Fans of quilting personalities Marianne and Mary Fons were thrilled in February of this year when the mother daughter duo launched their own podcast. Called Quilt Your Heart Out the show was an hour-long call-in advice program for quilters.
A fan of the public radio show, Car Talk, Marianne Fons envisioned Quilt Your Heart Out as a show with a similar format, but across generations. At ages 66 and 36 Marianne and Mary would share wisdom about patchwork and about life. At the time of launch Mary wrote in a publicity email, “The quilter podcast space is wide open and Quilt Your Heart Out plans to be the most popular and well-loved podcast in the industry/community.”
Last week, after only 10 episodes, that plan was foiled. The show was shut down suddenly and completely. The only explanation given was a 30 second farewell spot, which disappeared shortly thereafter when the show was removed from iTunes, and a brief mention in a post on Mary’s blog, Paper Girl written in her signature conversational style. “Ever gotten a cease and desist letter?” she asks. “Wow, are they ever lame. I got one, once. I was told to cease and desist a really fun project that I was working on. I had to cancel it, too, or go to court and stuff. I really loved that podcast. Did I say that out loud? Where was I?”
In the three months it lasted Quilt Your Heart Out had built a solid fan base. It was downloaded 43,000 times, an impressive number for a new podcast. When the show disappeared listeners like Rachel Reid quickly showed their disappointment. “I waited patiently for new episodes every week,” she wrote in a comment on Mary’s post. “My mother and I enjoyed listening to it while we quilted together. This is outrageous.” Another listener, Nancy Neely, exclaimed, “The podcasts were great. How could they possibly be wrong?! Outrage!”
Photo of Marianne and Mary Fons by Brave Lux Photography.
To understand what may have happened to Quilt Your Heart Out, some history of the Fonses is helpful. In 1999 Marianne Fons and Liz Porter founded Fons & Porter, a quilting-focused media company that produced the Love of Quilting magazine which was picked up by PBS in 2003 and turned into a television show by the same name. New Track Media bought Fons & Porter in 2006 and in 2014 F+W bought New Track during an 18-month spree of acquiring craft media companies that also included the purchase of Interweave, Martha Pullen Company, and LoveSewing. Marianne Fons signed a non-compete upon the sale of the company.
After having co-hosted a few Love of Quilting episodes with her mother, Marianne, in 2011 Mary Fons, a performer and writer, proposed the idea for a show called Quilty that would focus on novice quilters like herself. She wanted to appeal to the new generation of Internet savvy quilters by putting the series on YouTube. Quilty ran for five years and aired over 250 6-10 minute episodes, each getting tens of thousands of views, some in the hundreds of thousands. She was also the editor of the Quilty print magazine until she parted ways with F+W at the end of 2014. Mary signed a non-compete as part of her employment contract with F+W. It expires at the end of 2017.
I reached out to Mary to find out exactly what happened to the podcast. She explained to me she is bound through the end of 2017 by the non-compete clause that she signed when she was hired by F+W. She also said that her mother is bound by a non-compete with F+W which was put into place when she sold Fons & Porter. Mary explained that both she and her mother are very fearful that F+W will take further legal action against them and therefore felt they couldn’t talk to the media about the fate of the podcast.
I contacted Sara Domville, president of F+W, and Kristi Loeffelholz, vice president for the Quilt + Sew community at the company, to see if I could learn more details. In a phone conversation Domville explained to me that F+W shut down the show due to a need to protect its trademark. “We take the protection of our brand seriously,” Domville said. “We paid millions of dollars for Fons & Porter and we have to protect our trademark. We can’t allow others to use the brand or we’ll lose it.”
A source close to the matter told me that there was a period of negotiations between the Fonses and F+W in an effort to save the podcast. Apparently F+W asked to rebrand the show as Fons & Porter’s Quilt Your Heart Out and to take a significant portion of the ad revenue. It seems that although the Fonses were willing to compromise to a degree, when the company also demanded full editorial control of the show negotiations fell apart ending with F+W issuing a cease and desist letter. Subsequently the show was shut down.
Over 60% of F+W’s total revenue is derived from art and craft media. Domville noted that the company has provided quality resources to the craft community for a long time and that craft is a key part of their business, but wouldn’t disclose any further details about the dissolution of the show itself.
“When you sell your brand you can’t do something that could confuse it in the marketplace,” Domville told me, noting that the situation is complicated by the fact that the trademark is also Marianne and Mary’s last name.
A trademark is a word, phrase or symbol that is used to identify and distinguish a particular company’s products. Trademark infringement happens when there’s a likelihood that consumers will become confused as to the source of the goods. It’s up to the owner of the trademark to monitor for potential infringement and put a stop to it, typically by sending a cease and desist letter to the infringer. Trademark holders risk losing their legal right to the trademark if they allow infringement to go unchecked. So according to Domville, F+W shut down Quilt Your Heart Out in order to protect the Fons & Porter trademark.
