And should we? A lot of people are, for different reasons....one of them there.
I'm not so sure we should.
I'll freak out if I come to the decision that I don't trust them - but for now I do. Why? Because what they are claiming in their TOS is pretty much the same as every other online entity out there. I think people just happen to be finally noticing it.
Wordpress:
By submitting Content to Automattic for inclusion on your Website, you
grant Automattic a world-wide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license
to reproduce, modify, adapt and publish the Content solely for the
purpose of displaying, distributing and promoting your blog.
Typepad:
1.5 By signifying your acceptance of this TOS or making any use of the
TypePad Service, you signify your irrevocable acceptance of this TOS,
the Terms of Use and the TypePad Privacy Policy in effect at the time of
your use...
8.1 TypePad does not claim ownership over the content you post on the
TypePad Service. After posting your content, you continue to retain your
ownership of your content and you continue to have the right to use and
license your content in any way you choose. But by using the TypePad
Service or TypePad's Web properties through which the TypePad Service is
available, you are granting TypePad a nonexclusive, worldwide,
royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable right and license to use,
reproduce, create derivative works of, distribute, publicly perform and
publicly display your content, subject to any restrictions on such
distribution which you may implement through any content distribution
controls provided to you by TypePad as part of the TypePad Service. This
license ends when you delete your content or your account (except to
the extent that your content has been shared with others or syndicated
to third parties and they have not deleted it). You may always decline
to submit content to TypePad, but please be aware that your decision may
prevent you from being able to use all or portions of the TypePad
Service.
Flickr:
...perpetual,
irrevocable and fully sublicensable [is that a word?! I guess it is, I see it with a red squiggle line under it up there in the TypePad rules] license to use, distribute,
reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, publicly perform and
publicly display such Content (in whole or in part) and to incorporate
such Content into other works in any format or medium now known or later
developed.
"Publicly accessible" areas of the Yahoo! Services are those areas of
the Yahoo! network of properties that are intended by Yahoo! to be
available to the general public. By way of example, publicly accessible
areas of the Yahoo! Services would include Yahoo! Message Boards and
portions of Yahoo! Groups and Flickr that are open to both members and
visitors.
SmugMug is quite a bit safer....but still:
You retain the copyright in any User Content you post on the Site.
SmugMug neither has nor wants any ownership of your Content. However, by
uploading and/or posting any User Content to the Site, you grant
SmugMug a perpetual, nonexclusive and royalty-free right to use the User
Content and the name that is submitted in connection with such User
Content, as is reasonably necessary to display the User Content, provide
the Services and to facilitate, at Content Owner's direction, the
license of Photos or the sale of Products on the Site.
You understand and acknowledge that any User Content contained in
public postings, including any galleries that are not designated as
unlisted, will be accessible to the public and could be accessed,
indexed, archived, linked to and republished by others including,
without limitation, appearing on other web sites and in search engine
results. Therefore, you should be careful about the nature of the User
Content you post. SmugMug will not be responsible or liable for any
third party access to or use of the User Content you post. SmugMug
provides many security options and settings for your content and you should read and understand them all.
And I think we're all pretty aware of Google right now, with their big change recently. And all of this is old news with regards to Face Book.
Which Big Brother should we trust?
Showing posts with label blah blah blah. Show all posts
Showing posts with label blah blah blah. Show all posts
Monday, March 12, 2012
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Pretty Definitive Copyright Answers re:Patterns
First, I wanted to share my response to some of the great conversations I've had about Copyright. Personally, I would be very flattered if I published a pattern and somebody actually liked it enough to put time and money into making it and feeling like they in turn could make money from their creation. That pretty much sums up how I feel about knit/sewing/quilting patterns and copyright.
And now I babble on and on about it because I research stuff - I always just have to know. I found a bunch and I'll share it here if you're interested. But you'll be glad to know that after this, I am researched and blog posted-out on the topic!
Just for my own information, I googled copyright-sewing-selling, something like that, and of course came up with a boatload of links. One of the top few was to Amy Butler's page. For good or bad, her name does come up a bit when you mention Copyright so I clicked over to see what she had to say.
Besides the standard, she links to a McCall's email conversation that seems to say one may not use their patterns for anything other than personal use. Amy Butler kindly links to the US Copyright office, so I had to follow.....and I found all kinds of stuff.
One of my pet peeves in general is when people quote sources that are not THE source. Like when somebody presents a fact to support their argument, only to find that support is also just an opinion without factual backing. That's how misinformation and misunderstandings seem to become Truth.
So in this little research project I've made for myself, I've only gathered my information directly from the US Copyright and also Patent Office official web sites and publications. I've added direct links to places I remembered to grab.
*****
Circular 40 from the United States Copyright Office : Copyright Registration for Works of the Visual Arts
Copyright in a work that portrays a useful article extends
only to the artistic expression of the author of the pictorial,
graphic, or sculptural work. It does not extend to the design
of the article that is portrayed. For example, a drawing or
photograph of an automobile or a dress design may be copyrighted,
but that does not give the artist or photographer the
exclusive right to make automobiles or dresses of the same
design.
