Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[tabberone]

I believe the ISP settled their portion.

The problem of course with class actions is that you have to get everyone to agree.

It's dragging out and I think the information that I have I'm not supposed to say since Derek (monsterpatterns) told me unofficial stuff.

But on the face of it - shutting down a website for selling the patterns?  First Sale Doctrine.  Misrepresentation under 17 U.S.C 512(f).

I would hope that Congress never intended for the DMCA to be abused as badly as it is being abused.

I've been shut down on eBay for re-selling items I purchased in the store!  In order to shut me down the rights owner has to swear that I've infringed on their trademark or copyright.  They get away with it because most people get scared and actually think they've done something wrong.

[Isaac]

I understand the need for confidentiality.  I was just wondering if there were any other filings in the case that would be worth tracking down.

I'm aware that perfectly legal sales of copyrighted items have been shutdown on ebay using the DMCA.  It is a very powerful tool especially given the threat of statutory damages of up to $150,000 per infringement.   There is probably also a lot of shady selling of "backup copies" of software and the like going on too.

[Bitsy]

I'm coming in long after these posts came up, but want to respond to the argument that cutting out the pattern as an intermediate step would constitute making an infringing copy.

I would argue that it does not, asuming that the finished item is utilitarian and not subject to copyright.

The sewing pattern is a set of instructions for making a utilitarian object.  While the way those instructions are expressed is copyrightable, this is kind of like a formula or recipie in that the underlying idea of how to make the item is not copyrightable.  With a formula it is the creative way it is expressed that is copyrightable, not the formula itself. With me so far?

The paper pattern itself is not a drawing of the design for the utilitarian object (which would be copyrightable) it is a template for making the utilitarian object.  Because it is a template, while there may be creativity in drawing it, the shape of that template is purely functional.  (Some pattern pieces might not even have templates, the pattern instructions may just say cut out a 10 inch by 10 inch square for one of the pieces.) So by cutting out the pattern piece, no protectable expression is copied.