So do you keep in mind The uniform Project? lady uses the exact same gown everyday for a year, increases money for charity, excellent idea, yadda yadda.
Even cooler, she made a pattern for the dress, as well as is selling the pattern … except: by getting the pattern (for $25, including $2 additional to her charity) you agree to this wackaloon EULA:
I acknowledge that the styles as well as patterns (the “Dress Patterns”) used for sale on this web site are secured by copyright, trademark as well as other intellectual residential property rights managed by uniform Project. I agree that I may utilize the gown Patterns only for personal, non-commercial purposes. For the function of clarity, I shall not utilize any type of product of garments produced with utilize of the gown Patterns (the “Dress”) in any type of industrial advertising, film, television, print or on the internet media, nor shall any type of gown be offered to third celebrations without the prior written consent of uniform Project. For the avoidance of doubt, no prior written consent shall be needed to publish pictures or videos of any type of gown on a non-commercial website.
There are so lots of things wrong with this. Where to start?
— First, this contract would prohibit you from contributing a gown to goodwill or selling it at a lawn sale. And IANAL, however I believe this is permitted under the ideal of very first sale: in other words, when you get something, particularly a physical object, it is your ideal to offer it as you choose.
— It’s quite common for industrial stitching patterns (Vogue, etc.) to state you can’t utilize the pattern to make garments commercially, however — you don’t want to anyway. however stating you can’t wear the gown on TV? Why not? Do they seriously believe that if somebody shows up using this gown in, say, a Mentos industrial it infringes their trademark? What if you are photographed for a “man on the street” segment? (And the founder of the job works in advertising, or did, which makes this all the a lot more head-scratchy.)
— Again, IANAL, however as far as I know, you cannot copyright a fashion style in the us (in fact, Diane Von Furstenberg has been trying to modification that for years, in part to secure her famous wrap dress) however only the printed pattern (or you can trademark a logo, which is part of the reason why significant logos are so prevalent these days). (And I’m not an professional in utilizing the USPTO site, however I didn’t even see a trademark registered for the uniform Project, under that name.)
— as well as what makes something a non-commercial website? I run ads, is this site commercial? (That’s why there’s no photo of the gown or pattern here, although I believe their limitation makes no sense.) What about somebody who makes butter-and-egg money from Amazon affiliate links? who gets complimentary products for review?
Does any individual (perhaps somebody who is a lawyer) understand why getting a gown pattern would be saddled with such a restrictive agreement? I can’t envision the possible “tort” that would necessitate this type of heavy-handed protection. Does somebody using this gown in an ad truly injure the uniform job in a substantive way?
Needless to say, they lost my business.
Oh, Leola.August 13, 2008
APB on a BDP (BDP = Bridal gown Pattern)February 4, 2009
Oh, I Forgot!August 9, 2007