Duck Gate: No One is Talking About This Yet - Spilling the Tea - Responding to
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 сен 2024
- In today’s video, I explain what I'm calling "Duck Gate" and the controversy surrounding @ashleyrosepeters mass production of a free Crocheted by El duck. This video came to be after watching @CatCakeCrochet 's video because I think she failed to mention one specific thing that is kind of important to the discussion at hand! Though, of course, no hate is meant toward Ashley or Cat Cake, this is just my take on the situation.
Important Links:
🩵 Crocheted By El Instagram: / crochetedbyel
🩵Crocheted By El Duck Pattern: www.instagram....
🩵 Cat Cake's Channel: / @catcakecrochet
🩵 Cat Cake's Video: • Crochet Drama: mass pr...
🩵 Ashley's Channel: / @ashleyrosepeters
🩵 Ashley's Apology Video: • i made a $1000 mistake...
🩵 Another Video About Duck Gate from Crochet Vision's Channel: • Duck Drama | Mass Prod...
🩵 🩵 🩵 Playlist of all my pattern compilation videos: • Good Crochet Patterns!
Master List Of All Crochet Business Products: docs.google.co...
Master List of All Crochet Patterns I've Used in My Business:
docs.google.co...
Here are links to other patterns I've put out this year:
🎀No Sew Paddy The Leprechaun (with Pot of Gold) - worksofwhimsyc...
🎀No Sew Strawberry Doll (with ‘MILK’ Purse) - worksofwhimsyc...
🎀No Sew Mushroom - worksofwhimsyc...
🎀No Sew & Low Sew Easter Egg Pattern Pack - worksofwhimsyc...
🎀Pyro The Dragon (with Dragon Egg) - worksofwhimsyc...
🎀Jenna the Giraffe Snuggler - worksofwhimsyc...
🎀No Sew Chip The Bear (with Heart) - worksofwhimsyc...
🎀No Sew Dino Pattern Pack - worksofwhimsyc...
• No Sew Dino (T-Rex) - worksofwhimsyc...
• No Sew Dino (Triceratops) - worksofwhimsyc...
🎀Standing Fox - worksofwhimsyc...
🎀No Sew Halloween Pattern Pack - worksofwhimsyc...
• No Sew Candace “Candy” Corn - worksofwhimsyc...
• No Sew Witch Hat - worksofwhimsyc...
• No Sew Ghost - worksofwhimsyc...
• No Sew Frankenstein - worksofwhimsyc...
• No Sew Pumpkin - worksofwhimsyc...
Here are links to my free patterns:
❤️No Sew Mushroom - No Talking - • No Sew Crochet Mushroo...
❤️No Sew Bee - • Create Adorable Croche...
❤️No Sew Pumpkin - • Chatty Pumpkin Crochet...
❤️No Sew Pumpkin - No Talking - • No Talking Pumpkin Cro...
❤️No Sew Witch Hat - • Chatty Witch Hat Croch...
❤️No Sew Witch Hat - No Talking - • No Talking Witch Hat C...
❤️No Sew Heart Keychain - • Valentines Crochet Eas...
❤️No Sew Pot of Gold - • Pot of Gold (NO SEW) T...
❤️No Sew Striped Easter Egg - • Easter Crochet Easy Cr...
❤️Right Handed Slip Knot and Single Crochet Tutorial - • How To Crochet For Abs...
❤️Left Handed Slip Knot and Single Crochet Tutorial - • How To Crochet For Abs...
🫢More From Me...🫢
-Etsy: www.etsy.com/s...
-Instagram: / worksofwhimsycrochetco
-Pinterest: / worksofwhimsycrochetco
-Email: Support@WorksofWhimsyCo.com
Please check them out and follow for updates and other information.
FAQs...
How old am I? ... I’m 29!
When did I start my crochet business?: December 2022
When did I start my RUclips?: March 2023
When did I start crocheting?: Seriously, in November 2022, but I learned as a child
DISCLAIMER: Some links included in this description may be affiliate links. If you purchase a product or service with the links, I may receive a small commission. Thank you for supporting CottonBabyCrochet so I can continue to provide free content for you!
#crochet
#crochetideas
#crochetbusiness
#crochetinspo
#crochetinspiration
#vlog
#smallbusiness
#etsyseller
#amigurumi
#fiberart
#fiberartist
#watchmework
#yarn
#crochetartist
#crochetdesigner
#smallyoutuber
#smallbusinessowner
My name is Quinn lol. But I don’t mind being called Cat 😜
You asked for me to reply so:
Your first opinion was that I villainized Ashley by scrolling her socials and pointing out that she never credited:
I personally do not feel like I villainized her, I didn’t say anything mean and
I only showed her socials to prove I did my due diligence by checking her posts to make sure I didn’t miss her mentioning the pattern wasn’t hers.
You are incorrect, I never mention in my video how Ashley says “my duck, my duck”. I purposely didn’t talk about her saying “my duck” because I feel like most people refer to the finished objects as their own after they make them, but I can see how someone who was unfamiliar with crochet by el would take that as Ashley claiming to be the designer.
I think your second point was IP infringement, for this point in the you said that I said we “should be allowed to sell” but I didn’t say that either.
I purposely did not speak to the legal ramifications of this in my video, I only mentioned that it is widely known not to sell characters. I did not say you cannot make and gift characters and I only spoke to my own hypocrisy in being totally fine ripping off big companies but not a small designer. I think the point you made that a crocheter could single handedly corner the market for snugglers is kind of funny, I really don’t think Disney is checking how much any of us sell a plushie for before mass producing their own.