[my empahsis]
*****
The back of my McCall's pattern bought last years says in part: individual home use only....not for commercial...Honestly, I'm not sure what those statements are because they are not a part of Copyright law.
I found a link to a lawsuit between video game companies - one was mad that the other made something that was used with the first company's product. Their lawsuit was denied and in part the judgement said: a party who distributes a copyrighted work cannot dictate how that work is to be enjoyed.
*****
Circular 31 from the United States Copyright Office : Ideas, Methods or Systems
Section 102 of the Copyright Act (title 17 of the U.S. Code) clearly expresses
this principle: “In no case does copyright protection for an original work of
authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation,
concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described,
explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.”
Inventions are subject matter for patents, not copyrights.
What Is Protected by Copyright
Copyright protection extends to a description, explanation, or illustration of
an idea or system, assuming that the requirements of copyright law are met.
Copyright in such a case protects the particular literary or pictorial expression
chosen by the author. But it gives the copyright owner no exclusive rights in the
idea, method, or system involved.
Suppose, for example, that an author writes a book explaining a new system
for food processing. The copyright in the book, which comes into effect at the
moment the work is fixed in a tangible form, prevents others from copying or
distributing the text and illustrations describing the author’s system. But it will
not give the author any right to prevent others from adapting the system itself
for commercial [my emphasis] or other purposes or from using any procedures, processes, or
methods described in the book.
*****
I was surprised when I found that one. Seems pretty clear-cut.
Another similar example - recipes. There is no copyright violation in using either a mix or published recipe to prepare and sell at a bake sale....in your restaurant...You just can NOT photocopy the page and hand it out to everybody. The copyright office goes as far as telling people they probably DO NOT want to copyright a recipe with a secret ingrediant, as all copyright documents are public and there is nothing that would prevent others from finding and using their ingredent list and methods.
After reading Circular 40, I clicked around the Patent law area for a bit, as it seemed like if you wanted to control the use of objects people made from the thing you have just published directions for you may actually need a Patent instead of a Copyright.
I happened across an online chat they had at their web site:
I often read about people making the claim that there is some kind of licensing that goes along with copyright allowing them to say yes/no to selling a product made from a pattern, and it appears there is not, unless you're talking about music and there's a new, crazy complicated mess!
I found Licensing is linked with Patents - what is normally claimed for Copyright and sewing patterns is found here with Patents.
The last point that seems a bit vague and a tad confusing is "derivative works". Some people claim that sewing an item from a pattern is creating a derivative work and in essence violating copyright law. But I found that for something to be a derivative work it in itself must be copyrightable.
While the US Copyright office gives a nice list of derivative work examples, there isn't anything on the list that is equivalent to using a purchased pattern to make and sell stuff. For now my inference is that it is NOT an infringement or derivative in any way because of their examples in Circulars 40 and 31, a rough similarity to recipes, and finally because I didn't find one instance of case law ruling on use of a pattern. Not that absolutely none exist, but of ALL the millions of patterns and users over time, certainly there would have been at least ONE I could find if it was in fact a valid infringement. Because really, people seem to sue over just about anything.
Holy Cow - did I write enough?! If anybody finds something from the US Copyright office or case law that is different than what I have here, please share.
As a commenter mentioned, a huge thing about all the brouhaha that crops up about copyright in the craft world may just be the not knowing, misunderstanding, misinformation. Because if one goes into it knowing that a published pattern = possibility of items made from said pattern could be produced and sold by another, perhaps the author would prefer not to publish and sell the finished objects themselves. Or, like I said, the author can go into it knowing that if somebody DOES choose to create and sell from their pattern, they can feel the pride of knowing their ideas are loved and benefit from selling to those who are eager to make use of them.
.
And now I babble on and on about it because I research stuff - I always just have to know. I found a bunch and I'll share it here if you're interested. But you'll be glad to know that after this, I am researched and blog posted-out on the topic!
Just for my own information, I googled copyright-sewing-selling, something like that, and of course came up with a boatload of links. One of the top few was to Amy Butler's page. For good or bad, her name does come up a bit when you mention Copyright so I clicked over to see what she had to say.
Besides the standard, she links to a McCall's email conversation that seems to say one may not use their patterns for anything other than personal use. Amy Butler kindly links to the US Copyright office, so I had to follow.....and I found all kinds of stuff.
One of my pet peeves in general is when people quote sources that are not THE source. Like when somebody presents a fact to support their argument, only to find that support is also just an opinion without factual backing. That's how misinformation and misunderstandings seem to become Truth.
So in this little research project I've made for myself, I've only gathered my information directly from the US Copyright and also Patent Office official web sites and publications. I've added direct links to places I remembered to grab.
"A copyright protects the form of expression rather than the subject matter of the writing. For example, a description of a machine could be copyrighted, but this would only prevent others from copying the description; it would not prevent others from writing a description of their own or from producing their own machine."I thought that was pretty interesting, as it seems to be very similar to the concept of a published pattern. So then I came across a series of PDFs, and this one had another good example as I tried to figure out what the rules really are.
