I love the saying to but don’t use it, yet have seen other items on here from various seller using it, sorry but you need to know that this saying in text
“I love you to the moon and back”
has been trademarked using it is breaching copyright
1 Like
I just ran the search and there are rather a lot of them aren’t there - question is should we report them to admin? (the answer to which is probably technically yes)
1 Like
Yes this has been discussed before (Google said " “I love you to the moon and back” has now been trademarked ") .
I spotted one on the front page earlier.
I made a suncatcher inspired by the phrase and renamed it to “I love the moon” to be on the safe side.
1 Like
Yes, this has come up before, and we have to be so careful. Perhaps we should report these items to Folksy, let’s hope they read the forums and take action themselves.
Jayne
1 Like
I think it would take a few days of clicking @SashaGarrett there are lots
Yes @JOYSofGLASS that’s where i saw the item, then went looking through a few pages, it silly really to take a chance on being found, you did the right thing changing the phase slightly, your work is gawgus 
That’s what i was hoping for @qteacup would rather them have a chance of seeing this post and sorting it themselfs.
I remember last year i got a shamballa bracelet removed from the other site and had an email threatening court action 
was sh*t scared
1 Like
Folksy don’t do anything about copyright breaches- if you report something, they just say the person could have permission for all they know (not in those exact words!)…
1 Like
Yep it’s also Trademarked.
Why do you think the the advert says’ I love you to the stars and back.# as they can’t use to the moon and back.
Also I think the owners have to report it to Folksy admin or straight to the offender. If we see it we can only alert the holder of the Trademark/copyright.
It really is a minefield isn’t it?! I imagine most of the sellers using it have no idea that they’re doing anything wrong. I’ve never had any plans to use this phrase in a design but, if I had, it never would have occurred to me that a phrase that everyone uses could be trademarked. Makes me wonder how many other phrases there are that could be copyright breaches. It seems crazy really that someone can trademark a phrase that is in common usage and which they didn’t invent! Ah well - such is life…
1 Like
I didn’t know that was copyrighted. But I was helped in summer by someone I can’t remember who as I’d used shamballa in one of my titles. I quickly changed it after being told. And I had an item with a certain mouse on it so I removed that too as I don’t want any copyright issues.
I would prefer to be told by someone so I can change it.
2 Likes
Are you using invisible ink @SallyandtheFreckles 
Just been to look in your shop, your pictures are Fab how do you get the background that white.
@PocketfulCreations it’s barmy i now, these days they try and trademark any word they think might fetch money in.
Better that a fine, i dismantled my shamballa bracelets @hobbitgirlie1880 not worth a couple of pounds profit.
2 Likes
hi there & thanks : - )
i am in a constant panic about my photos.
i take the photos of my brooches on my windowsill which is white and the wall next to it is white too so it is almost like a continuous backdrop of white.
i then use photoshop elements, which i had free with my bamboo pad, to brighten the photo up a bit as it is so dark at the moment and i have no proper lighting.
the cards as naturally very white so i just brighten a little as again i haven’t got great lighting.
ps did you start your blog in the end ?
1 Like
Imagine in 50 years time every word will be copyrighted, I doubt I’ll be around to see it though
1 Like
You would need to report any possible infringement to the copyright holder, eg disney, marvel etc, Folksy wouldn’t know if an individual shop had a license or permission. As far as I know Folksy won’t remove listings until the copyright/trademark holder contacts them about the specific listing. it’s a minefield.
1 Like
They look very professional Sally, thank you for sharing 
oh the blog lol no that was to much stress lol decided against it in the end, i never heard anything from them so all that fuss for nothing
1 Like
I really do think people need to get a life. I can understand products or names such as Disney /Frozen etc being copyrighted but sayings … really???. Quite clearly some people have lives that are so wonderful that all they have to worry about are things that are extremely trivial. A design/ creation etc is something that someone has taken the time to come up but sayings are made up from everyday words that have been existence for probably hundreds of years so people should not be allowed to copyright them !!!
3 Likes
I have mixed feelings about this. Apparently “I love you to the moon and back” was not in common useage before the book came out so it is within the letter of the law, however I think a certain young american female singer is sailing very close to the wind with some of the phrases she has chosen to protect.
This all comes down to who owns the language, and whether or not it is really desirable to restrict artists to paying their respects to the works of those who have gone before them by quoting lines or phrases that inspired them, or giving their own “take” on a famous image, for example. Being constantly quoted (and mis-quoted) more often than not has not exactly harmed William Shakespeare.
I think if the original work is strong enough then it won’t be harmed by imitation. And if the original author or their descendants think they should be profiting from somebody else’s idea inspired by the original work, then why aren’t the doing it themselves? Or collaborating with their fan…
Sam x
2 Likes
Hi Samantha I think it all getting too silly if i’m honest, a designs, artwork sketch’s, paintings i can understand, I used to say this phrase to my kids over 25 years ago when they used reply to me saying love you night night and they would say, how much do you love me, lol they will be trademarking good night sweet heart next lol.
2 Likes
That’s the thing about language isn’t it. It’s a code, with a limited number of words that can be arranged to create a meaning. Painting (or even photography) is not limited in that way. There are unlimited numbers of subjects that can be chosen, colour can be mixed in an unlimited number of ways. Unless you are writing Lewis Carroll style nonsense poetry the same words in similar combinations will inevitably be used again and again, particularly if they concern subjects like love!
Sam x
1 Like
But it’s the exact arrangement of those words that makes the difference between a bland sentence and something special…which is why writers’ and poets’ works are protected by copyright. If that particular arrangement has captured the imagination of so many people, it’s obviously a very special (and clever) use of words. That’s worth protecting if you’re the author.
It’s usually only an issue if other people are trying to make money from it.
2 Likes
Not all writers works are protected by copyright. When a book goes out of copyright then you can quote it as much as you like without fear of retribution. That’s the problem. Truly great authors are having their words used over and over again, and the quickly scrawled lyrics of popular songs are being protected with draconian powers as if they were the pronouncements of a god.
I used the example of Shakespeare for a reason. There is a well known and excellently written play called “The Name of the Rose.” Should that play not have been written, because Shakespeare came up with the phrase? There are others. The novel “Cover Her Face” uses a phrase by Christopher Marlowe in the title. As somebody who is an amateur poet herself and a great lover of classical literature, I regard this kind of use as legitimate. All words have been used before by somebody, it is the context of the story that changes the meaning and context is infinitely variable. So when a novel set in the 1930’s quotes Christopher Marlowe who was writing in the C16 they add meaning to his words and bring out further meanings of their own. That is art.
All art is derivative. Who knows, Shakespeare may have heard or read these words himself and used them in his own way. A word or phrase should not be the subject of copyright. It is the entire poem, song or novel that is the art-work. The situation at the moment is becoming analogous to saying that artists cannot use the colour yellow, because Turner used it so effectively in his paintings.
In the end this all comes down to money. Copyright is controlled by lawyers. Lawyers very rarely get involved in cases where there is no profit OR no publicity (which generates profit) for them.
Sam x
3 Likes