Your last point - which you said I failed to talk about- is that this is not/cannot be a legal issue and is only a moral one. I wouldn’t necessarily say I failed in talking about this, I purposely didn’t speak on the legal ramifications of this because I’m not a lawyer. I don’t want to put out disinformation. I wanted to make my video to bring up the discussion and relay, which I said in the video “ I am morally struggling with” the similarities between ripping off a big corporation and ripping off a small creator. I think we have same opinion on copyright.
Overall I think it may be easy to see my video through a negative lens after watching Ashley’s video. Especially after seeing the hurtful comments she received, which was not my intention. I think she did a great job showing a sincere apology, and I agree she didn’t touch on some of the moral issues.
Loved your video ❤
Hello Quinn, it's nice to formally meet you, for starters! And I appreciate you taking the time to respond to this. I'm hearing your points. But, I would just like to explain a few things, so you can maybe see that I wasn't trying to like jump to the furthest of conclusions. I'm rewatching your video so I can pick out exactly what you said to explain exactly how I came to the conclusions I did. But, I do hear what you're saying.
First, I'll address your second point because you touch on this first in your video. While you didn't technically say "we should be allowed", which is how I interpreted it, the comment you made was, "Do I morally thick it's wrong? No. Not really. I'm not ever going to side with a huge corporation. I don't think those huge corporations are hurting by us small creators charging $30 for something that took us an hour and a half." Then you went on to say when it would be sketchy to use a trademarked character. Your example was Bluey p*rn, which of course, I fully agree here lol. But I think, reading back your own words here, you can see why, even though you didn't explicitly say "we should be allowed", I took it as that.
And in my video, I went on to talk about what can and can't be done as far as infringement goes, it was just meant to educate viewers, in general. NOT because you said anything about it that was right or wrong about it. There's just be a lot of discussion of infringement related to this, so I wanted to give everyone a run down about it. I hope that makes sense. Basically, that was just generally speaking, not responding to what you said. So that's my bad for not creating a clearer separation between where my thoughts about what you said ended, and where my next points begin in the video. If I ever do a video like this again, I'll make sure there's more distinct separations between thoughts.
And to clarify what I said, I don't think AAAA crocheter could corner the market on smugglers. BUT if we, collectively, start producing Disney snugglers, this *could* hurt Disney because when there's a true need for something, it's more valuable. But, with us producing Disney loveys, there's no longer a need for them. I do see that this is a stretch in THIS example, but I don't think anyone can argue that something that doesn't exist yet, but is wanted, is more valuable than something that already exists that someone else also tries to produce. So point taken here. It is basically impossible for us to compete with Disney, but you get the gist of what I was trying to say. It was just a poor example in hindsight.
Now, we'll move into your first point, since it was kind of the next thing covered in your video. In my head, I combined what Ashley said in her video and what you said in your video about the "my duck" thing, but I'll explain that in a second.
I know you did *explicitly* say you were not trying to bully her, at all. Which I do respect. However, you did say, "in this case, unfortunately, in my opinion is that she is taking credit for Crocheted by El's design because she isn't openly stating that it's not her pattern". To me, that part felt harsh (judging by your reaction, perhaps I'm interpreting this as harsher than you meant it). But note, that's just TO ME that it seems harsh. I can't speak for everyone.
Though, you do go on to point out that she did leave a link, but it was way after the fact, which I agree is a little late for sure lol. Because, while I forget to credit people here and there (and genuinely, this is something I'm trying to work on, because it IS the right thing to do), if they leave a comment asking for a pattern, I will go find the link and post it.
Then, you went on to say that you felt it "almost seemed intentional" for her to not credit Crocheted by El. This, to me, was where it really felt like it crossed the line into villainizing her. Now, I don't think you were like crazy insulting or anything. I don't even necessarily think it was uncalled for to say. And, I think it's fair game for you to share your opinion. However, in my opinion, saying that she was trying to take credit and maybe even intentionally avoiding crediting Crochet by El just seems harsh. You could have just laid out all the facts, like she hasn't credited her, her whole platform is built around the duck, etc, without saying the part about how you think it's intentional because that makes the situation particularly nefarious. HOWEVER, like I said, it is technically well within your rights to share your opinion, as it is within my rights to explain why I interpreted what you said the way I did. Now, I FOR SURE don't mean to be harsh or aggressive towards you in any way, and I don't think you're like super mean or a bad person. This is just my take on it, so this can be an area where we respectfully disagree with each other.
Then, as far as the "my duck" part. Ashley said in her video that she was calling it "my duck" and that's where people were getting confused. And you said in your video, that because of the lack of crediting Crocheted by El, it makes it seems like that's her duck. So I do admit that I mistakenly cited what you said. Though, I do think my point still stands that it's not uncommon to say something like, "look at my duck!" when showing a duck you crocheted even when it's not YOUR design, just simply because you physically made that item.
And now I think we're at the last point. I can see why you didn't focus on the legal issue with this, now that you've said that. I'm not a lawyer either, but at one point, I was going to school to become a paralegal (which was really fun... there was a whole mock trial at one point... but at the same time, A LOT of reading haha), so the law interests me. Even as a paralegal (had I become one officially), I couldn't give legal advice, but I know my way around some legal research, and for the most part infringement is pretty cut and dry anyway. But, of course, then we get to issues like this where it's not legally an issue, but probably should be. It's just not covered by intellectual property law at this time. But of course, ya probably shouldn't do it regardless lol. And I'm not saying I'm 100% qualified to cover this topic from a legal standpoint, it's just something that HASN'T been mentioned (at least in video form yet) in relation to this situation. And to me, it's really important. I felt like people weren't getting the FULL picture, without making that distinction. Morally wrong/legally perfectly acceptable. And where you were more interested in pondering the morality of the situation, I find it interesting that something can be morally wrong, but at the same time, not legally wrong.
