BBC removes Doctor Who fan’s knitting patterns from the Web
The Open Rights Group often receive calls from UK citizens who have found themselves on the wrong end of online copyright disputes. Because we’re not a legal advice service, very often we cannot offer them any help. We’re working on a way to change this situation - watch this space for an announcement in the Autumn. In the meantime we tend to pass these queries onto our informal law-discuss list for further analysis.
This week, Andres Guadamuz, who sits on the list, has published details of a very interesting dispute between the BBC and a knitting enthusiast and Doctor Who fan who goes by the screen name of Mazzmatazz. Mazz has been posting knitting patterns to help other people re-create characters from the cult series using only two sticks and ball of wool. Impressive? The BBC, producers of the series, didn’t think so. They sent Mazz a letter, which states:
“We note that you are supplying DR WHO items, and using trade marks and copyright owned by BBC. You have not been given permission to use the DR WHO brand and we ask that you remove from your site any designs connected with DR WHO. Please reply acknowledging receipt of this email, and confirm that you will remove the DR WHO items as requested.”
Fearing legal action, Mazz has now removed the knitting patterns from the Web.
As part of our response to OfCom’s public service broadcasting review, we’ll be making arguments similar to those we made last Summer during the iPlayer/DRM debate. That is, that in the future, organisations like the BBC with a public service remit should have a role in stimulating the creative economy in the UK, by allowing budding creators to remix its content. Even if this is only allowed to happen in a non-commercial context, the BBC could seed a new generation of creators and remixers, just as it nurtured a generation of computer games developers in the 1980s with its computer literacy project, centred around the iconic BBC micro.
This approach doesn’t mean giving all the BBC’s content away for free, although in some situations that might be appropriate. But it does mean being more flexible in the approach the BBC takes to controlling who gets to use its content and how. The approach the BBC have taken with Mazz’s knitting patterns demonstrate a distinct lack of flexibility. It is quite possible that through transforming the characters in Doctor Who into knitting patterns, Mazz may have infringed upon the BBC’s copyright. But it’s hard to see how Mazz’s non-commercial knitting patterns actually damage the commercial interests of the BBC.
The situation also touches on the growing need for UK copyright law to allow transformative use of works. In 2006, the Gowers Review of Intellectual Property asked the UK Intellectual Property Office to propose amendments to the European Copyright Directive that allowed for creative, transformative or derivative works. In ORG’s recent submission to the UK IPO, we urged the UK IPO to take this recommendation forward. For a compelling legal analysis of the issues that Mazz’s sitaution touches upon, including the tricky area of transformative use of works, visit Andres’s blog, Technollama.
May 8th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
The case of Arsenal v Reed surely has a bearing on this.
May 8th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
I wonder if the BBC really is deciding to join the EBs these days, last week they aired free EB propaganda on local news. Is this what the tax payer’s money is going towards? The EB’s plans?
Indeed Fandom and other transformaitve works need to be part of copyright.
May 9th, 2008 at 11:08 am
Arsenal v Reed has bearing on the trade mark issue, but not the copyright case.
May 9th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
The creature in the picture is clearly Cthulhu. If that’s a Dr. Who trademark, Lovecraft’s ghost should sue the Beeb.
May 9th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
All Mazz has to do is repost the patterns with each getting funny nicknames, like “Cthulhu Enjoys Juicebox” or whatnot. The letter only advised Mazz remove specifically the trademark references, not the material of Mazz’s own creation.
May 9th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
[...] BBC removes Doctor Who fan’s knitting patterns from the Web [...]
May 9th, 2008 at 2:47 pm
[...] Boing Boing comes word of the BBC demanding that a knitter remove Doctor Who-inspired patterns from the web. Patterns that were made available for free, mind you. Sheesh. I had better go grab [...]
May 9th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
Billy–that’s an alien from Doctor Who called the Ood. Sure does look like Cthulhu, though!
May 9th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
The BBC is being RIDICULOUS about this. Considering that all art is just ripped off from art that came before it: current copyright laws are incredibly draconian. Just because they have their lawyers have the right to go after Mazz, doesn’t make it right.
May 9th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
This is the same creative thinking that Paramount used to kill off it’s cash cow (Star Trek. BBC should take a look and learn from their mistake.