*****
Circular 40 from the United States Copyright Office : Copyright Registration for Works of the Visual Arts
Copyright in a work that portrays a useful article extends
only to the artistic expression of the author of the pictorial,
graphic, or sculptural work. It does not extend to the design
of the article that is portrayed. For example, a drawing or
photograph of an automobile or a dress design may be copyrighted,
but that does not give the artist or photographer the
exclusive right to make automobiles or dresses of the same
design.
[my empahsis]
*****
The back of my McCall's pattern bought last years says in part: individual home use only....not for commercial...Honestly, I'm not sure what those statements are because they are not a part of Copyright law.
I found a link to a lawsuit between video game companies - one was mad that the other made something that was used with the first company's product. Their lawsuit was denied and in part the judgement said: a party who distributes a copyrighted work cannot dictate how that work is to be enjoyed.
*****
Circular 31 from the United States Copyright Office : Ideas, Methods or Systems
Section 102 of the Copyright Act (title 17 of the U.S. Code) clearly expresses
this principle: “In no case does copyright protection for an original work of
authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation,
concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described,
explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.”
Inventions are subject matter for patents, not copyrights.
What Is Protected by Copyright
Copyright protection extends to a description, explanation, or illustration of
an idea or system, assuming that the requirements of copyright law are met.
Copyright in such a case protects the particular literary or pictorial expression
chosen by the author. But it gives the copyright owner no exclusive rights in the
idea, method, or system involved.
Suppose, for example, that an author writes a book explaining a new system
for food processing. The copyright in the book, which comes into effect at the
moment the work is fixed in a tangible form, prevents others from copying or
distributing the text and illustrations describing the author’s system. But it will
not give the author any right to prevent others from adapting the system itself
for commercial [my emphasis] or other purposes or from using any procedures, processes, or
methods described in the book.
*****
I was surprised when I found that one. Seems pretty clear-cut.
Another similar example - recipes. There is no copyright violation in using either a mix or published recipe to prepare and sell at a bake sale....in your restaurant...You just can NOT photocopy the page and hand it out to everybody. The copyright office goes as far as telling people they probably DO NOT want to copyright a recipe with a secret ingrediant, as all copyright documents are public and there is nothing that would prevent others from finding and using their ingredent list and methods.
After reading Circular 40, I clicked around the Patent law area for a bit, as it seemed like if you wanted to control the use of objects people made from the thing you have just published directions for you may actually need a Patent instead of a Copyright.
I happened across an online chat they had at their web site:
....Monica 2: Is it possible to patent the design of an article of clothing? I am referring to the sewing pattern, not any graphic pattern on the cloth itself.Didn't bother to look into what all that would entail to be nonobvious - but did see that Patents cost big money and it seems like a waste of time and funds relative to what we're dealing with. But from the same area of the web I found this interesting answer:
Expert 50: Yes, it is possible to obtain a patent for the sewing pattern for an article of clothing as long it is meets the standards of being new, useful and nonobvious.
Copyright vs. Patent
Copyright vs. Patent If one develops an unusual book format /structure with the intent to display a specific kind of information (e.g. the structure makes learning celestial navigation easier), does one protect that using copyright (as 3-dimensional art) or as a patent (as a useful item)?
The answer to your question depends on how you want to protect your invention. If you want to protect unauthorized publication of your book, then a copyright may be sufficient, http://www.copyright.gov/ If you want to protect the ornamental features of the product, then a design patent may be the best choice. Lastly, if you want to protect the use or the products utility, then a utility patent would give you the best coverage. For example, if your product is an educational device, then your product may be eligible for a utility patent. Often, more than one type of intellectual property protection (i.e. a combination of copyright, trademarks and/or patents) may yield the best coverage for your product. You should seek legal advice to see which intellectual property protection is most appropriate for your invention.
I often read about people making the claim that there is some kind of licensing that goes along with copyright allowing them to say yes/no to selling a product made from a pattern, and it appears there is not, unless you're talking about music and there's a new, crazy complicated mess!
I found Licensing is linked with Patents - what is normally claimed for Copyright and sewing patterns is found here with Patents.
Patent: re LicensingClicking away, I came across official court summaries by judges in some copyright cases. Even a couple quilt related ones - but all that I found dealt with somebody copying a quilt or other item exactly and without any connection to a published pattern. And interestingly, those cases didn't side with plaintiffs much, if at all.
Infringement of a patent consists of the unauthorized making, using, offering for sale, or selling any patented invention within the United States or U.S. Territories, or importing into the United States of any patented invention during the term of the patent.
The owner of a patent may grant licenses to others. Since the patentee has the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, or selling or importing the invention, no one else may do any of these things without his/her permission.
A patent license agreement is in essence nothing more than a promise by the licensor not to sue the licensee. No particular form of license is required; a license is a contract and may include whatever provisions the parties agree upon, including the payment of royalties, etc.
The drawing up of a license agreement (as well as assignments) is within the field of an attorney at law. Such attorney should be familiar with patent matters as well. A few States have prescribed certain formalities to be observed in connection with the sale of patent rights.