But would the average consumer really have confused Quilt Your Heart Out with something produced by Fons & Porter? Although F+W produces many different kinds of media, they don’t produce podcasts. It seems that Marianne Fons, who came up with the idea for the podcast, thought its content was different enough to not cause confusion. In an interview with Iowa Public Radio she described the show this way: “We do touch on quilting issues, but it’s very different than the how-to type of instruction that Fons & Porter is known for that Mary has done on television.” She goes on to say that the podcast is about people’s lives and about the psychology of quilting, making it different from the Love of Quilting television show and the Quilty YouTube series, which were about demonstrating quilting techniques.
Quilt Your Heart Out was a popular podcast despite its short lifespan. It had a unique format and the hosts have large and devoted followings. Negative publicity about shutting it down suddenly and completely could affect F+W’s reputation and the value of its trademark. Quilters are a community of passionate enthusiasts and although protecting a trademark is important, if it’s done in a way that the community feels is overly aggressive the company can be seen as a bully and the goodwill with customers can be eroded. A trademark is only valuable to a company when it has the ability to create commercial success through goodwill and good rapport with customers.
This isn’t the first instance in which F+W has acted in a way that some might perceive as harsh. In researching this story I spoke with multiple people who have worked at F+W in various capacities over many years. One summed up the company this way: “There was no consistent corporate strategy and the management structure became so draconian that decision making grew increasingly difficult. There seemed to be no regard for how the company or its brands were regarded in the marketplace, or for the quality of the products. When F&W took over, the management style changed from supportive and mentoring to one of micromanaging and small picture focus.” Others described the company as “the Death Star,” “the piranha of the crafts industry,” and “Voldemort.”
Domville and Loeffelholz see it differently. “There are two sides to every story,” Domville told me. She pointed out that F+W invested tremendous resources on product development and advertising to develop the Fons & Porter brand and that it’s vital for them to protect that asset. About the Fonses Loeffelholz said, “We’ve upheld our end of the contract. We just want to be sure the other parties are upholding theirs.”
I believe the Fons’ experience might be similar to what happened with Martha Pullen and the now defunct Sew Beautiful magazine. F&W is a for-profit company interested mostly in collecting sewing-related intellectual property and remarketing it for a wider audience and greater profits. This the “nurturing” aspect of small female-owned businesses is lost. Sad. Thank you for sharing.
Well there are other podcast and YouTube choices out there for quilters . Thestitchtvshow.com and hip to be a square podcast are two examples of quilters ttalking about lives and quilting chat with friends.
But the differentiating factor here was the format, a la Car Talk. Plus, there’s room out there for multiple voices and perspectives, I imagine.
I’m no lawyer, but a lifetime non compete clause seems over-reaching to me.
As does a name as a trademark. I work for a company founded on the founders name….and the company pays licensing to him…..
But honestly, the company is out of line….the show could only have helped their sales and elevated their trademark.
Finally, unless the publishing house is running a podcast, it’s not really competition.
I’m sure Marianne and Liz knew what they were doing, it was a golden retirement fund. I’m glad for them that they were able to sell the company so well. But F&W are running a business, not a quilting Bee, they put what they felt was needed in the contract and Fons and Porter signed the deal. as Did Mary Fons. I know many a woman who made the mistake of using her own name when starting a company – only to have everything end in an ugly divorce and even the loss of their name.
I have to agree with what you say. Money changed hands; contracts wer signed. It all seems fair enough.
Interesting read. I didn’t realize they had sold their company to F&W. I wonder if they now regret it? Maybe a name change is in order?? 😉
I assumed from the outset that Quilt Your Heart Out was a property of or at least sanctioned by F&W, but that’s because of what I know about the publishing industry, having worked in it for some time. So it could be argued that there would be that confusion. But I don’t think the average person who doesn’t pay attention to the quilt industry as an industry would really give the matter much thought. You’d be hard pressed to find a random quilter in a quilt shop who would know off hand that Fons & Porter is a brand owned by a media company called F&W and no longer owned by the actual Fons and Porter. Considering the way writing contracts have changed over the years, it seems to me that the general legal strategy for businesses such as F&W is to aggressively pursue and retain rights to all creative property produced under and for them, and to aggressively defend any perceived encroachment. I suspect that this is at least in part because it is so much easier now for people to self-produce and distribute their own work, and thus to profit from it, more than was possible, say, 20 years ago.
Yes, exactly, thanks for explaining it so clearly.
