Re: Knock-off legal?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Trishty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> I think the manufacturers only really care if you're making money
> out of it. But if you're not copying it to sell or to distribute,
> but only to wear yourself, I can't honestly see why they'd even
> care. As Monsieur Lagerfeld says: "Those who buy the original don't
> buy the copy, those who buy the copy don't buy the original..."

I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure this would fall under "reverse
engineering" sorts of precedence. (OTOH, if you were photocopying
actual patterns you'd purchased, that wouldn't be legal.) The only
exception would be if there was a patent involved; if the dress
company had a *patent* on their design, you'd be screwed (and the
above-mentioned copying would indeed be illegal).

This is why some people get so upset about software patents; companies
are getting patents on things like file formats, so that nobody may
implement code (even from scratch) which, say, reads that
file-format. (This would be like getting a patent on a dress-design or
v-neck t-shirts and hence being able to prevent anyone from making any
such dress or t-shirt...)

- -- 
mike [at] mike [dash] warren.com
<URL:http://www.mike-warren.com>
GPG: 0x579911BD :: 87F2 4D98 BDB0 0E90 EE2A  0CF9 1087 0884 5799 11BD
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iEYEARECAAYFAj/GnncACgkQEIcIhFeZEb2iQQCfaxe4J/UR5YAKpmzlPD5GqEcl
+qMAoM70VCky3nOricWeOjATNdbj0ZXq
=9WTl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----