So far, so good?

Not really, because when I learnt, cloth and whole stitch were interchangable as terms and Cloth Stich & Twist was described as Cloth Stitch & Twist or Whole Stitch and Twist.

Now, there were a number of reasons that the International System didn't take off and the main one was limitations on printing.  

During the resurgence of lacemaking in the 70s and 80s, colour printing was exceptionally expensive.  Most designers would only have a colour cover and maybe one or two colour plates in their books.  This wasn't an issue for looking at the lace patterns and finished articles because most, if not all the lace was made in the traditional white or black and the prickings were black dots.  

Around the mid 90s, dual colour because easier to do so we started to see the addition of blue into the printing of a number of books, most noticably Pamela Nottingham's later books.  This was followed by tri colour printing and we started to see red included in Geraldine Stott's and Bridget Cook's later books.

​With the opening of the EuroTunnel in 1990, it now became easy for lacemakers in the UK to take a train to Belgium and holiday in Bruges, giving access to the Kant Centrum and attend OIDFA events in Europe.

Towards the end of the 90s, access to international books was also becoming much easier in the UK due to international lace suppliers attending events like the National Lacemaker's Fair at the NEC and teaching at summer schools.

Interest in books from outside the UK grew and UK lace suppliers found it easier to obtain books from publishers such as Barbara Vey.  

It was around this time that multicoloured printing took off and we started to see the International Colour Code being used more and more in books and people started to realise that terminology isn't global.  So, the use of C and T became the international language on many of the newsgroups such as Arachne so that lacemakers could talk to each other and understand what was being discussed.

In the past, I have had people borrow a book and not return it.  So, I now simply say no.  Many of my books are out of print and irreplaceable.  I use them as a resource for my students to look through and loosing such books would impact them as much as me.

So, what about just copying a pattern from one of my books or single patterns?

​The answer is still no.

But I just want a copy of one pattern
​Doesn't matter.  If it's covered by copyright then making a copy and giving it you breaks copyright.  You are stealing the intellectual property of the person who designed it.

But you can copy up to 10% without breaking copyright
No you can't.  That is a common quote that people say that has no basis in copyright law.  If copying is permitted, it is stated in the UK and US for example as 'fair usage' which is commonly taken to mean no more than 10% but I fact this refers to quoting a book in academic work.

But you are allowed to copy the patterns from a book to make them yourself, why can't you make a copy for me?
The designer grants the book owner permission to copy the patterns for personal use, so that you can make the lace.  It would be rather difficult to buy a book of patterns and not be able to copy them and make prickings.

What the designer did not give permission for, is for you or me to copy the patterns and give them away to other people.

I'm not charging anyone for the copy so that's ok then?
No it's not.  Paying or not, it doesn't matter.  You are prohibited from passing on copies.  Just because you don't profit from the copy doesn't make it ok.  You are still effectively stealing someone else's intellectual property by passing on unlawful copies

I can't get the pattern I want, but I've got a great photograph of it so I'll just make my own pattern by working the photo or creating my own pricking and it will then be my pricking.
​You can and you can't.

Working from the design to learn the pattern .. That's ok, you are allowed to do that under educational purposes, however you cannot share the pattern you have created or sell the lace you have made because they are covered by the copyright of the original pattern.  The pattern and the images of that pattern are covered by copyright.  You can't just go and nick someone else's work.  It is stealing!

If I change 10% of the pattern, then I'm not breaking copyright and it's now my new pattern
That would be a nope, nope, nope.  This 10% thing is terrible and keeps being rolled out.  There is nothing that says changing a bit revokes copyright.