I also think the article raises some good points, but those points could have been better organized and outlined more succinctly. For example, the issues of fan art and parody probably should have been covered in a few sentences instead of several paragraphs.
Well, you know what they say about hindsight.....
What does hindsight have to do with my comments?
I would also like to point out: If you are running a legal bakery, be it a store front or home front and you feel you ARE legal, then why get on a forum and be so shocked and dismayed over these situations? It should be a non-issue.
Knowledge of copyright law is less widespread than it should be among business owners, probably since it's not a hurdle you have to clear to get your business off the ground (like a health inspection might be in a non-CFL state). There's also the fact that infringement is so widespread, many will take refuge in the "everyone else is doing it" defense.
So what exactly are the valid points that are raised?
There are several valid points, albeit many are buried in prose: the distinction between copyright and TM, unauthorized derivative work is unlawful unless it falls under fair use, wider distribution of your infringement increases your risk, how to deal with a client who asks for an infringing design, the discussion about licensed products, etc.
I also think the article raises some good points, but those points could have been better organized and outlined more succinctly. For example, the issues of fan art and parody probably should have been covered in a few sentences instead of several paragraphs.
Well, you know what they say about hindsight.....
I would also like to point out: If you are running a legal bakery, be it a store front or home front and you feel you ARE legal, then why get on a forum and be so shocked and dismayed over these situations? It should be a non-issue.
Could you elaborate a little more on your last comment please? (shocked and dismayed)
Gatorcake, I meant no offense. Once again this thread, like many others has turned ugly. I only meant the auther "perhaps" had several points of view,take from it what you will. I like to keep an open mind when I come to Cake Central, I learn a lot from everyone here. I have no intention nor do I want to re-write that blog. I have enough on my plate. Thank you very much. I've been told over the years that I have a keen eye for seeing all sides of an arguement. That's all. Sometimes, if I feel strongly about something, I'll make a stand for that issue. But this is a mute point. Either your breaking the law or your not. BUT, people are still entitled to their opintion, just like you and I.
I merely suggested perhaps you keep a more opened mind. That's all.
It could have been written differently as Jason pointed out.......Everyone reads things differently.
I also think the article raises some good points, but those points could have been better organized and outlined more succinctly. For example, the issues of fan art and parody probably should have been covered in a few sentences instead of several paragraphs.
Well, you know what they say about hindsight.....
What does hindsight have to do with my comments?
Not your comments, I was referring to the comment you made about the blog, it could have been written better. It's always easier to back and re-think or re-read, etc. what you could/ or should have said. It's a saying. Have you not heard it before?
I would also like to point out: If you are running a legal bakery, be it a store front or home front and you feel you ARE legal, then why get on a forum and be so shocked and dismayed over these situations? It should be a non-issue.
Knowledge of copyright law is less widespread than it should be among business owners, probably since it's not a hurdle you have to clear to get your business off the ground (like a health inspection might be in a non-CFL state). There's also the fact that infringement is so widespread, many will take refuge in the "everyone else is doing it" defense.
I think that's lam and I never let my kids get away with that excuse
I am not seeing where this thread turned ugly...?
I feel the article in question is not a good reference for cake makers because it was not written by a lawyer. Here is an article my attorney wrote on selling cakes made from copyrighted character pans. The moral of the story is: don't do it. http://klonglaw.com/?p=403
I also think the article raises some good points, but those points could have been better organized and outlined more succinctly. For example, the issues of fan art and parody probably should have been covered in a few sentences instead of several paragraphs.
Well, you know what they say about hindsight.....
I would also like to point out: If you are running a legal bakery, be it a store front or home front and you feel you ARE legal, then why get on a forum and be so shocked and dismayed over these situations? It should be a non-issue.
Could you elaborate a little more on your last comment please? (shocked and dismayed)
I just meant some people are surprised when they find out they're breaking the law by "copying" Disnsey, Sports" logos, etc. This issue has come up on CC countless times.
[/quote] I just meant some people are surprised when they find out they're breaking the law by "copying" Disnsey, Sports" logos, etc. This issue has come up on CC countless times.[/quote]
Well, I guess the shock for me was this huge corporation coming after my small business, not something I've ever had to deal with. I understand what you are saying, but regardless, it is shocking.