Okay, then you must have been pressed hard enough because here I am — an average quilter who shops in quilt shops, and I have never heard of F+W. OF COURSE I thought that Fons and Porter was owned by Marianne Fons and Liz Porter, because they are in the TV shows, and when I go tot the Fons and Porter web site I see a picture of the two of them at the top of the page with a caption “We hope you enjoy quilting as much as we do!” All of their marketing is carefully and deliberately designed to give consumers the impression that they are doing business with Marianne and Liz when they shop with Fons and Porter.
So, two things here. Thing One is that people need to carefully consider whether they want to use their name as their business name, because of exactly these kinds of complications if they ever want to sell the business. Thing Two is that, in all fairness, they kind of sold THEMSELVES, since their brand was being themselves and being quilters. If they sold their name, their image, their likenesses, their quilting personas, if you will, for millions of dollars, then I think that may have been shortsighted on their part but ABSOLUTELY they should not be able to continue to profit from their “quilting persona” via a podcast or other format. If they want to do a podcast about baking they would probably be okay, but I would argue that they could even get in trouble for doing podcasts about politics, or Bible study, or anything controversial because F&W could say that making themselves controversial figures would harm the brand that they purchased.
I think this story is a lesson about not being able to have your cake and eat it, too.
Just to be clear, Marianne Fons sold the company to New Track, which was then sold to F+W. Mary Fons didn’t own a share of Fons & Porter and did not benefit financially from that sale. Mary’s work with F+W was as a contractor.
I’m glad you clarified that F&W acquired New Track. Media. I remember when that happened and was so sad to see the quality of many of the New Track publications take a hit. Unfortunately, I think many are now under the impression that Marianne received millions of dollars for selling her brand directly to F&W. I’d love to know details on how transfers of rights work when one company takes over another. That could be an in-depth blog post in and of itself!
If this is true, “We paid millions of dollars for Fons & Porter ” there is the issue. If anyone is paid millions of dollars by a huge conglomerate, without really sharp legal representation BEFORE they signed for the money, they probably relinquished all kinds of rights that are coming back on them now.
Authors and artists and musicians are often taken advantage of, by the waving of money or the hope to be famous, or just to be seen and to help others. The down the road complications from poorly made contracts are many if one signs draconian ‘lifetime’ non-competes and other fancy footwork about pay and rights. Hopefully they have a re-negotiation clause somewhere in that contract.
As a completely disinterested party, this is how I see it. The Fonses had a choice to sell and to sign over their rights for financial gain – they profited. There was inevitable small print attached; was it unreasonable? Little matter, as they signed to the effect that they agreed the conditions. Those conditions seem pretty clear. This article told me several things. Be careful what you sign. You can’t have things all your own way, having cake and eating it comes to mind. And finally, that quilting is a nasty sharp edged business.
The company acted entirely within their rights and in their own interests. As did the Fonses act in their own interests, hoping that the nasty legal stuff wouldn’t matter. They found out that it did, and why wouldn’t it? I am usually against the big companies up against the underdog but not in this case. I don’t really see the Fonses as a poor beaten underdog, just players of the same game. As you explain it, it seems very clear cut to me.
They must have known about the non compete clause, maybe they ‘assumed’ that a little podcast wouldn’t be an infringement. Meanwhile, I see small designers get bent out of shape because someone stole their design. How is this different? And you are right, quilters might be nice people – but as a business – it is like all others. I for one am happy that capitalism allows a small person to create something so great that a large corporation buys them out for what I am sure is now a very generous and lovely retirement for both Marianne Fons and Liz Porter.
I feel the same way as Sara and archangel. The contract is there for a reason – as a way of solving conflicts not yet encountered.
From the company’s point of view, they own the Fons & Porter brand. If Mary and Marianne Fons continue activities that are not under the control of the F+W, all kinds of problems could ensue. What if F+W wants to promote something similar, but using another brand(s) under their umbrella? Will they now they have competition from a brand they actually own? It doesn’t make sense. The bigger the “rogue” podcast gets, the harder it becomes to shut it down or change it or whatever. Eventually, the company realizes they got screwed – they paid millions for the rights to the brand, but the brand is still being controlled by the original owners. And the company then has to revise their internal plans to work around the actions of Mary and Marianne. That is why F+W put a non-compete clause in place, not only with the Fons’ but with ALL the other crafting companies they buy. Are they supposed to start making exceptions for everyone?
This reminds me of a conversation we once had about the fact that McCall pattern company has long had a faux customer service representative with the fake name “Meg Carter”. When McCall launched their social media campaign, they chose to have “Meg Carter” start up a McCall blog, tweet, post to Facebook, Instagram and Pinterest, comment on sewing blogs, etc etc. Why? Because it is a company, not a person. The company needs to have a way to maintain consistency. What would happen if they hired someone to do social media, and that person did it under their own name, and then that person quits or, heaven forbids, gets fired? You want to keep all that drama out of the limelight – you want to put someone new into the position and carry on. It is just a job, not some kind of personal identity thing. The founders of Butterick, McCall, etc have all probably been dead for a long time, and presumably they will carry on for a long time to come. Of course, it is fun and interesting that we all know who Meg Carter REALLY is. Those of us to follow that closely enjoy knowing a little bit of “behind the scenes” at McCall. That is a win-win for the company and the consumers.