And yes, I agree 10000000%, I absolutely don't think we should be ripping off one of our own, for sure!
And unrelated, but I was thinking about it the whole time I was watching your video, I LOVE your wallpaper. It's so cute and calming and gives like hippie nature vibes.
Quinn, you literally introduce yourself at the start of every video, so if this person is subscribed, she would have known your name. I liked your video and you mention up front to not go harass this Peter’s girl. Second video I see dissecting the drama, think it’s just the same of trying to get more view traffic. I enjoyed your video, this one I cannot finish viewing, too much finger pointing and misinformation about your video.
The responsible thing to do among our sister & brother crafters is to have reached out to them one on one, to have an adult discussion about the concerns. It was made into click bait, ultimately hurting one of our own in our community. This makes me sad. We should be holding each other up with support and education. Let's do better. 🧶
@coastalb1 Actually, I made this video after asking on social media and in my community tab if people wanted to hear my opinion on it and I even mentioned there was already another video about it when I asked. Multiple people told me they WANTED to hear my take. Has nothing to do with trying to get views. This actually was the SECOND video I released today. My regularly scheduled content has gotten me more views than this. Which makes sense because this video is only for a select group that cares about such a niche topic. If you did RUclips, you'd know niche topics don't typically bring in the most traffic/viewership.
That aside, if you listened BETTER, you would have heard me say that I stumbled upon this ONE video of hers, that's how I discovered her, but I subscribed. Why? Because, as I stated at the beginning of the video, I think she provided a beautiful commentary on the morality aspect and the potential consequences of these events. However, you are correct, she did introduce herself at the beginning of her video, which I did catch the SECOND time I watched it all the way through. Because I literally watched her video more than once for clarity sake because I'm TRYING to do by due diligence as I'm putting out my opinion and info on things. But I missed it the first time because I was more focused on listening to her talk about what was going on. My bad, I'm only human.
And no need to stress about not watching all the way through. I'll still get paid even with your partial view and commenting is engagement and will boost my video in the algorithm. Thus, more views. So don't worry, you've already done more than enough to support my channel!
My only comment today is that “ it’s a shame that the person thought a product made in China should replace hand crocheted items. “ Many RUclipsrs already are commenting that third party sellers are ruining their business. Oh well, get back to my crocheting 😂😂
And Quinn (Cat Cake) definitely pointed that out. We, as crocheters, are already competing with companies that mass produce crochet and now, by doing this, we're like potentially giving them the opportunity to rip off our characters too. I definitely understand the desire to outsource, but she should have outsourced using other crocheters and then we wouldn't even really need to have this conversation lol.
@@WorksofWhimsyCrochetCo I totally agree with you. It’s probably been an educational conversation for many newbies. Better to learn from others’ mistakes. AND you ruined my Christmas sale…I just realized the goofy grinch I crochet is a licensed character, now I have to skip it. 😂
I have to comment. I deal with facts all day long in my life.
The facts are: Ashley Peters used El's pattern to mass reproduce. Ashley Peter's apology video, while an apology were words. There was no congruency between her words and her emotions. It rang hollow. CatCake Crochet did not stalk anyone. What she did was reveal that Ashley Peters videos in its entirety were about the crocheted duck she used to mass produce, which bears repeating is not her original design. I took a peek at Ashley Peters videos and it is true, her entire youtube channel is about the duck. This video was made wholly to support the idea of small 's' stealing someones design and using it to reproduce for ones own benefit. The person in this video readily admitted to using major companies trademarked characters and reproducing them in crochet, knowing this is 'illegal'. But, again readily admits for her this is okay. This is the only reason this video was made. Facts are important. And knowing one's biases is also important. I am hazarding a guess, the person that made this video understands their own biases, but is ignoring this fact to support someone. As for CatCake and the accusation she is actually bullying someone, is perception. Viewing someones channel and pointing out the obvious is not bullying behaviour. I do not think anything is missing in CatCake's original response video. That being said I follow both of you. You are both smart women. However, I think one is going on personal bias and one is not. I forgot to mention, In noe of Ashley's videos did she once say where the duck pattern came from She never credits the person who created it. She even goes on to say either in a comment or her description in one of her vids she wants to 'create' more like the duck. She didn't even create the duck. She knew full well she was stealing from someone else. She is lying by 'omission.' Also, in her comments when viewers are complimenting her, she is absolutely gushing ion her responses, knowing full well what she was doing. Omitting facts does not dissolve oneself of responsibility for what they have done. Ashley Peters was quite deliberate in her omitting where she got the pattern from. That is called lying by ommission.
I would consider lying by omission wrong too. I hadn't really consider it like THAT because Idk... maybe I'm gullible... but I didn't really see the intent to hurt from Ashley (her apology didn't feel hollow to me). Conceptually, I saw the mass production as problem solving (only conceptually, I'm not saying it's right to mass produce ANY crochet characters, let alone those that aren't your own). I just felt like the issue was that she didn't think it through enough to realize it WOULD hurt someone. Not that it makes it okay/acceptable/excusable. But even in criminal law, they have two different charges for unaliving someone intentionally and unaliving someone by accident, you know what I'm saying. So to me, it matters a lot HOW this went down. Because of course, if her common sense was the only issue and she's stopped now and apologized, then we can all just move forward together as a community understanding that this ISN'T okay even if it's not technically violated infringement laws. However, of course, if she did 100% intend to leave out the information (which, I don't know that we'll ever know for sure, even if there are people that THINK this is the case), then obviously, my feelings about this would be a lot different than they are. And as you heard, my feelings are that this was a mistake and that she learned her lesson and is trying to do right NOW. But that's the hard part here because it's really difficult to tell what someone is thinking when they do something and I just try to give the benefit of the doubt.
