Uploaded January 2012 | Updated September 2026, 6 hours ago
tabberone.com/Trademarks/CopyrightLaw/Patterns.shtml
I came across an unusual segment in a new beading magazine that I thought was kinda dishonest. After a little research, I learned I was right. Instructions and patterns are NOT copyrightable.
"A pattern can be a template, or set of templates, for manufacturing an item, be it a birdhouse or a dress. Templates are not copyrightable. A pattern can also be drawings accompanied by instructions for knitting, crocheting or quilting. A method or procedure is not copyrightable. While the drawings themselves could possibly qualify for copyright protection, the actual instructions are not copyrightable. The only other aspect of patterns that could possibly qualify for copyright protection would be the artwork and that would only be if its intrinsic properties allowed it to be separable from the design, which very, very few designs can do. And to be enforced in federal court a copyright almost always must be registered with the US Copyright Office. "
And:
"Pattern designers do not have the legal right to tell you what you can and cannot do with patterns that you have purchased from them. Period. Even if the pattern is a federally registered copyright, and very, very few are, their claims exceed the rights granted under copyright law. Period. They are lying to you. Period. Why are they lying to you? We think some believe what they say. We think some are just plain fools running their mouths. The rest are control freaks. None are correct."
In short, during these horrible economic times, don't be intimidated by outrageous demands from pattern sellers. They have no legal weight.
For your further viewing pleasure on the subject (and because there are way too many gullible people in the field, my favorite video from Johanna Blakley (Fashion historian):
youtube.com/watch?v=zL2FOrx41N0
And the Libertarian, economic and cultural warriors at ReasonTV:
youtube.com/watch?v=5jGAvGVBz7A&feature=plcp&context=C31d3872UDOEgsToPDskLkEYD4b_CBt2imFZme2Jef
From the email I received from a real legal eagle in the crafting industry:
"Instructions are methods for making something. Methods are not protected under copyright law. Once they sell you the written instructions the method is yours to use. The only exception to this would be if you signed something prior to the purchase stating you agreed to their terms."
[Got that? Signed PRIOR to purchase]
"Consider this. How many millions of patterns have been sold in the last 100 years? Far more that anyone can count. McCalls, Butterick, Vogue, Simplicity, etc, print and sell patterns through countless outlets. These companies say you cannot use their patterns for commercial purposes, and so forth. Yet in the last 60 years these companies have but a few registered copyrights on their patterns.
"Simplicity gets copyright registrations on its pattern envelopes but not the patterns themselves. We have researched federal court cases and cannot locate a single federal court case that has gone to trial over the use of patterns to make and sell items.
"No large manufacturer and no small pattern designer has been stupid enough to try to go into court. Why? The US Supreme Court settled that issue in 1879 by saying a copyrighted design does not protect the item made from that design."
Done.
2/3/12 Blog entry by a sympathetic knitter:
herhandsmyhands.wordpress.com/on-copyright
See you soon!
TC
tabberone.com/Trademarks/CopyrightLaw/Patterns.shtml
I came across an unusual segment in a new beading magazine that I thought was kinda dishonest. After a little research, I learned I was right. Instructions and patterns are NOT copyrightable.
"A pattern can be a template, or set of templates, for manufacturing an item, be it a birdhouse or a dress. Templates are not copyrightable. A pattern can also be drawings accompanied by instructions for knitting, crocheting or quilting. A method or procedure is not copyrightable. While the drawings themselves could possibly qualify for copyright protection, the actual instructions are not copyrightable. The only other aspect of patterns that could possibly qualify for copyright protection would be the artwork and that would only be if its intrinsic properties allowed it to be separable from the design, which very, very few designs can do. And to be enforced in federal court a copyright almost always must be registered with the US Copyright Office. "
And:
"Pattern designers do not have the legal right to tell you what you can and cannot do with patterns that you have purchased from them. Period. Even if the pattern is a federally registered copyright, and very, very few are, their claims exceed the rights granted under copyright law. Period. They are lying to you. Period. Why are they lying to you? We think some believe what they say. We think some are just plain fools running their mouths. The rest are control freaks. None are correct."
In short, during these horrible economic times, don't be intimidated by outrageous demands from pattern sellers. They have no legal weight.
For your further viewing pleasure on the subject (and because there are way too many gullible people in the field, my favorite video from Johanna Blakley (Fashion historian):
youtube.com/watch?v=zL2FOrx41N0
And the Libertarian, economic and cultural warriors at ReasonTV:
youtube.com/watch?v=5jGAvGVBz7A&feature=plcp&context=C31d3872UDOEgsToPDskLkEYD4b_CBt2imFZme2Jef
From the email I received from a real legal eagle in the crafting industry:
"Instructions are methods for making something. Methods are not protected under copyright law. Once they sell you the written instructions the method is yours to use. The only exception to this would be if you signed something prior to the purchase stating you agreed to their terms."
[Got that? Signed PRIOR to purchase]
"Consider this. How many millions of patterns have been sold in the last 100 years? Far more that anyone can count. McCalls, Butterick, Vogue, Simplicity, etc, print and sell patterns through countless outlets. These companies say you cannot use their patterns for commercial purposes, and so forth. Yet in the last 60 years these companies have but a few registered copyrights on their patterns.
"Simplicity gets copyright registrations on its pattern envelopes but not the patterns themselves. We have researched federal court cases and cannot locate a single federal court case that has gone to trial over the use of patterns to make and sell items.
"No large manufacturer and no small pattern designer has been stupid enough to try to go into court. Why? The US Supreme Court settled that issue in 1879 by saying a copyrighted design does not protect the item made from that design."
Done.
2/3/12 Blog entry by a sympathetic knitter:
herhandsmyhands.wordpress.com/on-copyright
See you soon!
TC