In this case, the Fons’ were not able to come up with a win-win, so they lost and F+W won. I hope the mom really did get a lot of money when she sold to F+W. We don’t all get to cash out like that. Maybe they need to do a Artist-Formerly-Known-As-Fons thing. Ultimately, if they really need the name “Fons” to succeed, then they will have to deal with the fact that they sold it and its not theirs anymore.
Companies like F+W, and McCall for that matter, are in business to make a profit and pay the salaries of their employees.
The customers of F+W and McCall are people like me who have money to spend precisely because we work for companies. We understand what companies need to do in order to remain profitable. No we don’t always like it, but maybe it makes more sense to us than small entrepreneurs who compete against those bigger companies.
I am sorry if my reply sounds harsh – I have done my best to be tactful and impartial. I have no dog in this fight. I am not a quilter and doubt if I would have listened to the podcast.
I sincerely appreciate that you allow comments on your blog that raise different perspectives. And I really enjoy your newsletter – keep up the good work!
Robyn, thanks for your thoughtful analysis. You’ve raised some excellent points. Everyone will have a different initial emotional reaction to this type of situation. However, your comments remind us that we all have choice, and also, most people rely on having a regular income to provide for their families. Big corporations have a significant role in ensuring consistent income for their many employee. Nothing is “black or white”.
I am now even more glad that I have cancelled all of my subscriptions to quilting (and other) magazines owned by F+W. The quality has gone so downhill since they were all acquired that I was frequently finding myself putting them straight in the recycling bin. I am somewhat curious as to what full editorial control of the podcast by F+W would have looked like (if the magazines are any indication they have proved themselves clueless about the current quilting community) but am glad Mary and Marianne recognized what a mistake allowing that would have been. I will continue to avoid F+W brands in the future (Keepsake Quilting and Craft of Quilting are two other F+W owned brands that will never get my money.)
I agree the quality of the magazines has bottomed out. I cancelled my subscriptions and don’t even bother to flip through them anymore when I see them. In fact, my local quilt shop has stopped even carrying any of their magazines, because they heard so much negative feedback from the customers over the quality.
This reminds me of Prince issue with WB I believe. It’s their name for the Fons’. How will they do anything in the industry without constant legal issues? Fight for the right to use their name back. Price won so can they. Big corps can’t steal a name even if they did sign it away. Make music, make art, etc. Be you, be proud, stand tall.
I thought about this, too!
They can change their name to a quilting symbol and call themselves the “quilters formerly known as Fons …” ????
Perfect idea 😀 Who’s gonna tell Marianne? 😉
I really love this idea. They could have some kind of astrologically-inspired gender-ambiguous quilt block for their logo. And their guitars….I mean sewing machines.
Love it!!
We all miss the great magazines that F&W have now put or are in the process of putting out of print. I understand all the selling/buying aspects of big business but feel that in the long run, we consumers pay the price.
I thought of Prince too! And I wondered if they would want to legally change their name. Would some like Fonze be different enough? It never occurred to me that this type of problem could happen if you name your company after yourself.
Sad. Very, very sad. It’s got to be difficult to have your very name be a trademark, along with the one thing that you’ve built your reputation on (quilting). I loved the format of Quilt Your Heart Out, sharing real stories from real people. I hope that F + W doesn’t silence the true voices of Mary Ann, Mary, and many of us.
I am part of a mother/daughter podcast team, and we podcast about garment sewing and running a sewing store (Sewing Out Loud). When I read in Abby’s newsletter that the podcast was cancelled due to a cease and desist, I got a funny feeling in my stomach. My mom and I have such a great time- an dI could tell that Mary and Marianne were enjoying themselves as well! Instinctually, I feel very sad that the Fons’s had to cancel, but it also seems like a bit of a reality check on how the publishing business actually works. Ultimately, I believe the move by F+W is tone deaf. Like Mary said, the market is wide open.
Thanks for posting your podcast, I just listened and I’m enjoying it, for me sewing is more than just quilting. Good to hear from others who share that as well.
To be honest, the whole Fons & Porter persona started going downhill when Liz Porter “retired” with the original sellout. While Mary Fons tried, her clueless type of approach was off putting to quilters who had been around a while. Consequently, this latest fiasco just adds more fuel to the proverbial fire. Also, the “apparently clueless as well” F & W will find out that quality is much more important than they apparently realize. Do I understand the conglomerate side – not really. Any reminder of the brand name keeps people looking at and for those products. As for Marianne Fons, with all the money you made, why fight with the clueless F & W, retire and quilt. 🙂 I’m not sure what Mary should do.