@@WorksofWhimsyCrochetColove how you called out Quinn for "villainizing" Ashley. Then proceeded to make Quinn into the villain. Feminism at its finest 👏 👏
The way I see this is one person found a free pattern on the internet, had good success with selling the finished product, did not credit the pattern designer as was requested and then went on to source out the finished product overseas without contacting the pattern designer. This gives me a bad taste.
What I don't understand is why most of this video was about trademarks and big companies and nitpicking about someone else who thought it wasn't appropriate and giving legal opinions when you are not a lawyer.
Thank you!
These aren't legal opinions. This is basic factual information about intellectual property law that EVERYONE in the crochet industry should know because it's speaks to what we can and can't do in our day to day business.
It was also worth mentioning because if you go read the comments on Ashley's videos and Quinn's videos a lot of people were calling this infringement and it's technically not. So I explained how it's not infringement.
And, I personally think that's worth mentioning because some people see the world as black and white, and have the mentality of "if it's not illegal, then how could it be immoral". I thought that was an interesting perspective to hear about. And since this is my channel, I get to ask people to share their perspective.
Also, it's worth noting that before I even made this video, I ASKED people on RUclips and social media if they wanted to see it. When I made those posts asking, I went out of my way to mention that there was already a video made about, though I disagreed with some of the points made in the video and I felt like an important fact was left out (that this is not a legality issue being what I was referring too). The vast majority of people said they'd like me to make this video.
So, here we are.
But I agree with you, I kind of get a bad taste about mass producing what was originally a handmade item. That's part of what made it special. And this has definitely made me self reflect about making sure I'm giving credit EVERY TIME and not just most of the time when I post a thing I've made.
Quinn @ catcakecrochet put out a very respectful video in which she shared her thoughts regarding her own inner conflict about this situation compared to making plushies that were copyrighted by big corporations. She did talk honestly about the possibility of her own hypocrisy. I don’t appreciate your video, Jacki. Your video is the one that feels very clickbait to me. Sad you felt the need to put a long statement defending your perspective once Quinn responded. I
Watched your video to see if you were going to just go on to get clicks. And my opinion is yes. That is what you were after. Quinn discussed her personal struggle with the topic in an intelligent and intelligent and interesting way. I appreciate that she was not engaging in clickbait drama bs.
Yeah, I didn't want to make the exact same video so I said where I disagreed with Quinn. Because while she is entitled to her opinion, I am too lol. Plus, it's definitely not clickbait to mention the one thing no one has said in a video yet, INCLUDING Quinn, which is that legally, what Ashley did was perfectly acceptable. But you don't have to appreciate my video, as that's YOUR right.
Personally when I watched Quinn's video I took from it that she was bringing forward an important topic for discussion among the crochet community; specifically around the morality of this situation. You are right in saying that people interpret things in different ways but I genuinely didn't feel like Quinn was unfair in her presentation. I did enjoy Quinn's video and at the time of viewing it I left a comment to say (paraphrasing here) that (in my opinion) the decision to manufacture the duck and also failing to credit the original designer multiple times may not have been intentional but it is still disrespectful (again my opinion) to the designer. I do feel for Ashley and she absolutely does not deserve any hate but I believe this is a valuable debate that should be explored, and has encouraged all of us to consider our own values and responsibilities as makers.
Oh, I totally agree. I do think it was disrespectful but as you said too, I don't think it was intentional.
And that's part of why I wanted to make the video because like, I can see why Quinn drew the conclusions she did but at the same time, I think speculating that it was intentional to not give credit to the designer so Ashley could potentially take credit herself, to me, came off as villiainizing her more than was necessary. But of course, that's just MY opinion. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. I appreciated Quinns take on everything else. Like she posed good questions that I personally never even have considered as far as the potential consequences of this. And I was genuinely curious about everyone's take because I know there are some people that don't even consider it as morally wrong because how can it be if it's not illegal. And that's why I thought mentioning the lack of legality issues was very important to the conversation too.
Jacki, thank you for sharing a different perspective.
I don’t agree with everything you said but I respect you saying it.
I think the bias/ hypocrisy (that I also have) when it comes to stealing IP is that big companies will not hurt financially or emotionally if small makers sell their trademarked designs. Stealing from a small designer will though. And people feel empathy for other people, not big corporations.
Another theory I have as to why Ashley got so much hate is because we (crocheters and other crafters) typically want to support other crafters who turn their hobby into a small business out of a love for the craft itself, more so than the desire to make money.
And manufacturing a plushie as a knock-off of the original crocheted design in order to “keep up with demand” sounds silly to me. It was clearly an opportunity to make more money.
And everyone can have their own feelings about that. Because what is the point of having a business if not to make a profit, after all? Still, personally, that reasoning doesn’t sit right with me. (Again, others will feel differently and that’s valid)
I think Quinn was being fair and I didn’t interpret her assessment as villainizing. The comments, on the other hand, went too far in my opinion.
Final note, it was always only a morality issue. :)
You said everything I was thinking well … I also didn’t like the mass production thing as the whole point of making stuff and being a small business is just that. Taking something and making it cheaper and gas doesn’t mean it’s better. If People spend money for handmade items that’s what they need to be. I wish this was handled privately to avoid so many hurt feelings and hate in the process. No one deserves it .. none of the girls ❤
@@CompleteCreationsLLC I agree, it takes away the whole point of being a small crochet business.
