**news From Provo Craft Regarding Licenses** Please Read**
Decorating By JenniferAtwood Updated 22 Apr 2010 , 1:20pm by dburris1
Anyway - I guess looking at Jenn being very upset about some of the accusations that we received got me a little more in defense mode than I realized - but I love her with all my heart and don't like to see her sad.
Sorry if I overreacted ...
Tobias
Understandable and commendable. Sorry for adding to it however unintended.
I get what you are saying about your files. You are right, with no way to protect them, if you were to offer them for sale, they would undoubtedly be shared. You both have to decide if it's worth it to you. No-one could blame you for not wanting to take that risk, they are exclusive to you and your customers now, if they started popping up all over the net they would be less special. 
. I've not used any of these types of files yet, is there a way you can add the creators information and protect the file so it can't be edited? I'm guessing there probably isn't a totally secure way, but I don't know. I know these techie people seem to be able to crack anything these days.
Jenn and Tobias, I thank you for the information. I had read it on another blog earlier, and do appreciate seeing here. Some people aren't aware of where to find information, and since many cake people visit this site it is appreciated.
I don't understand why people feel the need to send you hateful emails, it is just not necessary. We are all welcome to state an opinon, why can't that be done without being hateful.
I wish I was close enough to take one of your classes, it would be well worth the time and money. You are teaching a technique, just as you would if you were teaching about patchwork cutters. I love your blog and look forward to any other teaching ventures you guys decide to do.
Please realize for every 1 hateful person out there, there are 10 of us who may not always speak up, who do appreciate what you do and are thankful for that.
Funny how you guys seem to be all stuck with stars in your eyes for Provo's decision, when the Policy didn't have a legal leg to stand on and they are just wording it's withdrawal benevolently trying to instill good graces amongst purchasers, because angry customers are bad for business.
If it had been a real enforceable policy they wouldn't have pulled it so super fast when it was questioned. They would be enforcing it and deciding how much to charge people for the licensing agreements, and making more money on it. But it isn't and they can't. Stop thanking Provo for trying to rip you off and then deicing not to... what they tried to do is ridiculous!
I wasn't thanking Provo , I was thanking Jennifer and Tobias for relaying info.
I do a lot of machine embroidery for my Retro Apron shop and understand the copyright issue. There are a lot of designs I cant use if I am putting it on something I am going to sell. I can create my own PES or HUS files and use those but I cannot use the images from the design cards for sale.
Same Thing.
The only issue I had with PC was them not disclosing this prior to my purchase.
I understand that without the uproar that ensued over this they might not have rescinded their policy and , yes the squeeky wheel gets the grease but at the same time I don't think what they were doing was any different than many other craft policies. Yes it would have affected the way I used the product and I may not have wanted it at all if there were limitations to what I could do with it, but in the end they are just another corporation developing a product that they can make money on.
I do not condone nor villainize their actions , All I now is YES I am getting the Cake.... because I want it.
I have had a few Pm's & emails trying to make me feel bad for getting one, for giving money to a company that would do such a thing....
Do I feel bad? NO
I am sure if we all looked into the backgrounds of some of the other companies we buy products from we would find issues and policy's we don't agree with but many of us would still buy from them.
I understand the anger but don't understand why it is being directed at people that have nothing to do with it.
That's awful that anyone would send out ugly PM's to you, Jen and Tobias or anyone else, but that is precisely why I cautioned not to speak for anyone with that old adage, "Don't shoot the messenger." The whole thing is shady. Yes shady dealings happen all the time. I don't like them either. My post wasn't directed at you or anyone in particular, just towards the "Oh thank you Provo" attitude in general. I don't think they deserve any thanks in this instance. They did what they did before they had to be told to do it. But the misdirection in the wording of the explanation is trying to make the company look good. What happened just leaves a bad after taste. No one can stand up and say, "Hey we were ill advised and we screwed up and now we fixed it. We are sorry for any ill feelings, confusion and inconvenience this has caused." A company that is willing to be that forthright has my respect.
Didn't mean to sound condecending. I admit I was a little agitated, not necessarily because of your post, but because of some of the downright hateful PMs and emails both Jenn and I received Tobias
The thread that was posted here (and locked) about Linda sounded to me like you were speaking on behalf of PC. I won't get into my personal feelings about that, but after reading that I thought Provo Craft was lucky to have someone who is trusted and respected in the caking community to speak for them. That thought crossed my mind again after reading this thread. You may not work directly for PC, but bad business for them may mean bad business for you and I think it muddies the water a bit and may cause some question your motives. That said, some people need to adopt a "take it or leave it" attitude with regard to what is said about PC and move on. There's no need for anyone here to be attacked.