The last point that seems a bit vague and a tad confusing is "derivative works". Some people claim that sewing an item from a pattern is creating a derivative work and in essence violating copyright law. But I found that for something to be a derivative work it in itself must be copyrightable.
While the US Copyright office gives a nice list of derivative work examples, there isn't anything on the list that is equivalent to using a purchased pattern to make and sell stuff. For now my inference is that it is NOT an infringement or derivative in any way because of their examples in Circulars 40 and 31, a rough similarity to recipes, and finally because I didn't find one instance of case law ruling on use of a pattern. Not that absolutely none exist, but of ALL the millions of patterns and users over time, certainly there would have been at least ONE I could find if it was in fact a valid infringement. Because really, people seem to sue over just about anything.
Holy Cow - did I write enough?! If anybody finds something from the US Copyright office or case law that is different than what I have here, please share.
As a commenter mentioned, a huge thing about all the brouhaha that crops up about copyright in the craft world may just be the not knowing, misunderstanding, misinformation. Because if one goes into it knowing that a published pattern = possibility of items made from said pattern could be produced and sold by another, perhaps the author would prefer not to publish and sell the finished objects themselves. Or, like I said, the author can go into it knowing that if somebody DOES choose to create and sell from their pattern, they can feel the pride of knowing their ideas are loved and benefit from selling to those who are eager to make use of them.
 | ||
| me! In my first real life published book - it just arrived today and I can hardly stand it! |
.
Friday, October 14, 2011
The Copyright can o' worms
Worms (and some recent bee blocks if you're not fond of worms)
Not just that it can get controversial and contentious, but it truly is all crazy and interwoven with creativity/generosity/respect on so many levels. And sometimes it helps just to hear what everybody is thinking.
Come, sit in my parlor for a lively discussion.
My first level response is that there is not much of a legal ground for people to stand on if they want to tell others what they can do with items sewn/knit/crafted based on their published patterns. I know people go round and round with this and I have read a good bit of the copyright laws for myself (I'm obsessive like that - read the whole New Testament one day beginning to end as I looked for a quote for my lecture). Based on that, my view is if you publish a pattern - the person who purchases and uses that pattern to then make something is able to do whatever they like with their creation, be it keep/gift/sell.
People may NOT may photocopies/digital files/etc of the actual pattern to sell or even give away. It isn't theirs to give. But the thing they have crafted with their hands, based on the pattern, IS.
I believe the more reasonable request is similar to what Keyka Lou asks - just that you credit her with the design when you sell things made from her patterns. No special permissions needed. Because legally, they can sell them anyway.
Now all crafters would be super grumpy if say Target picked up their published pattern and decided to mass produce it without any compensation. That's quite different in my mind. But where is the line between these two?
What if I had a crafty family and my 7 sisters (and even a brother) were set to task creating 30 of those same items from a published pattern for an etsy shop. Getting kind of fuzzy.....and I think that is just one small aspect of the copyright conundrum!
I love this comment from my last post: Techniques belong to us all....the rest is complicated.
That actually ties in with the question I asked about what books or patterns you purchase. Because as I mentioned, with some paper and a pencil I'm able to reverse engineer lots of stuff. That's just how my brain works.
For myself, I generally pay for a pattern if: a) I truly have no idea how to make said item b) I believe the instructions included will have a unique technique or construction method that could save time or improve end result c) Greatly admire the author's work and just want to support their efforts even though I could reverse engineer the pattern.
So a couple examples from stuff I've bought. I think Allison from Cluck Cluck Sew is awesome! She has shared so many great tutorials, I especially liked using her double hourglass block instructions. Be sure to give that one a try if you haven't already. I totally relate to her mind keeping her up - knowing that there HAD to be a better way to make those things!
When she showed her fun Chain Reaction quilt and pattern, it was quickly added to my to-make list. With graph paper I could draft a plan myself without buying her pattern. But I DID buy her pattern - because I had already used many of her great tutorials and felt like it was a small way for me to support another crafty mom.
At the same time she had an Irish chain pattern that I don't see now - a very old block that you can find online or make easily without formal instructions. But after using Allison's tutorials and reading her Chain Reaction pattern, I also bought the Irish Chain pattern knowing that she would have some key tips inside making it way more easy to assemble than traditionally.
That's enough for now. I would love to here what you think.
.
Not just that it can get controversial and contentious, but it truly is all crazy and interwoven with creativity/generosity/respect on so many levels. And sometimes it helps just to hear what everybody is thinking.
Come, sit in my parlor for a lively discussion.
My first level response is that there is not much of a legal ground for people to stand on if they want to tell others what they can do with items sewn/knit/crafted based on their published patterns. I know people go round and round with this and I have read a good bit of the copyright laws for myself (I'm obsessive like that - read the whole New Testament one day beginning to end as I looked for a quote for my lecture). Based on that, my view is if you publish a pattern - the person who purchases and uses that pattern to then make something is able to do whatever they like with their creation, be it keep/gift/sell.
People may NOT may photocopies/digital files/etc of the actual pattern to sell or even give away. It isn't theirs to give. But the thing they have crafted with their hands, based on the pattern, IS.
