The other day someone was telling me that she sells clothes she makes.
 Even though she makes several identical dresses from the same
pattern, she has to purchase one pattern per item she sells.  I didn't
believe that pattern makers try to place these restrictions on people,
so I called the only pattern maker I know of, McCall's, and asked
them.  They confirmed that if someone wants to sell garments they make
from a McCall's pattern, they much purchase one pattern for every
garment.

I can't believe they can legally place this restriction on these
items.  I'm buying a product from a company - I can do what I want
with it.  I understand copyright laws - if I photocopied the pattern,
I would be violating their legal rights.  But I BOUGHT and paid for a
pattern - I can use it as firewood or I can make a 1000 and sell them.
 If it means they don't make as much money, though - if they can't
handle the facts of the business they in, they shouldn't be in that
business.  Ford doesn't tell me I can't give my friends rides, or buy
fords for a taxi service, 'cause that may mean they wouldn't sell as
many cars.  I see no difference.

Legally, does McCall's or any pattern maker have the right to try to
restict the way I use their product?  And if so, what gives them that
right?  Have there been any court cases about this sort of thing, and
what was the outcome?

I don't know the actual legality of this, but it is somewhat analagous
to software.  The CD you buy is not the actual working application,
but a "pattern" if you will, which the computer uses to create the
working application on your hard drive.  There, the restriction is
even more severe - not only can you not sell it, if you want to
install it on more than one (or best case a few) machines, you usually
are required to buy more than one copy or at least license.  This
doesn't necessarily happen, particularly for home users, but
businesses can certainly get in trouble if they don't have enough
licenses or copies.

The analogy to the Ford is different, because you are not giving or
selling additional copies of the car to your friends.  McCalls's would
have no grounds for saying you couldn't make a dress and then let your
friends borrow it, for instance.

Yes, you bought the pattern, but you are buying only limited rights to
use the pattern. For example, when you buy a book you can't go out and
make copies of it and sell them. Why? Because the creators of the book
would be getting the short end of the stick; they wouldn't be
profiting from their work. The same is true with patterns. Those who
create them deserve to get some compensation if someone else,
unaffiliated with them, goes out and makes a profit via their work.

Hope this helps,
Kriswrite

Hello there baerana,

Naturally, Google Answers is not a substitute for informed legal
opinion. With that in mind:

You are correct, that if you purchase a pattern, and do not sign any
contract when doing so, then naturally you have surrendered none of
the rights afforded to you by default, by copyright law. However, what
seems to be the case is that the actual design of the clothing that
the pattern represents can be in some cases copyrighted, and therefore
protected, by the owner of the design.

Therefore, when selling you the pattern, they are granting you an
extra right above and beyond what the law permits, to reproduce
however many copies of their copyrighted design they choose to allow
(where normally, any reproduction of their design for any purposes
would be an illegal copy).

Odd as this may sound, this appears to be the case. You can see an in
depth discussion here:
http://leda.law.harvard.edu/leda/data/36/MAGDO.html

Hope this helps,

--seizer