I’m not convinced that handling it privately would have led to the same result since comments questioning her right to do this were being deleted and ignored.
But I do wish people who commented had only addressed the behavior instead of attacking the girl. I feel for them all too. ❤️
Oh for sure, it'd definitely an interesting choice to take a handmade product, in general, and mass produce it. HOWEVER, especially when that handmade product IS crochet being that it can't be machine done. So having the "knock off" manufactured instead of commissioning someone else to make them is an interesting choice, especially because with $1000, you could have FOR SURE hired hands to make at least SOME. Maybe not as many as you can have manufactured, but still. And if you pay for the materials and find someone who is quite fast at crocheting, they likely would have made the ducks for at least A LITTLE less than she was already selling them for, and then she could bump up the price on hers, just a smidgen, to help cover the fact that she's outsourcing and boom, there would be no issue. So you definitely made some good points.
And FOR SURE, I felt Quinn was *just a bit harsh* but those comments were *waaaaaay* out of line.
Yeah absolutely, I wish people would figure out the difference between sharing an objective opinion on something and being downright awful. Because, to me, there's a clear difference lol.
You make a great point Priscilla. I don't know anything about comments questioning her being deleted (though, I do know Quinn mentioned them being ignored... maybe I'm naive, but I'd like to think there's a logical explanation for that too. I'm a SMALL RUclipsr, and sometimes I get WEEKS behind on responding to comments, and her reels/tiktoks have like a bajillion views, so I'm SURE she's gotten more comments than me... so maybe that's why they seemed ignored... but also I could be wrong). BUT I do think this definitely would have gone down A LOT differently had Quinn not messaged Crocheted by El or made her video. So that is a SOLID point.
I haven’t seen the apology video, I’m glad to hear it’s been addressed and she appreciated the feedback. I felt Quinn was respectful and liked that from the beginning of her video she explained how it was not intended to cause any hate and actively discouraged people from villainising her. I think if people did that it is reprehensible and that is the act of bullying.
I don’t agree with reproducing someone’s pattern into a new item for monetary profit, but I’m not the police (legally or morally) and therefore it’s not up to me to take any particular action or thought for or against what has happened. I’d like to think it was all an innocent mistake and has been rectified.
I know I couldn’t do something like that and feel at peace with myself, but then I’ve been on this earth many more years than the lady involved. With age comes awareness. She has been through enough let’s hope it’s an end to it all.
Yeah, for sure. Ashley literally points out in her video that she's only 22 and her brains not even fully developed yet. The prefrontal cortex is the last to develop and coincidentally is responsible for good decision making. I know when I was once 22, and even being a mother by then, I look back now (at 30) and I can see that I was dumb as heck haha. I can't even imagine being that young and trying to run a business, let alone running a business and being on the internet.
I'd like to think I'm a good judge of character, and Ashley genuinely seemed to be sorry and seemed to be giving a lot more thought to her future actions. HOWEVER, it is worth noting, not everyone feels this way. Some of those people are being reprehensible as you put it, so I feel like we can disregard them. If you're going to be straight up nasty, your opinion of someone else is irrelevant. BUT some, like Quinn, and like a few people in this comment section, do think this wasn't a fully innocent mistake, and while I disagree, I don't think THEY should be disregarded because they were able to give an opinion and give examples as to why they feel that way without just straight up attacking her. So, you know, they SHOULDNT be ignored just because I don't agree, which is why I explained how I feel about what Quinn said in my video. I don't agree with it, even with the examples she gave, because I feel like there's some logical explanations for them, you know.
But, the good news is, I think we can ALL learn from Ashley's actions, whether they were fully intentional or not. Course, I wouldn't mass produce a plushie like this (though, I'm not against hiring help to ACTUALLY crochet), but this has really highlighted the fact that I have no excuses for not crediting a designer every single time. I've been better about it this year, but there's lots of room for improvement still. So that's what I learned, and what I'm going to work on.
My biggest problem is that Ashley did exactly what Temu, even Disney, and many other corporations do ALL the time with small artists and creators with original ideas. She took a free, not copyrighted image/plushie and began mass producing it without even crediting where she got the pattern from. Is it illegal? No. But it is horribly morally wrong. I think she is smart for trying to push her business forward and make it successful, but in my opinion what makes crochet businesses stand apart from mass produced clothing and TOYS is that they are HANDMADE. A person created these items with their own hands, that’s why I buy from any vendors that knit or sew because I can’t do that and I appreciate the time and effort and soul that went into it. I understand that her entire business is basically the duck now, so having a mass produced sewn duck will still fit her product line up, but to me I think a crochet business is meant to be handmade. Hire on another crocheter and pay them a wage if you can’t keep up with demand.
I think it's morally wrong if you think it all the way through and then do it anyway, for sure. But I think she only thought it through AFTER the fact when someone pointed it out. The reason I think that Ashley is not immoral IS because she made the course correction after the fact. Some damage is still done even if she donates the mass produced version (which she definitely said she will not be selling them, so that's good), because now some Chinese manufacturers were basically given the instructions to make the plushie now. So they could go ahead and mass produce it for themselves still because I'm sure it would get bought, it's a cute a$$ duck. But she did try to do the right thing after the fact, so I'm choosing to give her the benefit of the doubt and believe this was an honest, though dumb, mistake. That aside, of course, I totally agree. Crochet is and will always be special. Plushies are cooler when they're handmade, for sure. No doubt in my mind. So this wouldn't have been my first thought...mass producing vs commissioning people to crochet. A thousand dollars worth of crochet ducks would still be a lot of ducks.
i think she should have talked to el before doing any thing
For sure. AT THE VERY LEAST. Though, at the same time, I'm still not sure I love the idea of mass producing a regular ole plushie when she's supposed to be a crochet artist and planning to sell them along side crochet plushies, even if she had permission. We're handmade artists. Aren't we supposed to believe handmade is better, more special? Though, like I said in my video, I certainly understand the desire to outsource some market prep lol. That's just not how I think it should be done.