I believe the more reasonable request is similar to what Keyka Lou asks - just that you credit her with the design when you sell things made from her patterns. No special permissions needed. Because legally, they can sell them anyway.
Now all crafters would be super grumpy if say Target picked up their published pattern and decided to mass produce it without any compensation. That's quite different in my mind. But where is the line between these two?
What if I had a crafty family and my 7 sisters (and even a brother) were set to task creating 30 of those same items from a published pattern for an etsy shop. Getting kind of fuzzy.....and I think that is just one small aspect of the copyright conundrum!
I love this comment from my last post: Techniques belong to us all....the rest is complicated.
That actually ties in with the question I asked about what books or patterns you purchase. Because as I mentioned, with some paper and a pencil I'm able to reverse engineer lots of stuff. That's just how my brain works.
For myself, I generally pay for a pattern if: a) I truly have no idea how to make said item b) I believe the instructions included will have a unique technique or construction method that could save time or improve end result c) Greatly admire the author's work and just want to support their efforts even though I could reverse engineer the pattern.
So a couple examples from stuff I've bought. I think Allison from Cluck Cluck Sew is awesome! She has shared so many great tutorials, I especially liked using her double hourglass block instructions. Be sure to give that one a try if you haven't already. I totally relate to her mind keeping her up - knowing that there HAD to be a better way to make those things!
When she showed her fun Chain Reaction quilt and pattern, it was quickly added to my to-make list. With graph paper I could draft a plan myself without buying her pattern. But I DID buy her pattern - because I had already used many of her great tutorials and felt like it was a small way for me to support another crafty mom.
At the same time she had an Irish chain pattern that I don't see now - a very old block that you can find online or make easily without formal instructions. But after using Allison's tutorials and reading her Chain Reaction pattern, I also bought the Irish Chain pattern knowing that she would have some key tips inside making it way more easy to assemble than traditionally.
That's enough for now. I would love to here what you think.
.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Boo!
The Bubble and Brew is serving up Pumpkin Lattes if you are craving one.
One more bit of handwork I've had going. It's one of Crabapple Hill's very fun embroidery patterns. I love so many of their creations!
I also just found this - starts October 24th!
I have a good amount of the creepy family with a plan to make a Halloween quilt for myself. Can't wait to see what everybody else comes up with for them!
Now a topic that is a bit frightening and goes with the Boo! Or perhaps it's just me that is a bit frightening as I rant for a moment.
Copyright
dun - dun - DUUUUUUUNNNNNNNN
For sure a contentious topic among any crafting community. But what brings on my rant is a book that the UPS guy just thunked onto my stoop a half hour ago. Always eager to look at MORE quit inspiration (hence the mile long Google Reader subscription list) I dove into the pages as soon as I could depackage the book.
cute - cute - oooh, cool - seen it - seen it - cool - just a square, huh - cathedral windows (did my own bake shop tutorial on that one) - whoa, amazing curved piecing - oops, the editor missed that mislabel - that would make an amazing quilt all on it's own
At first annoyed by stuff that I have seen a ton of times before, then thinking how not everybody surfs quilt blogs and flicker with their morning oatmeal, I was ok with finding super simple squares and even the wonderfully old cathedral window pattern looking new and modern. It may be the first time a new, modern quilter has seen some of them.
Then the title page caught my eye opposite the index (which I LOVE by the way - little pictures by every entry). And what does the copyright statement say? Your standard crafter's : "These designs may be used to make items only for personal use or donation to nonprofit groups for sale or for display only at events, provided the following credit is included on a conspicuous label:....." I could see applying this rule very literally to several wonderfully unique items in this book, and not remotely in any context to others.
In no way to I have a suggested solution to the whole creative property issue. But I just had to rant a little bit about it today. Thoughts?
Gotta run. I'm off to DQ really quickly to use a free Blizzard coupon before the kids get home. Ha!
One more bit of handwork I've had going. It's one of Crabapple Hill's very fun embroidery patterns. I love so many of their creations!
I also just found this - starts October 24th!
I have a good amount of the creepy family with a plan to make a Halloween quilt for myself. Can't wait to see what everybody else comes up with for them!
Now a topic that is a bit frightening and goes with the Boo! Or perhaps it's just me that is a bit frightening as I rant for a moment.
Copyright
dun - dun - DUUUUUUUNNNNNNNN
For sure a contentious topic among any crafting community. But what brings on my rant is a book that the UPS guy just thunked onto my stoop a half hour ago. Always eager to look at MORE quit inspiration (hence the mile long Google Reader subscription list) I dove into the pages as soon as I could depackage the book.
cute - cute - oooh, cool - seen it - seen it - cool - just a square, huh - cathedral windows (did my own bake shop tutorial on that one) - whoa, amazing curved piecing - oops, the editor missed that mislabel - that would make an amazing quilt all on it's own
At first annoyed by stuff that I have seen a ton of times before, then thinking how not everybody surfs quilt blogs and flicker with their morning oatmeal, I was ok with finding super simple squares and even the wonderfully old cathedral window pattern looking new and modern. It may be the first time a new, modern quilter has seen some of them.