Does this mean that PBS LOVE of QUILTING will not longer have Mary and Maryanne? Is that why there have been other instructors on the show ? Who owes the program? PBS or the publishing company F&W?
Is F&W now running the Fons and Porter store and web pages ? I really would rather know who I am dealing with ….
It’s owned by F+W.
Grrrrrrrrr!
F&W Media http://www.fwcommunity.com/uk fka F&W Publications as acquired the following:
David & Charles
Stitch Craft Create
Interweave
Martha Pullen Co
love sewing
Fons & Porter
Creative University
BurdaStyle
SewandSo
The Hobby Warehouse
If you have done business with these companies and noticed a drastic change in business practices, this might explain it. (I have)
Abby, thanks so much for the very enlightening blog post. And Nana, thanks for this list. Now I understand why I lost interest in the Interweave publications.
That tells me why I hate BurdaStyle, and why the “real” Burda patterns aren’t on that website.
They bought over NorthLight as well. They are expanding into fine arts as well. When they took over the old accounts that were under NorthLight weren’t transferred over and I couldn’t watch the video I bought. Sloppy company do sloppy job.
I was a fan of the podcast, and a guest. It was sad to see it go. Having worked on projects such as articles and webinars with F&W, I must say my experience has been positive. The thing is, our relationship is far less complex. Being an independent contractor is one thing. Having a lifetime agreement involving name branding is a whole other ball of wax! Thank you, Abby, for shedding light on the story. I am certain everyone will move forward, gleaning useful things from the experience.
I really liked the podcasts but can understand the company taking the stand that they have. Every action has a consequence in life. I guess when you chose to sell your company (I think I understand it was a choice) and get a huge amount of money there will be a downside. I assume such smart people had a lawyer look over the contract.
This sounds like exceptional overreach for brand protection from F + W; like telling Cher she can’t sing because fans could confuse that with Sonny & Cher and damage the brand.
It is worth noting that the podcast was not called Fons & Porter & did not involve the retired Liz Porter. This was a mother daughter podcast about life & quilting. I was a subscriber from day one to the iTunes podcast Quilt your Heart Out, and I looked forward to each episode.
There was no confusion to this new quilter, about branding of the old business vs this Mary & Maryanne podcast. Listening to the episodes actually clarified the business had been sold some time ago, Liz was retired, Maryanne’s new projects, and I would describe Mary Fons as the always loveable Marlo Thomas “That Girl” of Quilting.
I hope other blogs will pick up this discussion regarding F+W’s actions that resulted in shutting down a podcast consisting of folks on a party line chatting about things they love. I may need to be more discerning in the future on how and where my Quilt dollars are spent.
It’s very simple though, if you don’t like the terms of a contract or think they are over-reaching don’t sign and don’t take the money! It is not like the terms were hidden. They were remunerated for giving up their rights, if this was unacceptable (as it would be to many, including myself) do not sign. It was a choice not something mandatory!
I was very sorry to see the demise of Quilty magazine. Their patterns were more contemporary than the ones in F&P Love of Quilting magazine, and more appealing to me, personally. After reading this article, I am even less inclined to buy another F&P magazine than ever. (Btw, I am 63 and have sewn since grade school, so it’s not like I’m a novice!)
I need to learn more about non-competes. What surprises me most about this is that it is their LAST NAME! How can they make a living without using their names?
It sounds like this also has to do with the trademark infringement of the use of the name ‘Fons’ in conjunction with quilting. I suspect that if the podcast were about life and cooking and not called “Quilt Your Heart Out” but instead “Cook Your Heart Out” that it would have been allowed to continue.
Maybe we should stage a protest in support of the Fonses with all of us changing our last name to Fons!!
How annoying
How would one feel if a blog called “While they sleep” started up and talked about making children’s dolls??
Or if “Porter’s quilting supplies” had started up back in the day?
Bottom line, trademarks are important to protect one’s effort and money. And trademark law requires defending one’s trademark (as well as actively using it) to avoid “trademark squatting.”
Furthermore, any time a person sells a business and intends to continue in that line of business, they really need to build sales agreements that allow for it — even if that means they will likely make the sale happen at a lower price.
Thanks for the sleuthing — I appreciate hearing the details of what happened.
I was really enjoying the podcast but I can definitely see a case for F+W. I’ve been quilting for ~5 years now and didn’t know Fons & Porter no longer belonged to the founders. If someone had asked me whether the podcast was associated with Fons & Porter, I would have guessed that it was. I would bet that a lot of people like me who don’t really follow the industry would say the same. And therein lies to issue, right?