I loved this video and the points you made. I would love to hear your thoughts on pattern making and how likely is it that when making a pattern, you unintentionally come out with the same pattern as someone else.
I've honestly wondered that too. I feel like it could be pretty easy to end up with an identical pattern unintentionally. A lot of us start stuff the exact same way lol. But it's hard telling honestly. And I haven't really done a pattern video because it's like a wing it thing for me. Some people, like all from jade, start with a drawing. However, I start by just making a thing lol. So I can't really show/explain that too well.
I can do anything I want to with a pattern I paid for, except share it or give it away. I make Yodas, Coraline dolls, and spiderman. this was a free pattern and I have made two ducks. I would NEVER send work to a cheap Chinese company though.
Kind of... If you're bringing Yodas and Coralines to markets though, make no mistake, that IS infringement. But outside of selling them, you can make them for yourself, for your friends, for you kids, to decorate your house. Whatever you want as long as you're not profiting! I've never made that duck pattern personally, but maybe I should lol. It really is cute. And by make, I want to clarify, I will be crocheting it. Though, I'm not against having one of my own designs turned into a real plushie one day. But it would be something to complex to really be a good market make anyway. But it would just be cool to design something like that OF MY OWN.
I commend Ashley for apologizing, I think it’s the right thing to own up to your mistakes. Also it’s even better that she did own up even though she is a small channel because if she had let it blow over like you said, it would eventually come back to the light and she could get “canceled.” It shows integrity and growth. Also I think licensed patterns should not be sold and should only be made for personal use or gifts. The only way I think it should be possibly monetized is through making a video on how to make it or showing it off. Licensed items are still someone’s art and as an artist I can say it honestly hurts when someone uses your designs without permission. Even just being a person it’s not fun being copied even though it is “the greatest form of flattery.” However, if you wanna buy those patterns and sell them that’s at your own risk and moral beliefs. I think making licensed items are fun and a great way to share the things you love with others, but this is possible without stealing. This is probably partly why she didn’t even think about it. If we as a community are so okay with stealing ideas and designs that we condone putting patterns on a website instead of Etsy because we know there will be consequences then we are basically saying that our individual art and ideas are not worth protecting either. It’s just best to take the necessary precautions and respect others work.
Yeah. I kind of agree. It's best if we keep things black and white. If it's not yours, don't profit off of it (except in the context of paying for a pattern and making it for a market.) But don't mass produce someone else's design. Try to keep the trademarked stuff just for funsies. That kind of deal. And I also think Ashley apologizing was the right thing to do. It felt sincere to me. And she seemed like she was actually reflecting on her current actions and how to be better in the future. Which is really important and shows growth.
This is totally giving mean girl vibes and could have been handled privately by the owner of the pattern and person involved directly. This could literally have taken out someone’s business the way people are nowadays and I hate that for anyone. I completely agree with a lot this person said in her video but do believe it could have all been avoided without anyone getting hate or hurt feelings but do appreciate you speaking on this.
She could have inspired others to do the same. Publicly speaking about things like this teaches ppl what the proper etiquette is.
For sure the target attention doesn’t feel nice but she did make a mistake. The last person this should have been unfair for was crochetedbyel and I think that’s who CatCakeCrochet was speaking up for.
@@MarleneNailStudio she absolutely did and why if she was spoken to privately and a video made by anyone on these situations would have been fine but to pretend we didn’t know this was going to cause a target on someone is absolutely mean girls shit. People do do this just to make situations aware of but add a person into the equation is then brings it to this situation at hand. I’m not saying she isn’t wrong.. she is but the person that felt the need to not speak privately and share with the world a dicey situation and then a person attached is bound for a attack and that’s what I think is wrong.
I get what you're saying, but it's worth noting that Crocheted by El didn't even realize it was happening until Quinn (Cat Cake) told her, so at that point another party was already involved. And I supposed technically Quinn didn't HAVE to make her video, but I do think it's definitely part of what made Ashley apologize for the situation. Which is the right thing to do. And, I do kind of agree with Marlene that speaking on this publicly will help prevent another situation like this, which is good. At the very least, it'll help persuade people not to do it because even though Ashley seems like she's made an honest mistake, people came at her HARD. And you KNOW people won't be as forgiving if this kind of thing happens a second time. The prospect of having a community of people say really mean things to you can definitely be motivating to really carefully think what you say and do through.
@@CompleteCreationsLLC Privately it could have gone ignored just like some of the comments asking if it was her original design. The whole point was to get ppl taking about it to hopefully fix the wrongs.
All I’m saying is accountability is a good thing and we can all grow from it and I guess I’m more empathetic to how sad this would of been to crochetedbyel, the original designer, if it had reached the selling of a mass produced product stage. Cause it’s harder to fix then. 🩵
I think she was speaking up for Crocheted by El too. And Quinn was the one who told Crocheted by El, so at that point Quinn was already involved anyway. And you know, I think that was the right thing to do. Telling her. It was important to get her feelings on it before even speaking out.
But I personally don't think people should be attacking Ashley, even if they feel she did this on purpose because no one gains anything by being hateful. But that's just me, and maybe I'm biased about it BECAUSE I believe her when she says it was in honest mistake so I feel particularly bad for her that people are being mean, but still.