Then the title page caught my eye opposite the index (which I LOVE by the way - little pictures by every entry). And what does the copyright statement say? Your standard crafter's : "These designs may be used to make items only for personal use or donation to nonprofit groups for sale or for display only at events, provided the following credit is included on a conspicuous label:....." I could see applying this rule very literally to several wonderfully unique items in this book, and not remotely in any context to others.
In no way to I have a suggested solution to the whole creative property issue. But I just had to rant a little bit about it today. Thoughts?
Gotta run. I'm off to DQ really quickly to use a free Blizzard coupon before the kids get home. Ha!
Monday, August 15, 2011
OP {Docksiders} Acid wash?!
It must be all the family reunion stuff I did a week ago. As I was falling asleep OP popped into my head last night.
 |
| Super old - very Cute playground |
OP - Docksiders - Izod
{Had to have it all}
Everything else was Like Grody, Gag me with a Spoon. Fer Sure, early 80's in south Florida, Wellington. We were seriously it, at the pool - tennis club - polo field.
Totally.....right!
 |
| Kenton went all the way to the top! It is WAY high. Ski jump in Iron Mountain. |
Late 80's - moved north to Chicagoland.
Benetton sweaters huge. Acid Wash jeans high waisted and tiny tapers.
Choose from Tiffany or Poison.
 |
| Gram and Great Aunty LouLou |
I googled OP for the fun of it and find that it is exclusively now at WalMart(!) and I think I'm thankful that not too many photos are around of those late 80's high school years.
I did finish a little stack of toddler sized quilts.
More to share as school finally starts up again!
(Only about 45 hours away. Not like I'm counting down or anything)
.
Sunday, August 07, 2011
Argument of the Day
The Sun is a Star.
So does it follow that any star is a sun?
I am so glad we're home now and can banish the boys to three separate floors for a while. Because even once you find the answer online they can argue the finer points and semantics for a Very. Long. Time.
The Iron Mountain A&W is the best!
.
So does it follow that any star is a sun?
I am so glad we're home now and can banish the boys to three separate floors for a while. Because even once you find the answer online they can argue the finer points and semantics for a Very. Long. Time.
The Iron Mountain A&W is the best!
.
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Spray Baste It Baby!
First, thank you for all the kind words for Portia. She certainly wasn't running around the house and barking, but the house is strangely quite now that she is gone.
That's saying something, as there are still three boys in the house that are getting to the end of summer vacation and will argue about ANYTHING. Which muscle is the strongest (tongue or heart), if you put dry ice on your arm would it freeze your skin from the outside or burn you from the inside, and would you classify Black Jack as a type of poker or is it a game unto itself. All earth shattering topics - debated endlessly - with no resolution even with internet found facts. I think that dry ice thing has been going on for at least a week and a half now.
We did have some fun Tuesday watching Becket try out the high dive, though. And finish up swim lessons.
I have a couple quilts ready for binding as we travel, and I was super excited with trying all kinds of new stuff on them. For the batting I actually used up some scraps by joining two pieces. It worked so well!
And I think I have ditched the pins forever. All the cool kids are using spray baste, I had some stashed away that was bought with a JoAnn's coupon, and finally decided to give it a try.
LOVED it. Not a single pucker, which was my biggest worry. And it didn't seem too messy.
I hate the whole basting process, which is probably why I have so many tops just waiting to be quilted. This took so much less time and I loved not having to unpin while stippling. I also ordered some 505 that just arrived. I'll try it next and compare!
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Sweet Portia
She chose us when Kenton was only 8 months old. She nibbled on Caleb's and Mark's ears.
She has been the sweetest girl. So sad to say goodbye.
Blue nails for the blue mood.
.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Keurig Iced Tea and Iced Coffee
Desert Diva left a comment about the Iced Coffee with my Keurig and I couldn't reply to her. So I thought I would just do a quick post about my Iced Tea and Coffee on the machine.
Keurig recently started making KCups for Iced Tea and Iced Coffee, which sounded like an awesome idea. But you can use ANY of the KCups and not just the special ones. In fact, the most fabulous Iced Tea is made using the English Black Breakfast Tea. We're big sun tea drinkers, and both my mom and I agree that this is some of the best iced tea ever. Plus you can get a huge box of that KCup from Costco - shipped to your door free no less. Bonus!
For iced coffee, I've tried a bunch of different flavors. One of my favorites is the Green Mountain french vanilla. (although not as good as my last post's recipe)
Fill a LARGE cup to the top with ice. I'm talking at least a 20oz size, or else you may have an overflow. Then run a large into the ice cup and stir well. A good amount of the ice will melt with some remaining. Ready to drink right away!
If I have the machine on in the morning and know I'll want something in the afternoon, sometimes I'll run my tea or coffee into a cup without the ice and just put it into the fridge. Then it's a bit stronger when you drink it later since you won't have as much melting ice. I like my coffee and tea fairly strong, and the strength is just fine for me either way.
