Don't copy a tartan...

[Paul Henry]

Copyright tartan decision
Interesting news about tartan copying, and the result if you are caught!

[artificer]

Copyright tartan decision
Interesting news about tartan copying, and the result if you are caught!

Good.

IP thieves and knock-off artists deserve their own special circle in the underworld.

My $0.02

ith:

[Tobus]

Surely this sort of ruling is only applicable to corporate tartans, yes? I mean, if someone were to "copy" a traditional clan tartan by changing one or two colours and marketing it, they wouldn't be found liable under the same type ruling, would they?

[O'Callaghan]

Surely this sort of ruling is only applicable to corporate tartans, yes? I mean, if someone were to "copy" a traditional clan tartan by changing one or two colours and marketing it, they wouldn't be found liable under the same type ruling, would they?

It could, but to have copyright infringement there does have to be an owner of the copyright. So, if by traditional you mean that the originator of the tartan is lost in the mists of time, or has left no legal successor, then you may be right. Also, copyright has a term of life of the author plus fifty or seventy years, depending upon what country you are in, so copyright on many such traditional tartans will have actually expired.

I am not a lawyer. I am a patent agent, and although I am a Brit I am only admitted to practice in the US. Patent agents can practice copyright law in the UK and France, but not in the US or anywhere else AFAIK.

Note: FWIW, patent agents can practice trademark law in almost every country except the US, but we aren't talking about trademarks here, as we aren't talking about unauthorised use of the name of the tartan. OTOH, I could help someone get a US design patent (which other countries would call either a registered design or a design model) on a tartan, but in the US system that would protect only the pattern of the stripes and not the actual colours (not so elsewhere), and more importantly it would expire long before copyright. I could also, of course, represent someone trying to get a regular patent, but in terms of kilts that might be a structural feature or a new type of fabric, but not the sett.

[cessna152towser]

I find this interesting and a bit disconcerting. Generally, changing a main color (grey to brown) of a tartan is considered to be enough of a change to warrant a new listing in the Tartan Register.

That was my initial thought as well.
There has to be a certain amount of creativity in deciding what colours will work and which ones won't, also in deciding whether or not there is a need to alter the thread count.
Given that the case was contested I would not be at all surprised if it goes to the appeal court.

[LitTrog]

Doesn't Moon's "original" Skye Sage look an awful lot like an Isle of Skye tartan, which has, as I understand it, its own protections in place? Looks like they borrowed pretty blatantly themselves. Or am I waaaay off?

Other than that, I'm with Artificer.

[Grizzly]

This is very interesting in the light of my recent post about a change to the colourway in my Taylor Ancient Tartan. I had a play around on Scotwebs tartan designer as I wanted to retain the pattern but changed one of the colours from green to brown. Tobus then pointed out that my "new" design was very similar to DC Dalgleishs' own reproduction Taylor Tartan. This was a complete accident on my part as I wasnt aware of the DC Dalgleish tartan before I changed the colours.

As neither the Lochcarron original or the DC Dalgleish are corporate tartans had I better go in to hiding in case my variation has broken some rule in some way or as it would be purely for my own use is that ok?

Do I need a lawyer? Shall I book a flight to a country with no extradition treaty?

[Paul Henry]

I wouldn't be too worried!
This case is about the defrauding of the rightful owner of the tartan by someone trying to cash in on a successful design.
It's not about corporate tartans per se, simply someone who has copyrighted a design has the right to say who can or cannot use it!

This is very interesting in the light of my recent post about a change to the colourway in my Taylor Ancient Tartan. I had a play around on Scotwebs tartan designer as I wanted to retain the pattern but changed one of the colours from green to brown. Tobus then pointed out that my "new" design was very similar to DC Dalgleishs' own reproduction Taylor Tartan. This was a complete accident on my part as I wasnt aware of the DC Dalgleish tartan before I changed the colours.

As neither the Lochcarron original or the DC Dalgleish are corporate tartans had I better go in to hiding in case my variation has broken some rule in some way or as it would be purely for my own use is that ok?

Do I need a lawyer? Shall I book a flight to a country with no extradition treaty?

[RockyR]

I find this interesting and a bit disconcerting. Generally, changing a main color (grey to brown) of a tartan is considered to be enough of a change to warrant a new listing in the Tartan Register. Heck, someone took my "German Heritage" tartan and changed the gold stripe to maroon and called it the "Greatest Scot" tartan with the rest of the tartan intact "as is". The STA DID approve it (I emailed Brian Wilton and he said it was a big enough change to make it different) even after I objected.

How is changing a single stripe of a copyrighted tartan any less than changing 1 of the main 2 colors? I can see that the design is different. I can see that they just changed one main color, but honestly, I'm surprised they went that far and I'm surprised that the court found in their favor. Does this mean that ALL tartans that are color variations are 'suspect'?

What about a "shadow check" tartan... since it's black on black, can that idea be copyrighted and therefore infringed upon?

What about grey on grey on grey (like Highland granite or Sterling or Grey Granite, etc) tartans?

Don't like the can of worms this could open.