Marianne and Mary are certainly in a strange spot since it is their name, and they continue to be quilters. But F+W definitely has a right to protect their brand, and I can definitely see why they chose to do so in this case.
I was so glad you were able to explain more on what happened – I’m no lawyer, but it does seem awfully heavy handed. They weren’t using their name in the show title so it sounds less like protecting the name/brand and more like F+W is essentially trying to say they can’t do ANYTHING quilting related independently of work for Fons + Porter because it takes attention away from F+P branded media. That is a real shame, and I wonder if it would really have held up in court. A contract is a contract of course, but once you’re in grey areas (which I imagine this would have been – otherwise surely they could have altered the show’s name and marketing even further to make sure there was NO room for confusion that they were not associated with F+P), there’s a point at which one would hope for a bit of mercy instead of crushing a person’s ability to continue to work in the industry they love and helped build. Not to mention the negative impact on the greater community… It’s sad to know that they weren’t willing to compromise more.
(I feel pretty hesitant even taking a stance on this, as we venture into business in this industry it feels risky knowing we will be dealing with all parts of the industry big and small. But knowing this is how some of the larger companies may be functioning sure reinforces my dedication to promoting independent and small businesses. At the end of the day, it really matters how we treat each other both in life and business, and it doesn’t seem like a lot of good will was at work here.)
Thank you Ariana, for you comment. I agree with you. Had I been a manager/executive with F+W I would have supported, encouraged and even promoted Quilt Your Heart Out. The podcast did nothing to interfere or infringe on the success of F+W ~ it promoted and encouraged quilting, sewing, creativity, and a caring & respectful relationship between a mother and one of her daughters. Possible product infringement? Protential brand confusion? No. Did F+W listen to the podcasts, or even a representative sample of them? The podcast listener had a positive experience with Quilt Your Heart Out, which resulted in a positive experience or behavior ($) when consuming quilting products. It was a win-win for everyone; for Mary and Maryanne, for F+W, for listeners, and finally, for any business that sells quilting and sewing supplies. Finally, thank you Abby. Love your site!
I just want to point out that about six months after this happened the two people who were most in charge of making this decision (and are quoted in this article) were fired.
Can I call it Karma??
I was sorry to see Quilty Magazize end it’s publication. It’s a shame about both. Thanks for bring us such a good story and relevant story, Abby.
Thanks Abby for delving deeper into this topic! Given the non-compete clauses, I’m surprised Marianne and Mary went ahead with a podcast (or were surprised themselves when it was shut down). Particularly if they were seeking/receiving ad revenue. Still, a lifetime non-compete seems excessive. Is that normal?
I’ve been told that non-compete clauses tend not to hold up in court under many circumstances. Of course, many of these non-competes are signed by people who don’t have the money and legal teams to fight them. However, if your entire career is a certain specialized field and you want or need to continue working yet you have signed a non-compete- how do you brand yourself so as to not compete?
Interesting topic, for sure.
I love Abby’s blog as she creates interesting articles and presents the facts in a clear, honest and non-judgmental way. This post has sparked a lot of interesting discussion. I see both sides of the issues. It is too bad that the Fons may have had bad representation regarding the use of their names. Thanks Abby for sharing!
Thanks for immensley interesting article, Abby.
Abby, thanks again for taking on a difficult issue (sort of like the Houston teacher fees). Lawsuits are usually a no-win for everyone. And the whole area of Intellectual Property or Trademark law in particular is one big squishy gray area. Fights over what represents fair use of something covered by a trademark regularly happen and the outcome cannot be predicted as the concept of fair use is defined within the judge’s ruling for each case. Just spend an afternoon reading cases and see if you can predict in advance how the judge ruled, you will be wrong more than you think even if you consider yourself well educated in this field. Because of the difficulty in predicting the outcome of litigation, the cease and desist letters can become very scary. Hopefully, this area, as it relates to creative arts, will become easier to understand in the future.
I wrote an email to F + W expressing my disappointment. Also, what a corporate fail! As most people wouldn’t have known that F +W owned Fons and Porter, having the Fons’ talk quilting and sewing would only be good for the brand they purchased. And they wouldn’t have to pay a dime to get the publicity. Now, all they’ve bought is ill will. It certainly bought mine. I understand the economics of buying a company and protecting your brand, but in these days a misstep can cost you a lot. Making it all about the brand could hurt them in a community that is about community, not corporations.
You hit the nail on the head! From all the other comments about F + W, too, it would seem that they are only going to pound the nails into their own coffin. I understand that it is their legal right to enforce the noncompete clause, but it isn’t going to help the company.
Those reading this can learn from this story. Think twice about using your name as the name of your business. If your name is your business name, don’t sell the name if you sell the business. It might mean less money, but you would still have your name and you will not be associated with any bad publicity from the company that bought it.