I don't think they deserve any thanks in this instance. They did what they did before they had to be told to do it. But the misdirection in the wording of the explanation is trying to make the company look good. What happened just leaves a bad after taste. No one can stand up and say, "Hey we were ill advised and we screwed up and now we fixed it. We are sorry for any ill feelings, confusion and inconvenience this has caused." A company that is willing to be that forthright has my respect.
I agree! 
I also have a feeling this isn't the end of the licensing issue , since now there is a huge uproar over on the cricut message boards by the scrapbooking community, demanding the same exemption from the angel poicy for selling their paper goods. Some of it was getting quite ugly also coming after us cakers with pitchforks "why do they get special treatment" kind of thing. A lot of those posts were deleted shortly after going up.... Big Brother is watching! LOL
It seems to me PC bit off a bit more than they can chew with the cake ! ahahhaahahah
PUN INTENDED!
This sort of thing is nothing new to those of us in the papercrafting industry. All of the companies instill the "angel" policy. it's a way of us using their images and graphics without paying a licensing fee. Of course, pre-licensed images such as Garfield have their own rules and requirements. Provo craft isn't doing anything to cake decorators that every paper crafting company hasn't been doing to us for years.
I have a cricut type die cutting machine from Quickuts called the Silhouette. I wondered how all this would work out, knowing about the angel policy. This will be interesting I think.
For the question about "what if I modify someone elses design a bit", It's no longer the same design and therefore yours to do as you please has always been the answer I've received.
There was a post earlier regarding "card makers" getting to make unlimited cards and things with a design and sell them. That's not true. Paper crafters have been bound by that exact same angel policy forever. Not just provo craft, but by literally EVERY company that deals with images and graphics. This is sooooo nothing new. As I posted previously, I'm really eager to see what comes of all this. "Cakers" may have inadvertently opened a HUGE can of worms that changes ALL imaging copyrights. If we can use a cricut image as often as we want on sales, paper crafters should get the same right with their work. I see this being HUGE all the way around.
But Tobias posted an excellent point regarding their own graphics and licensing. My question is...... "Where is the limit?" If the image or graphic is yours to do "as you please" from the time of purchase, then shouldn't there still be SOME protection for the creator of that image? If I make a design and am KIND enough to offer it for sale for you to use on your goods (whether you sell them or not) I should at LEAST be protected from you being able to share or sell my image to others. There has to be SOME limitation on it. I've never been a fan of being limited by how many times I can use a particular image before it infringes on the angel policy, but there has to be a happy medium somewhere. If not a limitation on amount of use, then absolutely NO sharing of any kind. Sounds like a fair deal to me.
I agree with alot of what is being said that PC is just shady with the way the handled this. My only gripe is that with respect to Linda and the issue with that. I think that is wrong with how they treated her especially when she put in so many hours working with them and doing demostrations and such. Also I read her website and I read the response that Jennifer had to that. I think that Linda deserves more respect that what was said. Even though she may not have been the one to start using Cricut Expression the way she did, but she did train Jennifer. I believe that if someone was nice enough to show you a new technique and it has made your business more popular because of it.. don't talk bad about them when they have a conflict with a company such as in this situation. I know I wouldn't be happy either if I put time and effort into something just to have that company not even give me any type of credit especially when I go through the trouble of agreeing to be in the infomerical and then you cut me completely but you use my products (i.e. her gumpaste) in the video?? Who does that really??? We should be supporting one another when something like this happens not publicly saying how disappointed you are in their behavior because honestly you don't know what really went down between PC and Linda. Just my take on it. Cake decorators and bakers have a hard enough time as it is getting the public to understand that cake decorating is an art and should be justly compensated.
What about the third party licensed cartridges. I have seen many cakes made with these. Did the people obtain licensing permission or are they violating copyright laws?
When it comes to characters and such (ie garfield, scooby doo, Disney, Pixar) the individual USING that image has to have license to SELL those items. If you make a cake and put Lightning McQueen all over it and decorate it up with the cars logo and such, you need a license to sell it. If you don't have a license, you're selling it illegally.
There have been a lot of questions about the Angel Policy and how it
applies to those who have and will purchase Cricut Cake. After
thoughtful consideration, Provo Craft has come to a conclusion that
we know will please our Cricut Cake fans. Starting now and moving
forward, Provo Craft content used in cutting edible material in
connection with the Cricut Cake machine is exempt from the Angel
Policy. We know many of you are interested in making and selling
cakes, cupcakes, cookies and other sweet treats and we are certain
this decision will support your endeavors. If you have any
questions, please feel free to call Provo Craft customer service at
Quote by @%username% on %date%
%body%