Jump to content
Legba3

ATTENTION all weave inventors

Recommended Posts

I would love to see this Crystal River design you guys are talking about so much if someone could point me in the right direction.

Scroll up.

Black Widow's first post, both designs, comparison.

Enh.. I'll make it easier:

The original:

FL202.jpg

The contentious clone:

M_Byz_Crystal_River.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tis a VERY pretty design too

(sitting on the sidelines and reading with interest here)

Sheesh too slow... too much mindless TV watching :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually don't want royalties or money (although I think BW is entitled). All I want is credit for my weave which they are using with the name I gave it. Is that really so much to ask for? They credit others why not me (and BW and probably others too).

They did not make any effort to contact me (regardless of what they told you Cynake). They even admitted they saw my submission on M.A.I.L and my email is there for anyone to see in my profile.

They have replied to the email I sent them. The tone was sharp and they imply that they will not give me credit.

I may not be able to anything about this through the law (BW you could) but I do intend to make trouble.

Ethically it stinks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is the internet. By posting something on the internet you automatically agree to and lose all implied privacy, individuality, and profitability rights. Unless you filled out and submitted a copyright or patent form you have no position to request anything.

All someone else has to do is prove prior art on said weaves and thus disqualify all your claims. And all that takes is to make a small piece themselves and say they did it first. Unless you have hard official proof you were first (filed copyright form) you really cant ask for anything. Being the first to post something to MAIL doesnt mean you were the first to come up with it. How many posts happen on this forum of people "inventing" a weave on their own with no outside help, only to be told its been done before.

I have at least 2-3 weaves and designs sitting in my box-o-rings that are not listed on MAIL or any other website. Why? I dont care to have them copied.

The act of posting a weave or tutorial on a website like MAIL is for others to use and copy. You are just pissed they are using it to make money.

And a further point,

just because they have a PDF for sale online doesnt mean its actually selling. A google search for "chainmail tutorials" brings up a lot of free pages, MAIL included.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't invented any weaves, but I have taken existing weaves and added my own twist - much like Black Widow has done with Crystal River. I haven't seen 'my' bracelet anywhere else, but who is to say that someone else hasn't made the exact chain/ bracelet without ever seeing my chain? I find it incredibly difficult to believe that I am the only one who thought of the particular variation of the chain.

In the case of Long Canyon and Black Widow's Crystal River bracelet, it's obvious that the name Crystal River has been stolen. However, I find it hard to believe that Black Widow was the first person to come up with that particular variation, just because we haven't seen it doesn't mean it's not already out there.

For example, I own a 'book', self-published (paperback, spiral bound), copy protected 1976 by a Robert W. McOmber of Midway, Washington that has a number of chain weaves that are all in M.A.I.L.'s weave gallery with someone else's name credited to them. That book also includes a page showing the process of making long twisted wire segments with eyes on either end, that look exactly like Black Widow's components in her "Twisted Collection". Were the weaves and the twisted segments copied? Should Robert McOmber start filing lawsuits because someone recently came up with the same designs he published in a book 30 years ago - which he probably saw in an older book or in a jewelry store or an art show or, or, or...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Long Canyon are now going to give me credit for my weave, that's all I really wanted.

I do think that everyone who has a weave being used by someone else should be given some credit but I realize this isn't always possible.

BW's Crystal River bracelet however is a whole other ball game. I think she has a case here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know for a fact that in regards to the weaves Prairie Gal 'created', she was contacted and her permission was obtained before Long Canyon printed the tutorials.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the case of Long Canyon and Black Widow's Crystal River bracelet, it's obvious that the name Crystal River has been stolen. However, I find it hard to believe that Black Widow was the first person to come up with that particular variation, just because we haven't seen it doesn't mean it's not already out there.

For example, I own a 'book', self-published (paperback, spiral bound), copy protected 1976 by a Robert W. McOmber of Midway, Washington that has a number of chain weaves that are all in M.A.I.L.'s weave gallery with someone else's name credited to them. That book also includes a page showing the process of making long twisted wire segments with eyes on either end, that look exactly like Black Widow's components in her "Twisted Collection". Were the weaves and the twisted segments copied? Should Robert McOmber start filing lawsuits because someone recently came up with the same designs he published in a book 30 years ago - which he probably saw in an older book or in a jewelry store or an art show or, or, or...

The twisted wire segment is obviously not an issue... We even posted a tutorial a while back on how to make the segments.

We know that we will be copied and/or people will get inspired by our designs. And obviously we see it as a compliment.

