07 July 2009 ~ 6 Comments

IAPM66: Pirates and Designers

In this Episode my friend Jen shares some insite into the Design Copyright discussion. Jen also posted more about it here.

I would love to hear you thoughts on this issue.

Sadly, this show is very short. I am having a hard time finding my voice as I switch from an older computer setup to a new one. Still trying to get comfortable with new computer/mic. I think I will be back in full swing again by the end of the summer.

ADDED:

Oh yeah… I have started to play promos for other knitting podcasts again. This week I played one for KnitScape.

6 Responses to “IAPM66: Pirates and Designers”

  1. Jadielady 8 July 2009 at 7:56 am Permalink

    I haven’t listened yet, but I think its a very interesting topic. A lot of people who would never consider themselves thieves or pirates will print off a copy of a pattern for a friend or family member without a second thought.
    I think especially with web-based patterns a lot of the issue is some knitters aren’t as web savvy and so they don’t realize that even if its a free pattern, the reason its free is because the designer is getting ad revenue for when you click onto their site, and by printing off 5 copies of that pattern for your knit night friends, you’re still stealing.

  2. Jen 8 July 2009 at 10:24 am Permalink

    Thanks Guido for helping to spread the word about this issue! It was a lot of fun recording this with you and hopefully people get something out of listening to it.

  3. RedQueen 13 July 2009 at 2:40 pm Permalink

    Hey, Guido (and Jen!) — thanks for this interview. I work in the fashion industry, and it was appalling to hear that Diane von F. was leading the charge for this. Although I have never been a fan of her style, I have always respected her work as a designer. To hear that she is being so short-sighted as to push this issue is amazing. I played this show for everyone at work, and it sparked a flurry of iPhone lookups into the issue. The far-reaching consequences of this being passed are staggering. In a worst-case scenario, etsy would be eliminated, all the pattern houses (Butterick, Simplicity, McCalls, etc.) would be shut down, and local craft fairs would become illegal.

    More likely, what would happen is that the law would be passed, and within two years, every member of the fashion industry would be lobbying to have it repealed. It would effectively shut down innovation of design. Any fashion house would only be able to use the elements of their first season when the law went into effect, as everyone would immediately patent their current line. And grab any historical patterns they could to add them to their catalogue. I am disappointed in Diane v.F. for being so stupid.

  4. Jen 3 August 2009 at 11:35 pm Permalink

    Found another great link for this, via the AAFA, who unlike the CFDA, is opposed to this legislation for the very reasons RedQueen notes:

    http://www.apparelandfootwear.org/LegislativeTradeNews/details.asp?PUBLICATIONS_ID=339

    “More likely, what would happen is that the law would be passed, and within two years, every member of the fashion industry would be lobbying to have it repealed.”

    Well, exactly. Although, I worry that instead of that, it would be more like the CPSIA, where it would lead to design and, more importantly, manufacturing monopolies.

    I am really interested, in a train-wreck rubbernecking sort of way, to see how this goes. In the meantime, I a still trying to sprad the word so that perhaps it will simply not go altogether.

  5. Jen 12 August 2010 at 8:02 am Permalink

    Aug 2010 update on this bill:

    So the original bill stagnated and obviously did not go through. Then, like a phoenix from the ashes, it rose, re-written by Sen. Schumer, as the Innovative Design Protection and Piracy Prevention Act. Cathy Horyn has a blog post about it here:

    http://runway.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/05/schumer-bill-seeks-to-protect-fashion-design/

    It looks promising so far, I am really happy that they are still trying to address this (because I’m a designer) but that they also zoomed in on the most troubling version of the previous bill (the broadness) and corrected it (because I’m also a crafter and consumer).

    I shared more of my opinions on this at my blog too:

    http://aloosegarment.wordpress.com/2010/08/12/protection-for…signs-improves/

  6. Benny 21 September 2010 at 3:23 am Permalink

    allergy is evil… I just wanna go and can buy :(


Leave a Reply