However, I definitely think that talking about it will ABSOLUTELY help sway people against doing it too. If anything, they'll see the hate this girl's getting and at least think twice lol.
I don’t think Quinn @catcakecrochet villainized her at all. The video Quinn made was before the apology video. She was going off of the information that was available and at the time the videos that had the most attention on her channel were about this duck. Which a lot of ppl were under the impression it was her design.
In my opinion giving credit is the bare minimum. Some of these crochet designers do a lot of work and share it with us for free. So a shout out, a link, a mention or even just a pinned comment from the start is the least we could do to show our gratitude. Especially if it becomes your best seller! If she would have done that I feel like a lot of ppl might have called her out sooner than Quinn did.
That being said I think @ashleyrosepeters is being genuine and even her initial response to the negative comments was admirable.
That's a good point that I didn't actually specify in the video... You're right. Technically Quinn's video came first, so while I see it as a bit harsh (because she actually speculated that Ashley was intentionally trying to take credit for the design), it's hard to say if I'd still feel that way if the apology video didn't exist/I didn't watch it like immediately after watching Quinn's video.
Knowing what I do now, I feel like I can see Ashley's train of thought and how she ended up in such a compromising position without really realizing at first. But Quinn didn't have that kind of insight when she made that video. So that's honestly a great point and I didn't actually consider it like that before I made my statements about how I feel like she was a bit too hard on Ashley.
Not that I don't think Ashley was in the wrong, of course. But I just felt like saying it looked intentional was harsh. Though, if you do take away the apology video, I could actually kind of see how she ended up at that conclusion.
All that aside, I know I need to get better at giving credit to the designers. In my first year in business I was pretty bad at this. This year, I've done better, but I'm still not doing it 100% of the time. So, there's still room for improvement. It is the right thing to do, and this has really opened my eyes about doing better.
BUT it's worth mentioning that I'm a crochet designer too, and while I put in my patterns that I'd like credit too, I mostly just do that because it's standard lol. But I don't necessarily actually care about credit in most cases. Meaning, you don't necessarily have to mention me up front, but I'd like it, if someone asks whose pattern it is, if I get some credit at that point. Just because that could lead to sales haha. But like generally, I don't necessarily need the credit, but of course, don't steal my designs or have them mass produced into an actual plushie. Just get help with crocheting them if you need more for markets.
While a pattern has an automatic copyright ©️ you still want to be able to prove you actually created it. No mailing it to yourself to get a postmark on the envelope is not legit. It only covers the pattern. Not the object.
Trademarks are not automatic you have to actually apply for those and then you have to defend it so you don't lose it.
In writing titles and ideas cannot be copyrighted. So I could totally write about an orphan attending a magical boarding school only to find he is the chosen one destined to save the magical world. The reason I can't name it Harry Potter and (fill in the blank) is because it is trademarked.
Or to bring it back to crafts I can't copyright a four patch pattern or a log cabin pattern those patterns have been around as long as there has been quilting.
Or can anyone really copyright a crochet sock pattern? I don't think so because, again, that pattern has been around as long as crochet has been around.
But wouldn't the duck being a plush and not a crochet pattern make it different enough to not be the same thing legally speaking?
And I agree that she might not be able to sell these as a handmade item anymore since she had them massed produced in China. Yeah those ducks are no longer handmade.
Correct Lyra! This is all great information and examples!!! Also, I see think I see what you're saying about the duck plush and the crochet pattern being different enough to not be the same thing legally. Copyright only protects the pattern, but if she trademarked the character, even as a crochet plushie, I'm pretty sure Ashley couldn't make a plushie out of it, because at the end of the day a crochet plushie and a commercially manufactured plushie are still both plushies. And to use Harry Potter as an example too, someone couldn't turn the Harry Potter books into a Harry Potter movie without getting the rights because even though it's a different medium (book versus movie), its still the same characters, if that makes sense. So if she had a trademark, I do believe Ashley would still need to get permission to make a plushie of it or even put it on sticker like some people do with their crochet plushie characters.
I feel like in July 2024 the way social media is there is no way or reason you should be posting or reposting in this case creating without some sort of creator credit. We all know better! period. atleast a shoutout or ask the creator for their opinion or advice on the thing in question. its a risk with the cancel culture of the last few years.
Not that I didn't know it was important before this, but this definitely made me re-examine my actions. I have been better this year about crediting the designers of the patterns I use without being asked first. HOWEVER, I definitely am guilty in letting laziness get in the way of that because it takes more effort to get the link for every post/description box than it does to just post and only do it if/when someone asks. So, I'm going to strive to do better in this. And not just because of cancel culture, or anything like that, but because it's the right thing to do.
What I don't understand is how you take the "build your own duck" idea and turn it into a mass-produced plushie. Not only does the item lose its handmade charm, but the customer can no longer choose how the duck looks. How does this solve the demand for what she was offering? I agree that she should have hired others to crochet the duck for her so that she could continue offering the product that her customers wanted - a "custom" duck. It was a strange thought process in my opinion.
The hats were meant to be magnetic and she ordered different colours so that people can still mix and match. She said she’s giving them away to charity now though as she had already ordered them but feels bad about selling them after all this.
@@emmadavies8184 Thanks for clarifying. That makes more sense.