Were we the first one to create the crystal river??? I don't know but we obviously are the first one who posted the design here many years ago and we are the first one who named that perticular design Crystal river.

Copying one of our design and using the same name is obviously copyright infringement.

She even mentions it (taken from her site) : I saw a similar design on Ess in Chains that she calls Crystal River. I like that name so decided to use it for this post.

We are more than willing to make an arrangement with long canyon, But also more than willing to take proper steps if we don't come to an agreement.

BW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to bring things back into contention but I feel the need to comment on something here. I know the term copyright is being tossed around left and right. Is it possible that some people are confusing the terms copyright and patent? I know it is possible to get a patent on a weave (or was in the past) as Mead Simon has a patent on the mobius ball. Or did when I was starting to sell chainmail at shows. From what people have been saying re:copyright it sounds like many of them are confusing the properties of copyrights and patents. To clear up potential confusion:

copyright: the exclusive legal right to reproduce, publish, sell, or distribute the matter and form of something (as a literary, musical, or artistic work)

patent: 2 a: a writing securing for a term of years the exclusive right to make, use, or sell an invention

From the sound of things in this thread, the two have been confused a few times.

TML

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand your point in the case of Long Canyon especially considering her text and using your name, but what if I had made that same bracelet?

I am a rather infrequent visitor to this forum, before today I had never seen your Crystal River bracelet - what if I thought it was my design and started selling tutorials named Byzantine variation with beads? Would you, could you come after me?

My point - unless it's a totally new chain weave, claiming a variation as one's own seems a little iffy to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First - I've only "scanned" the long posts in this thread, so I apologize if I am repeating something someone else has already posted.

Several months ago, I contacted the U.S. office in charge of copyrights. Here are my question and their reply (which technically relates to jewelry pieces, not the weaves they are made from).

----------------------------------------------

>>> <chainmaillewench@gmail.com> 03/11/07 2:50 PM >>>

Can a jewelry design be copyrighted? If so, what exactly is protected? If someone makes an item of the same basic design, but using different materials or in a different size, is that a violation of the copyright?

-----------------------------------------------

fromCopyright Information <copyinfo@loc.gov>

tochainmaillewench@gmail.com,

dateMar 12, 2007 3:40 PM

Copyright protects any appreciable amount of original artwork in a piece of jewelry. It is the appearance that is protected, not the size or the materials used.

Copyright Office

Library of Congress

101 Independence Ave SE

Washington DC 20559

(202) 707-3000

www.copyright.gov

-----------------------------------------------

So - based on this, just changing ring size, color, or materials doesn't avoid copyright infringement. There would have to be changes to the actual design/method of construction. I have been unable to find any specific rule about how much must be changed (any specific percentage, etc).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand your point in the case of Long Canyon especially considering her text and using your name, but what if I had made that same bracelet?

I am a rather infrequent visitor to this forum, before today I had never seen your Crystal River bracelet - what if I thought it was my design and started selling tutorials named Byzantine variation with beads? Would you, could you come after me?

My point - unless it's a totally new chain weave, claiming a variation as one's own seems a little iffy to me.

I am not a copyright expert but Know a lawyer who is...

Would I come after you... depends on the situation... Would I try to make arrangements firsts, Obviously yes

Lesimony thank you for clarifying this point to everyone

BW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another important point I meant to point out - the jewelry has to have an "appreciable amount of original artwork". So just adding a simple element, like beads, to a style of jewelry that has been around for centuries doesn't give you a copyrightable design.

A few examples (from my point of view, not to be taken as legal advice). If you are the first person to make a 5-row E6n1 bracelet with rubber rings, that's not an original design. Just adding the rubber rings is not enough.

If you are the first person to make a 3-row E6n1 bracelet with beaded elfweave edges, that might qualify.

If you make a fancy choker combining different materials and more than one weave in an elaborate design, that should qualify.

NOTE - This post isn't meant to refer to items posted about by any member of this forum, just generic examples to help clarify the issue in the United States. The rules may vary in other countries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand your point in the case of Long Canyon especially considering her text and using your name, but what if I had made that same bracelet?

I am a rather infrequent visitor to this forum, before today I had never seen your Crystal River bracelet - what if I thought it was my design and started selling tutorials named Byzantine variation with beads? Would you, could you come after me?

My point - unless it's a totally new chain weave, claiming a variation as one's own seems a little iffy to me.

I *believe* you'd have to prove you didn't see it on their website. It's been on their website for quite some time. Both Ess and BW have a link on their profiles to their website. We are all members of the forum. It would stand to reason that you saw something of theirs in the gallery, or out of simple curiosity and boredom you were surfing, and followed the link to their site and saw Crystal River, or one of the other design (i.e. Bone Collection, or Twisted Mind). You'd be hard pressed to prove that you came up with it on your own.