Oh, and my most favorite creamer is Coffee Mate's Italian Sweet Cream. I don't use any sugar, and this has just the right amount of sweetness. I can find the large size containers at Target - I need it since those 63 servings only last me a little more than a week :) I like my creamer.
Heaven in 100deg Chicago Heat
Thanks Crystal for making me do it.
So glad I'm a good listener.
I actually have a Keurig that makes awesome iced coffee in 30 seconds - this is about 1 million times tastier. Just the smell when you go to pour off the coffee from the grounds the next morning is worth it!
Seriously, go do it.
I actually have a Keurig that makes awesome iced coffee in 30 seconds - this is about 1 million times tastier. Just the smell when you go to pour off the coffee from the grounds the next morning is worth it!
Seriously, go do it.
Monday, July 18, 2011
Becket just cuts to It
During dinner, the conversation happened to end up at species differentiation.
Caleb, the 14 year old, went into a big demonstration of the importance of opposable thumbs. And then he said:
Caleb: "So thumbs are one of the most important parts of the body."
Becket: "No they aren't. The soul is."
That pretty much ended it.
Caleb, the 14 year old, went into a big demonstration of the importance of opposable thumbs. And then he said:
Caleb: "So thumbs are one of the most important parts of the body."
Becket: "No they aren't. The soul is."
That pretty much ended it.
Trader Joe's love
I just found this in the new product section at Trader Joe's.
Seriously, how could my life not be better with this! One ice cream, in coffee, on buttered toast like cinnamon sugar....
Not to mention that I love their typeface.
It must be awesome to work for Trader Joe's packaging design and product development.
Monday, May 23, 2011
It's hard to get stuff done sometimes....
I think I'll probably just clear out my unread Reader blogs in the next few days. So if I haven't stopped by, forgive me. I'll come by later after I zero it out.
It has been a tad weird the last little bit.
I'm on Facebook and generally use it to stalk my family and a couple friends. Every so often trying to find an old classmate or two. A few weeks ago (all I can call it is obsessed I suppose) I was strangely determined to find an old High School boyfriend. Wasn't sure why I was looking and I just HAD to search, but it was REALLY hard to locate him and it took the better part of a day with no real luck. Possibly found his home nearby, but not sure.... The other day he popped back into my mind again for no obvious reason, while I was sitting at the computer, so in his name and city went into goggle.
The first three returns were his obituary.
Having died suddenly, a little more than a week before.
It has all kind of freaked me out on a couple levels. First off, I'm none too pleased with the turning 40 thing and getting old, but we are not old enough to have our peers die yet!
But even more so, why was I suddenly urged to track him down about a week before he died? Was I supposed to call him.....Yikes, it's been over 20 years since I last saw him. Hi, remember me from a lifetime ago? Just calling for no apparent reason. How's it going.
His mom and dad still live in the same house and now I really want to talk to them. Calling THEM would be super strange. A condolence card I suppose? They did a nice job with the obituary though - really made me want to hear more about what he has been up to the last 20 years. There are 24 pictures posted with it, too. The boy in the senior picture is the one I remember (I gave him that crazy pleather-shouldered sweater for Christmas. Late 80's, what can I say. We dated jr and sr year of high school.)
Yep, weird. I hate weird. And people I know dieing (knock on wood, I'm lucky that I've only ever lost a couple people). And it's hard to do other stuff when your brain is trying to make sense of it. In this age of instant and 24/7, never is seriously weird.
Rapture would have been easier.
11:11 Drew
It has been a tad weird the last little bit.
I'm on Facebook and generally use it to stalk my family and a couple friends. Every so often trying to find an old classmate or two. A few weeks ago (all I can call it is obsessed I suppose) I was strangely determined to find an old High School boyfriend. Wasn't sure why I was looking and I just HAD to search, but it was REALLY hard to locate him and it took the better part of a day with no real luck. Possibly found his home nearby, but not sure.... The other day he popped back into my mind again for no obvious reason, while I was sitting at the computer, so in his name and city went into goggle.
The first three returns were his obituary.
Having died suddenly, a little more than a week before.
It has all kind of freaked me out on a couple levels. First off, I'm none too pleased with the turning 40 thing and getting old, but we are not old enough to have our peers die yet!
But even more so, why was I suddenly urged to track him down about a week before he died? Was I supposed to call him.....Yikes, it's been over 20 years since I last saw him. Hi, remember me from a lifetime ago? Just calling for no apparent reason. How's it going.
His mom and dad still live in the same house and now I really want to talk to them. Calling THEM would be super strange. A condolence card I suppose? They did a nice job with the obituary though - really made me want to hear more about what he has been up to the last 20 years. There are 24 pictures posted with it, too. The boy in the senior picture is the one I remember (I gave him that crazy pleather-shouldered sweater for Christmas. Late 80's, what can I say. We dated jr and sr year of high school.)
Yep, weird. I hate weird. And people I know dieing (knock on wood, I'm lucky that I've only ever lost a couple people). And it's hard to do other stuff when your brain is trying to make sense of it. In this age of instant and 24/7, never is seriously weird.
Rapture would have been easier.