HOWEVER, I did take the picture down from CC and from my website and have discussed it with a lawyer who has told me what to do. AND, I will be taking down some other pics as well. 
I feel the article in question is not a good reference for cake makers because it was not written by a lawyer. Here is an article my attorney wrote on selling cakes made from copyrighted character pans. The moral of the story is: don't do it. http://klonglaw.com/?p=403
I recommend using caution when judging the quality of a work based solely on the profession of the author. Lawyers are capable of writing both good articles and bad articles, as are non-lawyers who have some legal knowledge.
It's interesting to note that the article you linked to (which is a good one) is basically the same thing I posted a month earlier:
http://cakecentral.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=6996838&sid=d4eb2f74732cc2dc0cff54b46bca0a4c
I am not seeing where this thread turned ugly...?
I feel the article in question is not a good reference for cake makers because it was not written by a lawyer. Here is an article my attorney wrote on selling cakes made from copyrighted character pans. The moral of the story is: don't do it. http://klonglaw.com/?p=403
Sorry, wrong choice of word.... gatorcake didn't like my post, I possibly offended her. I didn't mean too. But the "perhaps" sound of her post didn't come off to me as "friendly", IMO..........No, I'm not an atty, nor was that blog written by one, so no one should take it as the gospel. However, I think gatorcake and I should agree to disagree, we both read that blog with a different point of view. Which is fine. That's what makes this world go around.
I just asked her to be more opened minded, she didn't think it was necessary based on what she took out of the blog.
I feel the article in question is not a good reference for cake makers because it was not written by a lawyer. Here is an article my attorney wrote on selling cakes made from copyrighted character pans. The moral of the story is: don't do it. http://klonglaw.com/?p=403
I recommend using caution when judging the quality of a work based solely on the profession of the author. Lawyers are capable of writing both good articles and bad articles, as are non-lawyers who have some legal knowledge.
It's interesting to note that the article you linked to (which is a good one) is basically the same thing I posted a month earlier:
http://cakecentral.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=6996838&sid=d4eb2f74732cc2dc0cff54b46bca0a4c
I don't call a plumber when I have a legal problem, and I don't call my lawyer to come fix my toilet when it's broken. (Ironically, they both charge me about the same hourly rate.
)
It's highly appropriate to judge work by the education and expertise of the creator.
It's highly appropriate to judge work by the education and expertise of the creator.
I agree...an article written by someone with education and expertise in the relevant field will typically be a high quality article.
Fortunately you do not have to pass the bar exam to acquire education and expertise in the legal field.
I'm not sure I understand all of this (English not being my first language). If I make a cake (for arguments sake) in the shape of Hello Kitty but not out of a Hello Kitty pan is that copyright? or does it only apply if one is using a special shaped pan?
I'm not sure I understand all of this (English not being my first language). If I make a cake (for arguments sake) in the shape of Hello Kitty but not out of a Hello Kitty pan is that copyright? or does it only apply if one is using a special shaped pan?
Hello Kitty is a copyrighted character, so unless you got permission from the copyright owner you would be violating copyright law whether or not you used the Hello Kitty pan to make the cake (even if you don't sell the cake).
If you can't get permission from the copyright owner, the safest thing to do would be to purchase licensed toppers for the cake, since the toppers have already been approved by the copyright owner.
Of course if you are just making a cake for your own family and don't plan on taking any pictures of the cake the risk of getting caught is very low, and some character pans say that they are OK for home use only.
I think the safest thing to do would be to contact the copyright owner directly in each case, and if you can't get permission, don't do the logo.
I am only speaking for myself here:
The argument of "I didn't know" can only be used once. I made this mistake myself not long ago and at the time, I honestly didn't think about copyrights. I don't think too many ppl really think about it much when we first start out. I know that for me, since it was brought to my attention, that I will not do anything else that is copyrighted. I was just telling this to my DH last night. I will contact the company, or purchase the character, or do a play on it and that is all.