I had never seen the podcast. I have seen some of Mary’s Quilty videos. At least Mary’s non-compete does come to an end.
Great post.
What a messy situation.
The community is strong – this too will pass, and clearly M & M will return stronger than before.
PS I loved the idea of renaming “Formerly known as…” Brilliant!
Abby,
You do such a great job of bringing issues in the sewing/quilting/crafting business to our attention. I too am glad you choose to not go to the editing position but to maintain you own independence. I knew Martha Pullen had sold but had no idea that Fons & Porter also had. i appreciate the person in the comments who provided the list of publications/companies bought by F&W.
I understand both business sides of this issue and it all makes me sad…although I love the suggestion they use Prince’s tactic for renaming. When big companies buy out independents and do not continue to maintain the product, we as consumers are the losers. And that makes me even sadder. The sewing industry here in the US really took a hit when all our manufacturing was moved off shore. All the prices have gone up and the quality has gone down. It seems this is also true for big corp buy outs.
I personally will look closely at future purchases from the F&W companies to determine where else I can make these purchases.
I had heard a rumor that nancy zieman had also sold….is this true and if so, did F&W purchase it?
Keep up the great work Abby!
Thank you for your well written and thoughtful articles Abby. Your ability to present both sides is much needed in this day and age of one-sided reporting. From my perspective your articles lead to interesting and thoughtful discussions, the kind of discussions that can help us to grow in unerstanding and compassion.
Wow! Okay, firstly – Abby! Way to go on this article! Secondly, this sounds like a total deal with the devil! Lifetime non-compete clause! As I was reading I was feeling very nasty feelings towards F+W and thinking to myself “well, I’ll never buy anything from them every again!” and then I read this: ” Quilters are a community of passionate enthusiasts and although protecting a trademark is important, if it’s done in a way that the community feels is overly aggressive the company can be seen as a bully and the goodwill with customers can be eroded. A trademark is only valuable to a company when it has the ability to create commercial success through goodwill and good rapport with customers.” And I was thinking , “EXACTLY!”
I like the the Fonses but no one held a gun to their heads and made them sign. There are lawyers who you hire to explain the “fine print”. I don’t blame the F & W for going after them. As far as the “multiple people” who were unhappy with F & W, you’d be more credible if you weren’t anonymous. I’m kind of tired of hit pieces on big companies as if they aren’t allowed to make money. I give credit to F & W for speaking to you, Abby, and telling their side albeit in an abbreviated and just -what -you- need- to- know fashion.
It’s definitely a shame how this went down, that a podcast people really enjoyed is now gone, and all the work for nothing. Regardless of the legality, it’s too bad, and seems like a waste.
But I have to disagree with “Quilters are a community of passionate enthusiasts and although protecting a trademark is important, if it’s done in a way that the community feels is overly aggressive the company can be seen as a bully and the goodwill with customers can be eroded. ” cause honestly, we have very short memories!
10 years ago or so, Amy Butler sent nasty cease and desist letters to a bunch of etsy sellers and there was an outrage, now all you hear about her is how nice everyone says she is. Or what about the Kate Spain fiasco a couple of years ago, where a quilt was made using her fabrics for a book, and then when publishing company made promotional items based on photos from the book, Kate Spain’s lawyers sent cease and desist letters to the quilt designer – who wasn’t even the one who made the promotional items! It doesn’t seem to have affected her popularity.
It’s just like politics, we forget by the next election cycle (or fabric launch!).
The Kate Spain issue and outcome seemed unnecessarily harsh on the poor blogger who innocently used her fabric, then was caught up in the wider book / publishing debacle. A lot of Quilters won’t forget that, and make a point to avoid that designer’s fabric. As is there choice. What goes around, comes around.
Sorry, should read “as is THEIR choice”.
This is an important post. I appreciate your thorough telling of the tales of the fibercrafts industry. Thank you.
Abby, once again you hit the nail on the head by bringing to us this information in such a balanced manner. As an ex-employee of a law firm of trademark lawyers I can see both sides of the issue. That being said it is interesting that the law does not seem to draw any lines between a person’s identity and his/her trade identity or delineate how long the rights to another person’s name can last. Will M&M ever be able to do business again in the quilt industry because of their name? Did they realize the long-term consequences of signing such a document? Who knows. This reminds me of Burt of Burt’s Bees, who signed a similar agreement and essentially signed not only his business but also his face away! Those pictures of him on the thousands of products of Burt’s Bees? He gets NO compensation for that… It could also be that people really just don’t get good legal representation (as I suspect Burt failed to do) — This issue has brought up a lot of interesting ideas from all of us — my takeaway from all this is that F&W really does not understand the deep consequences of going after the Fonses, regardless of their right to do so. They truly shot themselves in the foot. And it’s a shame that Quilty Magazine, one of the best new quilt magazines to hit the racks in years, has now also been sacrificed. Sad. Folks, we will just have to keep on creating, keep on being kind to one another and bring more outstanding art to one another. But think before selling your name!