I see someone already explained the customization process for the actual plushie. It was a good idea as far as customizing the actual plushie goes. But I agree, this isn't really a solution to market prep even if it WAS her design because we're crochet artists. We crochet. An actual plushie isn't crochet. So even though this does give her more stock for markets, which is helpful, I definitely don't think this was the best way to go about. Like, I can see how she got there in her head, but most of the markets I do require the stock ALL be handmade. So this would be an issue in that sense. And I do think it steps on the fact that we're supposed to be handmade artists, and she took something previously handmade and made it not handmade anymore. All this to say, objectively speaking, I get her thought process. She bought more stock, that gives her more stock. But subjectively, this is a bit of a strange thought process from someone who is a handmade artist.
Thank you for explaining this!!! Very helpful!
Personally I feel like it should have been handled by the involved parties. Just a little to much being made out of an honest mistake. Came back to say it's not any different than getting a bunch of your friends that crochet to join in and make a bunch of something you need for market. I realize it's not a crochet item but it is essentially the same idea.
Your take is exactly why it's an interest conversation even for those NOT directly involved. I agree that there is nothing wrong with her getting a second set of hands for crocheting the plushies. Especially because this is a free pattern, so it's not even like she'd be sharing a paid pattern (which IS covered by copyright law). But, I do think it is more of a gray area that she outsourced an ACTUAL plushie of the character. I personally wouldn't do it (maybe to have one for myself, but certainly not to sell), but it's legally okay. That's why this is such an interesting scenario, in my opinion. But, I hear ya, it would be tidier if Quinn (Cat Cake) and I didn't involve ourselves in it.
@@WorksofWhimsyCrochetCo Definitely wasn't meaning to sound harsh it's just been in my face so much the last couple of days. I agree people need to be educated on the ins and outs of copyright and infringement. It's a slippery slope and one I won't go down not even when someone asks if I can make our college mascot or an item that has their logo on it. I'll be happy to make a red and black scarf or hat but in no way am I going any farther than that. She definitely overstepped with the mass market approach and like someones comment I read now that manufacturer could take the idea and run.
I was doing macrame when it became all the rage again and then hobby lobby, michaels etc started selling the products so cheaply made but people were buying them. So it does hurt us in the long run as small business owners.
I have to say I do enjoy your channel because it is very informative. So you keep doing what you are doing.
Duck gate, lol
It was either "duck gate" or "the duck that broke the internet" which is a reference to Kim Kardashian's butt from a magazine cover from like a decade ago haha.
Parody would be like Pride and Prejudice and Zombies.
Blood and Honey uses A. A. Milne Pooh. I think.
I could be wrong, but I do believe the Blood and Honey Pooh wears a red top of some sort. And Disney was who put the red shirt on Pooh. However, I could be wrong, for sure, because I've never seen the movie lol. I like horror movies, but not like that lol.
@@WorksofWhimsyCrochetCo I did not see the movie. I heard it was awful and not the so horrible it is good awful. I could be wrong as well.
Blood and Honey was possible because the copywrite expired for the book version of Pooh. Disney still holds copyright for the yellow bear with red t shirt
@RowanFey The bear in the movie has a red shirt, which IS Disneys adaptation. To the best of my knowledge, it's because the movie can be argued as a parody of Winnie the Pooh why it's not infringement. AND it's worth noting that Disney has "Winnie the Pooh" and "Pooh" trademarked, yet the movie was still called Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey.
I thought it was a Pooh-ish spoof of Five Nights at Freddy's. I could be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure my teenager mentioned the correlation.
Thank you! I actually don’t even think it was morally wrong as it’s not illegal , harmed no one, and she does credit the pattern maker in her other videos - I know because I watched her before that video and used her info to find the duck pattern. I think it is interesting how many people on Catcakes video commented so negatively about the young woman. Meanwhile, so many crochet pattern makers are blatantly using other folks’ patterns with the smallest of changes (how many ducks/frogs/turtles are out there that are basically twins?) or are outright doing copyright infringement and not a word is said. I think it defeats the idea of handmade, wasn’t a bright idea to post about doing so on a video targeting people who sell crochet, and I am not sure if her future booth spots are based on her selling handmade items.
See, this is why it's worth noting! I personally think it's uncool to do, but it's an interesting question to pose, "how can something be morally wrong, if it's not legally wrong?" That's essentially why I thought it was so crazy that no one had bothered to look at things from a legal standpoint yet. Though, after talking to Cat Cake (who's name is Quinn, I learned), she said she didn't cover the legal side because she didn't feel qualified to because she's not a lawyer. Fair. Honestly, that makes total sense to me in hindsight. But at the same time, I just felt like it was really important and didn't give a FULL picture of the situation to NOT mention the legal side. So, here we are. And it's worth noting, that Quinn did explicitly say in her video that she's against ripping off one of our own, so she did touch indirectly touch on the point you made about folks' basically stealing patterns and making tiny changes. In my opinion, I feel like certain things are like always going to look similar. Like I've got a dinosaur that looks similar to a lot of other dinosaurs, but I wanted a faster market make, so I made up my own dinosaur basically. HOWEVER, I think there's a difference between taking a generic shape like that and making my own version, and someone seeing something like KnotJadedCo's leggy frogs and making their own. Like no one pioneered the generic dinosaur shape, so to me, it's fair game if we all make our own Dino patterns shaped like that. HOWEVER, to the best of my knowledge KnotJadedCo was the first person to create frogs shaped like that. And they have a clear, unique, distant shape that's not similar to a generic frog shape. So, at that point, I think it's wrong for people to make and sell their own leggy frog patterns. EXCEPT for Jo's Web who made a leggy frog, but it's distinctly different than the original version. In my opinion, it's different enough that, while you can tell it was inspired by the original design, it's not a direct rip off. Of course, all this is my own opinion, so take it with a grain of salt lol.