I do want to thank jason_kraft for all of his advice! If it were not for you, I would still not be thinking of this issue (until it was to late)
I am only speaking for myself here:
The argument of "I didn't know" can only be used once. I made this mistake myself not long ago and at the time, I honestly didn't think about copyrights. I don't think too many ppl really think about it much when we first start out. I know that for me, since it was brought to my attention, that I will not do anything else that is copyrighted. I was just telling this to my DH last night. I will contact the company, or purchase the character, or do a play on it and that is all.
I do want to thank jason_kraft for all of his advice! If it were not for you, I would still not be thinking of this issue (until it was to late)
This is an excellant point and I'm not picking on you, just so everyone is clear, I'm only gathering facts..... please explain how in today's society this would not have crossed your mind? Were you only baking for fun or did you bake and sell to someone's requirements? It would seem to me with all that is broadcasted in the stores and on the internet about re-selling knock of purses, etc that somewhere along the line something would have triggered a question or two about making a cake and selling it in the image of a cartoon or a hero, etc. Again, I'm not picking on you, I'm only trying to engage in a healthy debate....
" I didn't know", doesn't even work once legally.
I rarely even bother with these threads because it really isn't a debate. The internet is providing a perfect, cheap, way to prosecute these infringements. I's only a matter of time. Google provides the proof of infringement by the perpetrator's own hand... picture, IP address, description... cached even if you take it down.
ec, I'm not sure what you're driving at with this line of questioning but I don't think it will lead to a productive discussion, suffice to say that some people are aware of copyright as it applies to cake decorating and some are not.
ec, I'm not sure what you're driving at with this line of questioning but I don't think it will lead to a productive discussion, suffice to say that some people are aware of copyright as it applies to cake decorating and some are not.
Well, Jason, they choose not to be. Like I said earlier, I never let my kids use the excuse of "I didn't know". I doesn't hold water in today's world. Susan is right.
ec, I'm not sure what you're driving at with this line of questioning but I don't think it will lead to a productive discussion, suffice to say that some people are aware of copyright as it applies to cake decorating and some are not.
Well, Jason, they choose not to be. Like I said earlier, I never let my kids use the excuse of "I didn't know". I doesn't hold water in today's world. Susan is right.
You are making a false generalization by assuming that cake decorators are willfully choosing not to learn about copyright laws, instead of simply not being exposed to the information. I didn't make the connection myself until I took an IP law class a few months after we started our business.
EDIT: I won't be baited into a flame war here, so if you want to continue this discussion please do so via PM.
ec, I'm not sure what you're driving at with this line of questioning but I don't think it will lead to a productive discussion, suffice to say that some people are aware of copyright as it applies to cake decorating and some are not.
Well, Jason, they choose not to be. Like I said earlier, I never let my kids use the excuse of "I didn't know". I doesn't hold water in today's world. Susan is right.
You are making a false generalization by assuming that cake decorators are willfully choosing not to learn about copyright laws, instead of simply not being exposed to the information. I didn't make the connection myself until I took an IP law class a few months after we started our business.
That's not what I meant and you know it.
Again, I was only asking a question to another CC'er, (it's called an opinion) but it goes back to the same old thing.... if there are a "few" on CC that don't agree so therefore, it's a mute point. So, I'll stop asking, or inquiring or whatever you want to call it because apparently this site belongs to only a few select and only their opinions matter.
Here is my questions: How many home-bakes have contacted said companies and actually received permission? I am trying to achieve a legal in-home business and after reading Disney's requirments to recieve permission (jason_kraft posted a link for) it scared me to the point of rethinking a home based business. I don't see how any home-based could achieve permission.
Here is my questions: How many home-bakes have contacted said companies and actually received permission? I am trying to achieve a legal in-home business and after reading Disney's requirments to recieve permission (jason_kraft posted a link for) it scared me to the point of rethinking a home based business. I don't see how any home-based could achieve permission.
I think it's best just to buy licensed characters and cake toppers versus carving a cake into a Disney character.
Home-based has nothing to do with it and a business based on a need to produce illegal cakes seems like a poor way to start. Infringement has nothing to do with whether the business is legal, illegal, CFL.
The big companies are not going to give permission as a general rule. And I would hate to think of having to charge for my time to write for permission for every cake I made.
Your facebook pictures or the facebook of anyone attending a party are proof enough of the infringement. If you create the cake, it will be hard to keep it off the web, business or not.
Quote by @%username% on %date%
%body%