One of the things I’ve been thinking about is Vickie Howell’s podcast, Craftish. Like Marianne Fons, Vickie has had a PBS TV show, Knitting Daily, and she had Knitty Gritty on the DIY Network. And now she has a podcast she’s producing herself. I haven’t asked Vickie for details, but my guess is that she didn’t have a non-compete or if she did, it’s expired.
Also add QNNtv.com and Sew News to the list of content in the F + W portfolio.
Your explanation about the non-compete clause made me realize why someone else I know who was in the quilting world is now into equestrian pursuits and historical re-enactments.
And from now on, I’ll stick to Threads magazine for garment sewing.
And Modern Patchwork, QuiltCon Magazine, Quilting Arts, Cloth Paper Scissors, Interweave, Stitch Craft Create, David & Charles…it’s a lot of media.
This reminds me of the Mary Englebreit sticker on the Beatle album cover, but I can’t remember how that played out.
Mary’s non-compete issue ends in 2017. There is no “lifetime” non-compete.
It has got to be more than a little frustrating and confusing when you sell your business to one entity (New Track) and that company turns around and sells it to another entity (F&W).
I look forward to seeing the return of the Quilty and Love of Quilting podcasts, etc. in 2018 if the Fabulous Fons’ decide to resurrect them 🙂
postnote: I loveloveloved CarTalk and will happily listen to their re-runs for years and understand why the Fons were inspired by them 😀
Marianne has the lifetime non-compete.
I’ve lived the experience of a highly successful magazine changing hands and it didn’t end well. The magazine I worked for many years ago was sold to a publishing firm in California, and it failed within two years.
I believe that F&W also took over Quiltmaker and McCall’s Quilting and they appear to be going downhill as well–reduced staff, reduced ad pages and as a result, less editorial content. I don’t look for them to last much longer under this management.
I was searching online trying to find out why/how the Fons and Porter quilting show has eroded over the last several months, with new moderators whom I don’t like. I wondered what happened to Mary and Patrick. Now, I think I know. I was worried that Mary had become ill or something worse. I’m praying that the stress of this does not affect her health. But, as a nurse, I realize that such stress can have a major negative impact on one’s health. Thank you for posting this story. I, for one, will be sure to NOT support anything connected with F&W in the future.
Mary has recently become editorial director of Quiltfolk, a beautiful new quilting magazine.
Sadly this company is really short sighted! Having Marianne Fons doing a podcast that is hugely successful only benefits them by drawing attention to the nane Fons in the quilting world which in turn would end up driving traffic to the Fons and Porter name. In this day and age anything seen as disempowering women will only hurt themselves in yhe long run as it will turn people against the brand!
Whoooooo! It’s now June 2018 – hoping to find them back on the air – can anybody direct me?
😀
The show is gone and I don’t think there are any plans to bring it back.
Mary and Marianne Fons have both done some interviews on Just Wanna Quilt this year. It is interesting to hear what they are doing now. https://www.justwannaquilt.com/?fbclid=IwAR2rAtp4xVsF9PNZsciCOHbwGdRv2nmXTzotJPqHeTSisdtvPMT3hil73Ns
How sad this quilting show was great, informative. Our quilt guild sure miss Fons & Porter, and of course Mary.
I am a quilter, heirloom sewer, and do other needlecrafts as well…
the print magazines, ie Piecework, Love of quilting, etc that F&W has acquired has deminishes in content…
Completely dropped the Only U.S. heirloom sewing magazine , Sew Beautiful..
It does give a percived imiage that your executive staff are bullys.
And you don’t want to give the sewing public or are fearful in doing so, the magazine instruction and inspiration that used to be available… Prime example was last Martha Pullen show held in Arlington, Texas..it was horrble…
I don’t have political, or other clout but my “pocketbook” to borrow an old phrase… and if i find the publication is by F&W media, I will not waste.my money adding to your bottom line.
I know, You, Coperate America, media giants, really don’t care that a loadmouthed old lady would totally boycott your company…
But i do as well as most of my friends, and anyone I can tell the story of a company that is becoming the Robber Barton of craft publications.
Just a quick update. F+W recently sold the Marth Pullen brand.
I was thrilled to read today that F+W have filed for bankruptcy. I, for one, resented the way they quashed the Fons’ podcast, and I truly hope this bankruptcy will be the final end of F+W.. Karma is rough, F+W, but I believe you earned your own demise, with karma just being the icing on your cake..