Wednesday, November 22, 2006

So, so busted.

I've got to go bake pies, but I thought I'd check in really quick with my scandalous revelation of last evening.

Remember all the books I bought? One of them was "Celtic Charted Designs" by Co Spinhoven (available at Schoolhouse Press, if you want it, it's very nice.) For the record, it's copyright is 1987. Remember that date.



Imagine my surprise when I recognized a lot of patterns from another book:



That's right. "Celtic Collection" by Alice Starmore. Copyright 1992. As in, AFTER the charted Celtic designs book.

We're not talking 'inspired by', we're talking direct copies. Interesting behavior from someone who made a hobby of suing people right and left for copyright infringement.

Just for the record:
"Ardagh" is chart #42.
"Alba" is chart #123.
The bottom edge of "Ardagh" is almost a direct copy of #196.
"Donegal" is pattern #216.
And the animals in "Erin" are a copy of chart #378 with spots added.

In and of itself, I don't see anything wrong with knitting from these charts. I plan to do it, and I recognized some patterns used by other designers. But they aren't copyright crusaders, either, now, are they?

Very, very interesting.

8 comments:

Maggie said...

Scandelous, you think they at least would have mentioned where the chart came from!

April said...

That's outrageous. May a 1,000 moths invade her home.

I hate it when people do stuff like that.

Will we see The Baby dressed up like a turkey tomorrow?

Sheepish Annie said...

Nice catch!!!

Do you really bake pies??? Mommy Sheep doesn't bake the pies. It's really for the best. I can do it, but I hate it. We buy pies. Like I said: for the best, really.

Have a great Thanksgiving!

Amy Lane said...

Very nice catch...I'm sure there's a technical loophole somewhere (such as, the application itself changes the nature of the copyright) but you're rignt... a copyright crusader should at least give props where they're earned.

Jejune said...

Sheesh, that's pretty low. How similar are the grids? If they're identical, it's an infringement of copyright. If the images have been altered by 30%, then it's deemed to be a new work - at least according to what I was taught as a graphic designer in Australia. Could be different in otehr countries, but it sounds very off to me.

Bells said...

that's just cheap and tacky to do that, really. Highly inappropriate!

Anonymous said...

in my business (newspapers) that's called plagiarism, and it's a career-ending offense.

i suggest forwarding your info to schoolhouse press; let meg swanson decide what -- if anything -- she wishes to do. or, send it to the offender's publisher so if it continues printing her work, it gets greater scrutiny, at least.

a. nonnie mouse

Mary Lynn said...

I linked back to this from the Kaffee Fasset discussion . . . I have the same Celtic Charts from the 1980s. I'll have to dig them out.