Tuesday, July 10, 2007

Venting about creative control ...

Have been looking at cottage rose decorated cotton fabrics lately. Mixed with stripes. And stripes of roses and swirled ribbons in lovely pale pinks and baby blues. Mmmmm ... pretty stuff. Love it, love it. Can make it look elegant yet casual ... for this unfussy country girl - that will always prefer pearls to diamonds and vintage to new - it's a style that I've always enjoyed. I remember as a little girl in the 1970's my Grandma Jean decorating her home in antique linens and old found items that she arranged with a grace that is rarely seen. I even used Grandma's lovely style in a doll room I set up, it needs some work, but you get the gist ...



But something irks me. This is a style that's been around for quite some time, it evokes almost a Victorian feel in it's prettiness, but has a worn and aged feel to it, you know the phrase that defines it. I won't make it searchable, so will type it as "$h@bby ch!c." From my online research it seems that a particular interior decorating magazine first used the term in the 1980's, but it was trademarked by someone else in 1989. I can find no reference to the two entities being attached at any time. But since it has been trademarked/copyrighted to one person and her company to use the phrase for something other than that company's products or books is now a violation of the trademark/copyright/whatever - seen people get their auctions yanked on "that big site" for having the two words of that phrase in it in order, even when it acurately describes the style of the item being sold.

Ya know, if other big name decorating mavens out there cornered a common concept, and protected it with a bevy of lawyers, they would be further vilified. Not lauded as an original. (I recognize I could be completely wrong, it could be that this designer was working for said magazine and was the first to coin the term in print. But I know that this decorating style is older than the 1980's - if not the catchy name for it. And I do believe that if the suggested connection was the case, a reference to her time with the magazine in question would have been cited.)

I will continue to cherish and utilize the frugality, soothing elegance and grace that my Grandmother showed me. I personally won't purchase items that carry a trademark that doesn't allow others to define their chosen style in a quickly understandable manner.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

It's Ann Marie from Prego (also a fabric whore). I had NO IDEA that phrase was copyrighted. I'm wary of the "SC" term in the same way that I am when anything I like becomes popular for a while - first the proprietary twinge (I've always shopped and worn vintage, you latecomers!), and then the flooding of markets with cheap "vintage" imitations, and the books, and the tv shows... well, you know. So I don't like the phrase to start with, but knowing that it's copyrighted to someone makes me dislike it even more. And perversely, want to use it.