Ess and BW don't claim the twisted wire segments as their "original" design, however, the Spiderweb necklace which uses the segments, is original. Ess and BW aren't claiming they invented the weaves, or the wire segments. But the designs are CLEARLY original.

This is really a sore spot with me. I've SEEN Ess's sketch book. My jaw was hanging and I was completely blown away by the work and detail in their ideas (Ess and BW work together to come up with those designs.)

Anyone who has seen the creativity and hard work they have put into perfecting their designs wouldn't be so quick to jump in and say "anyone can come up with that".

LL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ess and BW don't claim the twisted wire segments as their "original" design, however, the Spiderweb necklace which uses the segments, is original. Ess and BW aren't claiming they invented the weaves, or the wire segments. But the designs are CLEARLY original.

I totally agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand what you're saying, but legally it's not up to me to prove what I have or haven't seen - it's up to whomever filing the complaint to prove I've copied the design (at least in the US).

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the effort and time that goes into jewelry and know first hand how it feels to see a copy of one's work under someone else's name. However, that doesn't change the fact that two or more people independent of each other, can and do come up with pieces that look remarkable alike all the time, especially when working from the same starting point - for this discussion, the Byzantine weave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand what you're saying, but legally it's not up to me to prove what I have or haven't seen - it's up to whomever filing the complaint to prove I've copied the design (at least in the US).

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the effort and time that goes into jewelry and know first hand how it feels to see a copy of one's work under someone else's name. However, that doesn't change the fact that two or more people independent of each other, can and do come up with pieces that look remarkable alike all the time, especially when working from the same starting point - for this discussion, the Byzantine weave.

Loopy, it wouldn't be hard to prove *you* copied it (and I know you didn't, this is just an example for discussion).. As I said above, it's a reasonable assumption because the links to the homepage are on both the profiles and you are all members of the forum. A judge wouldn't need any more proof of that. It's not just a byzantine weave. It also incorporates Saturn beads. It's also three strands staggered. And another feature that you may not have noticed is the beads. Ess and BW use two shades of pink.. this copycat used two shades of blue.. how much more proof does a judge need that this is copied design?

There's also the matter of copying the name.... and the fact that they say they saw something "similar" on Ess's website.. gimme a break!

I know you are saying that it's conceivable that two people could come up with the same design independantly.. and if they had never heard of each other, didn't have internet and lived on opposite sides of the world, I would agree.

But to paraphrase Occam's razor (sometimes spelled Ockham's razor) "All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best."

The simplest solution to this is that "You" followed a link in the forum, saw it on their website, and copied it. Case closed.

LL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a bracelet in FMG catalog and on their site that shows how one bracelet with the same colors, but switched around, can look different. It's in the crystals section of the catalog if you have it. Well that same bracelet was in one of the beading magazines a couple of years ago and it's called Garden Bracelet. The person in the beading magazine claimed it as her own and the person in the FMG catalog claims it as his. I've always wondered about it and how and why FMG did not catch this. I would think that they and their staff would be pretty up to date on beading magazines. This was not a simple stringing design, it's quite intricate. I thought hmm well there is nothing they can do now about the catalog and I had imagined something would have been said, but it is now also on their web site gallery pages and still being claimed by the man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's my understanding from what I've read and what has been said here you can use them to make your own personal design. You cannot copy, sell or teach from it.

So for example a beading store was teaching how to make a bracelet from a design in a magazine. Someone who knew the designer told her and she called the store and told them to stop making the bracelet. Another store was teaching the same bracelet from the same magazine, however they contacted the designer and received her permission. It states in the store and on their flyer, "with permission of xyz".

This has been brought up several times while I've been at the stores. How many different ways can you make the same weave? There are only so many ways and eventually someone is going to come up with the same idea as someone else. (But the one in FMG, I have a hard time with someone coming up with that design twice)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a curious question. While it may be slightly OT, I think it may prove where the biases lay.

For those that believe this is illegal (copyright, patent, theft, whatever) is chainmaille your primary source of income, or at least does it play a major part?

Same question to those that believe this is no big deal.

I think you'll easily see where the line is drawn. Plain and simple, it's business. A business wants to be compensated for it's ideas and creations. That's why patents were created. To grant a business a 'short' period of monopoly on a product to make a profit on it's investment in R&D.

As it's been said before, it's stupid crap like this that make fewer and fewer people post their original work. And for that...it's a crying shame.

Gaanon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×