11:11 Drew
Saturday, April 09, 2011
Sunday, March 27, 2011
Blog Helper Outtakes
It had been horribly gloomy, wet and cold here - it's finally sunny (huzzah!) but at 35deg and flurries, not exactly prime spring break weather.
The last couple weeks trying to get good pictures of my finished Hobson quilts was tricky so I hoped to catch as much light as I could inside our sunroom.
Unfortunately I had to deal with both a zombie and giant invasion (the lego dudes without heads are zombies, playmobile dudes without hair are giants). The strange result of a 5yr old hanging out with the teen brothers.
You can see I was permitted only that little back corner.
I left the quilt and camera for a bit to find another good spot and quilt holder. Becket decided to take things into his own hands and take the pictures himself. Probably to get my stuff out of his area.
But first a few guys moved in to hide. And he seems to be working on his toes-in-the-picture blog photos.
Monday, February 28, 2011
Chem 101
"One of the first rules of chemistry - always make sure liquid is in the vessel before turning on the heat source." ~ My Dad
Here is the practical lab showing why you don't want to test that lesson.
Kids, do not try this at home.
I was making noodles to go with dinner, wondering why my water was taking so long to boil. Lift the lid and find that I had forgotten to fill the pot with said water. So it has been on the hot burner, dry, for about 10 minutes.
I take the pot off the stove and in about a half second think: Is this a good idea? Pot's metal, not glass.... all the rest of dinner is ready and I don't even have the water in the pot yet....at least turn the water on Hot instead of Cold.....
I hold the very hot pot under the running water and EXPLODE instantly boiling water out the top. Then there's a strange hissing noise in the sink, and find I have blown the layered bottom completely OFF the pan! By some miracle, and with the help of our large, deep sink, I wasn't splashed a bit. My dad said that was a good example of a very violent expansion and contraction.
Enough chemistry for the day I think!
Friday, January 14, 2011
I can See!
I did it without freaking out - no fainting, no hypovetilating.
It's about 9 hours post-procedure and I can see at least as well as with my glasses. Appointment tomorrow 9:20am to get checked out officially.
I'm so happy!
{I went to that appointment this morning, and I'm officially 20/20 at this point and eyes looking healthy! Hopefully my prescription doesn't slip over the new few weeks and I continue to heal well.
Thank you so much for all your well wishes and encouragement!}
{I went to that appointment this morning, and I'm officially 20/20 at this point and eyes looking healthy! Hopefully my prescription doesn't slip over the new few weeks and I continue to heal well.
Thank you so much for all your well wishes and encouragement!}
Here's a cathedral window finished a couple of days ago - testing out methods. I think it will become a pin cushion once a week has passed and I can be around dusty things again.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Under Construction
Not just cathedral window blocks and tutorials....
but me, actually.
Pretty much a total surprise decision - I'm scheduled for Lasik Thursday morning. I've said for years that I was too creeped out by it to do it. I went to a consultation on Thursday, just considering it, and left having picked THE DAY for the 13th. These cathedral window instructions are going to have to wait a bit.
I can think about it without feeling like I'm going to throw up or faint, so I guess I'll go through with the procedure. So many people I know have already done it - recently and 10+ years ago, all very happy. I'm still pretty freaked out, but ready.
To get ready, I've cleaned most of the house. You're not supposed to be in dusty environments for a week or so for the cut to get a good start on healing. Thought cleaning would be better than booking a hotel for a week. Besides, if I go blind or die, and people have to come to my house to help, they can't see it dirty, right?! I'm thinking quilting is going to be in the category of 'dusty'. With all the trimming and stitching, there's always fuzz around my machine area, so I'll try to avoid my projects for 7 days, if I can.
I'm also making a spreadsheet to keep track of the million eye drops. I'll have four different solutions, with something going into my eyes every half hour while awake for a full week, then every hour for a month. Spreadsheets are a good stress reducer.
The need for order is obviously genetic. The pin fairy (Becket) visited my area, arranging my owl just-so. He amazingly found a way to make it all very symmetric!
See you all next week. Hopefully! (yep,a bit nervous)
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
You know you're a blogger....
When you see weeds in your yard - half frozen, half dew covered in the morning - and run to grab the camera.
And you take pictures of happy mail.
(Which seriously cut into my quilting time this past week as I actually READ a couple books. It's been a long time.)
Monday, October 04, 2010
Use my stash year : catch up edition
I've been doing quite well with using my stash. I have had an online cart filled at least three of four times. But I wait a bit and then look over at my cabinet, and decide I don't NEED the new fabrics. Even though I really WANT them!
I've moved from using up some purple to the colors I like best. My greens and blues. I cut a bunch for a scrappy boarder on a baby quilt I'm doing.
Since week 30, when I last reported, I added only 4.75 yards - solids I was really needing. Really.
I've used nearly 11 yards.
Busted (wk 31-40): 10.822
Purchased: 4.75
Net YTD: (13.025) I'm getting closer to zero!
This helps, too - I have defective shingles on my roof and am having to do a full replacement today. UGH. That crane (run by the dude on the left with a remote control- cool!) was unfortunately delivering shingles early Saturday morning. Not fabric.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)