May 9th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
Oh BBC… Why must you INSIST on alienating your fan base while simultaneously crapping on free advertisement?
May 9th, 2008 at 10:51 pm
[...] Boing Boing reading, as opposed to Ravelry: the Beeb has copyright/trademark issues with knitting patterns. It actually sounds like there might be some interesting facets, even for non-lawyers, and when I [...]
May 9th, 2008 at 10:53 pm
Jamie, you didn’t just say “alienated”, did you?
Yes, I too miss the days before the lawyers ran the beeb …
May 10th, 2008 at 1:34 am
I’m not sure about trademark law in the UK, but if it’s anything like the US, anyone holding a trademark name must protect it or risk loosing it. This means notifying anyone infringing on use for commercial purposes, whether it be a big corp, or someone’s grandma.
As bullying as it may seem, it’s normal procedure and a requirement of someone owning a trademark to protect it, and notify those using it without permission. I believe this is likely true, regardless of the owner being public, private or even non-profit.
I’m guessing what’s at issue is most likely not the knitting itself or its “likeness”, but more likely the use of the “DR WHO” brand name, which is very likely trademarked.
It would have been nicer, I suppose, if the BBC kindly offered to ‘license’, or allow the knitting artist to use the name at some nominal fee, so that their legal requirement to protect the tradename is preserved, while still allowing such folks to ‘freely’ make derivative works.
However typically legal entities go straight for the standard ‘take down’ letter.. probably not the only recourse, but certainly the ’standard’ one.
May 10th, 2008 at 4:34 am
[...] uploading someone else’s patterns — but he had created his own. The BBC, however, flipped out and told him to remove all such knitting patterns as they infringed on the BBC’s copyrights and trademar…. This seems like yet another case of overly aggressive enforcement of intellectual property rights [...]
May 10th, 2008 at 4:34 am
[...] uploading someone else’s patterns — but he had created his own. The BBC, however, flipped out and told him to remove all such knitting patterns as they infringed on the BBC’s copyrights and trademar…. This seems like yet another case of overly aggressive enforcement of intellectual property rights [...]
May 10th, 2008 at 11:02 am
being a knitter I am aware of the patterns in question, and if i remember correctly they were free and not given away for money, and although this has no
standing with the copyright issue, it just shows to me that the designer was purely showing a love for the show and wanted to share with those of us not able/clever enough to come with patterns on our own. Such a shame!
May 10th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
[...] steps in the open rights group, then on BoingBoing which is going to get a lot of [...]
May 10th, 2008 at 9:35 pm
[...] an aside titled ‘Dr Who Fan Gets a BBC Nastygram’ dated 5/10/08 Mazzmatazz knits Dr Who crafts, but took the patterns offline after the BBC sent this message: “We note that you are supplying DR WHO items, and using trade [...]
May 11th, 2008 at 9:46 pm
Hubs of BBC removes Doctor Who fan’s knitting patterns from the Web…
hubs about BBC Acorn to This week, Andres Guadamuz, who sits on the list, has published details of a very interesting dispute between the BBC and a knitting enthusiast and Doctor Who fan who goes by the screen name of Mazzmatazz. Mazz has been posting …
May 11th, 2008 at 10:28 pm
Because the BBC is publically funded, all of their intellectual property, ethically, belongs to the public. The change that needs to happen is that copyrights for all BBC produced material needs to be reversed and made public domain. To do otherwise is theft.
On the issue of knitting patterns, if this was a for-profit private company that paid for a TV show, book, or other creation with private funds, then they are entitled to trademark protection IF they took out a trademark in the appropriate category, namely knitted products. That is not the case here, or in any commercial case I have seen. For example, if you wish to sell knitted products that say “Google”, google could not stop you unless they had trademarked that specific product category.
May 11th, 2008 at 10:52 pm
The BBC is funded by UK tax payers.
All ‘their’ stuff ultimately belongs to UK taxpayers.
May 12th, 2008 at 2:30 am
so, then, JK Rowling could have sued the woman who wrote a book of knitting patterns based on her books? The estate of JRR Tolkien could have sued Spin Off magazine for copyright infringement when they ran a contest for Lord of the Rings Garb done in handspun yarns?
Please. Dr. Who is such a part of popular culture that the BBC has no right to do such a thing. I may never watch Dr. Who again, sigh.