(Note: The following consists of
the writer's notes during the speaker's presentation, and should not be construed
as legal advice….each case is different. For specific questions and/or
guidance, check with a legal professional.)
Seattle attorney Nancy Stephens emphatically makes a point at her August 8 presentation to CQA members about copyright issues related to art quilts. |
At CQA's
August 8 meeting, Seattle attorney Nancy Stephens, who leads the trademark and
copyright practice at Foster Pepper LLC, provided a fascinating overview of how
these areas of the law may be applied to the realm of art quilting.
"Intellectual
property comprises four areas—patents, trademarks, trade secrets and
copyright," said Stephens, adding that while there's a body of law for
most of these fields, the area of art quilts is different. "The law is
firmly set on patents and trademarks," she said, adding "there's not
much on trade secrets, and when it comes to copyright in relation to art
quilts, it gets vague and muddy." Copyright covers the rights in the expression
of an idea. Searching for cases involving any type of quilting that have been
adjudicated, Stephens found only four or five that touched on our concerns.
Stephens
pointed out that the basis of copyright is that "it protects original works of authorship that are
fixed in tangible form of
expression." This includes works that are literary, musical, dramatic,
pantomime, motion picture, sound recordings, architectural, and—where we artists
come in—pictorial, graphic and sculptural. "Works of a utilitarian
function (clothing, blankets) are excluded from copyright—but if you can
extract some artistic design element, you can copyright it," said Stephens.
So who
determines what is "original work"? "Ultimately, a court of
law," said Stephens. "You would need to prove how you came up with
the design. When it comes to art quilts, you can't copyright the idea or
concept, the method or technique, or a pattern, but you can copyright the
design-- your particular arrangement and placement."
Copyright
gives the owner the right to copy a work, distribute copies, and creative
derivative works. Stephens pointed out that "If you make a derivative work of someone else's copyright work, and want
to apply for copyright for it, you need permission from the original copyright
holder and also need to show what you added to the original." She noted
that anything created before 1923 is considered in the "public
domain" and may be used freely.
Asked
how the "fair use" rules might apply in this case, Stephens said "There's
no 10% or 20% rule!" She advises clients not to rely on Fair Use, although
there are some exceptions to copyright rules in that regard: the court would consider the purpose and
character of the use, the nature of the copyright work, the amount and
substantiality of the portion taken, and effect of the use on the potential
market of the original.
So how
should we go about getting copyright protection for our original work—and why
should we? "You own the copyright for your work simply by creating
it," said Stephens," but to protect it, you need to file Form VA,
which can be found online at www.copyright.gov, to register the
copyright." Because copyright is a federal program, any infringement suit
would be fought in federal court. As to
why file for copyright, Stephens pointed out that filing creates a public
record, and you can't claim damages for anything that occurred before you filed
the copyright certificate. With the advent of the internet, infringement is
becoming an everyday occurrence, and "willful infringement" of
properly registered copyright material can be quite costly to the infringer.
The photo at the left was made into a sculpture, right. The sculptor claimed it was a parody (an exception to copyright), but the court held it was an infringement. |
One of the
key considerations in any suit for copyright infringement is if there is a
pattern of copying. Referring to a particular case, Stephens showed pictures
from two different catalogs of sweaters. The second or "infringing"
catalog displayed two sweaters that were substantially the same design as two
that were pictured in the first catalog; the court decided that infringement had
occurred. In another case a major retailer directly copied, for some T-shirts, some
dog illustrations that a small company had online. In a "David vs.
Goliath" situation, a crowd-funding effort is underway to help the
copyright owner mount a suit against the retailer.
A major retailer created T-shirts (upper right) using artwork of dogs created by a small company. A crowd-funding effort is underway to aid the small company in mounting a suit for infringement. |
So what can be used for art quilts? Stephens
listed the following:
--Public domain material (pre-1923)
--Commercial printed fabric unless possibly when the fabric is subject to copyright protection
--Stamps, stencils, images from magazines…"So long as you 'make it your own,'" cautioned Stephens. "Transformative is a key word. If you are in doubt, seek permission from an earlier rights holder, and keep a paper trail of your efforts," she added.
--You can be "inspired" by the works of others, but it can't be a copy. Your work must be "transformative."
--Public domain material (pre-1923)
--Commercial printed fabric unless possibly when the fabric is subject to copyright protection
--Stamps, stencils, images from magazines…"So long as you 'make it your own,'" cautioned Stephens. "Transformative is a key word. If you are in doubt, seek permission from an earlier rights holder, and keep a paper trail of your efforts," she added.
--You can be "inspired" by the works of others, but it can't be a copy. Your work must be "transformative."
CF Enterprises (right photo) was enjoined from using Thimbleberries' registered design/pattern, left. |
Audience
members asked Stephens about a locally inspired, prize-winning art quilt that
has been widely seen at shows and in publications in recent months:
"Chihuly's Gondola," which was based on one of the displays in the
Chihuly glass garden at Seattle Center. Noting that Chihuly apparently has made
no complaint ("and he would have several more years to do so"),
Stephens pointed out the possible reasons that there would be no case of
infringement here:
--The quilt artist gave Chihuly total credit for the inspiration
--She made only one piece
--She took her own photo of the display, and worked from and modified that photo
--She changed the medium, i.e.to fabrics
--She changed some of the colors
--The quilt artist gave Chihuly total credit for the inspiration
--She made only one piece
--She took her own photo of the display, and worked from and modified that photo
--She changed the medium, i.e.to fabrics
--She changed some of the colors
Wrapping
up her presentation, Stephens gave us the following tips on how to deal with
our own work in relation to potential copyright issues:
1. Be creative (remember "transformative"!)
2. When borrowing, don't highlight the part that makes it special
3. Create a "story" for your work…How/why you came to create it…or "I'm making a commentary on XYZ"
4. Give credit where it's due
5. Use the term "artwork" instead of "quilt," as the latter is so wrapped in history with utilitarian objects
6. Use the © symbol with your work: © First Name Last Name Date
7. Don't mass-produce!
1. Be creative (remember "transformative"!)
2. When borrowing, don't highlight the part that makes it special
3. Create a "story" for your work…How/why you came to create it…or "I'm making a commentary on XYZ"
4. Give credit where it's due
5. Use the term "artwork" instead of "quilt," as the latter is so wrapped in history with utilitarian objects
6. Use the © symbol with your work: © First Name Last Name Date
7. Don't mass-produce!
Great post; thanks for the information! Interesting that the gladiator illustration is how those of us who defend our rights are often perceived: combative! And I particularly appreciate this advice: "5. Use the term "artwork" instead of "quilt," as the latter is so wrapped in history with utilitarian objects." Good advice for all of us!
ReplyDelete