I'm calling "shenanigans" - There are limits to an author's rights!

Several days ago Laurie Aaron Hird, author of The Farmer’s Wife Sampler, wrote to tell a list member she was not permitted to post tutorials on her blog to help others learn to make the blocks in the book. Mrs. Hird claimed creating tutorials for the blocks in her traditional sampler book was a violation of copyright law. The ensuing discussion on the Yahoo! list revealed some fundamental misunderstandings about what copyright law means to the quilting community. That discussion, coupled with some of the contortions I see as Flickr group members try to toe a line the author has outlined has persuaded me to do a short series of posts on copyright as it relates to quilting. 

This is the first in the series.

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

I want to start by letting you know that I'm a big fan of author's rights and of copyright. On the one hand, copyright grants important rights to authors. And on the other hand, copyright places important limits on an authors' rights. Those limits are crucial to promoting creativity because the limits allow authors to build on one another's work. And, when authors do that that we all benefit. We have more and better books; more and better blogs; and more and better classes as a result.

Let's look at how The Farmer’s Wife Sampler benefited from the limits of copyright:

• The author used letters other people wrote. She was entitled to do so because the letters had passed into the public domain. The copyright on those letters was limited in duration.
• The author used blocks other people designed. She was entitled to do so because the block designs had also passed into the public domain. The copyright on the blocks was limited in duration.
• The author didn't develop the idea of a sampler. She was entitled to use that idea because ideas can't be copyrighted – only the expressions of those ideas.
• The author didn't develop the technique of constructing quilt blocks using templates, either. But she was entitled to include template techniques in her book because, even though a specific description or illustration of a technique can be copyrighted, the technique itself can't be copyrighted.

Clearly, the limits imposed on the original authors' and block designers' copyright were absolutely essential to the development and publication of The Farmer's Wife Sampler book. Those same limits benefit the hundreds of other quilting books, blogs, and classes that discuss traditional quilting blocks and techniques.

So, I was more than a little surprised when Mrs. Hird claimed that bloggers could not create tutorials on making these quilt blocks because those tutorials would violate Mrs. Hird's copyright. Every quilter has the same level of entitlement to use the resources of the public domain in their own work that Mrs. Hird has for hers. I'm calling shenanigans on her claim. Her rights simply don't extend that far.

All of us - traditional authors, contemporary bloggers, teachers, and quilters  - benefit from reasonable limits to authors' and designers' rights. Those limits make possible the vibrant quilting community we love so much.

I've been an educator my entire adult life and I believe it's important for us to know what is so and what is not so in order to act responsibly towards our heritage and towards the authors who contribute so much to our culture. I thought it would be useful to take a few minutes to learn what the law actually says about how to protect our quilting heritage, our public domain, and the rights of our authors and ourselves. In a few days, I'll post some background information about copyright with a specific focus on the quilting tradition.

The intent in this post - and in my upcoming posts - is to educate us on what copyright actually means to quilters and to the authors/designers/bloggers whose work we appreciate.

Edited to add: I contacted the moderator of the Yahoo! mailing list asking how we could share info about copyright with those on the list. I thought I had allowed enough time for her to respond. When she didn't, I went public with this first post. Well, I just got a very nice note from her. In it, she said that "I think we are closer to thinking the same thing than it appears." I'm going to work with her on figuring out how to share more information without getting everyone in an uproar. I hope we'll be clarifying some misunderstandings in the near future. I really hope the discussion is helpful.

Edited (again) to add: Mrs. Hird has contacted me through the comments on this post. I tried to contact her through the Yahoo mailing list before making this post. When I didn't get a response, I sent a private note to the Yahoo list moderator leaving it to her to decide if she would share with Mrs. Hird. It was only after those two attempts to clarify failed (or so I thought), that I made this public post. I look forward to talking to both of them and clarifying any misunderstandings.