grown ups to come to some kind of satisfactory conclusion.

With regard to teaching, maybe in classes the emphasis should be on learning a technique rather than a style......I have run plenty of jewellery making classes and always tried to get students to think about where they take a technique after the class, what can they change or adapt to make the technique suit their personal style.  People always think in such negative ways, why not see a class as a chance for both the student and the teacher to learn, its a fantastic forum to bounce ideas off other people, rather than assume the worst of people.  If you are teaching a class, teach the stuff that you don't mind passing on, that you don't object to other people selling, but more importantly leave your student thinking about the possibilities of the technique!

Just my tuppence worth!!!!

[squirsygirl]

Is it in fact possible to copyright a certain style or technique? 

And is is wrong, morally or legally, to say that you have copyright-ed a certain style, when in fact you have not done any such thing?

I truly believe nothing is original: no method, no technique, no style.  It's all been done before, even if you've never seen it.  How well something is done, well that's what makes all the difference!  That is what makes a piece unique.  Each artist has their own flair.

Kirsty