Cue Design Theft... Are You For or Against

Are You "For" or "Against" Cue Design Theft?

  • For - Anything is Fair Game

    Votes: 62 47.3%

  • Against - Unique Designs Should be Off Limits

    Votes: 69 52.7%
  • Total voters
    131
  • Poll closed .
Vote and change the world

I don't see the point ever of voting about anything in pool.

Who the F cares if 75% of idiots think that something is good or bad or whatever.

I think if someone has an opinion about anything in the forum, go ahead and explain to influence others. But voting, WTF is it good for? Stop being sheep.

--Jeff
 
classiccues said:
No, because in the end it will come down to semantics and when and who is padding your wallet. Semantics like when is unique no more unique? Etc.. Etc.. when does a design become "common elements". Like I said in the other post the laws that govern copyrighting, true copyrighting anyways for the most part say 70 years after death. But when this is called out, then they are utilitarian pieces and not subject to copyright, lol. Yes, it's easy to leave loopholes so you can leave yourself a "grey" area.

JV
Click to expand...

Which would mean that you could not make a cue with anything or any technique that was used until after 1941. Otherwise you would be stealing. PFD and others pay to copyright many of their designs. Creating something and putting it into the public forum without copyright protection leaves any design open to use by others. If no one could use a design or technique that someone else had made in the past 70 years there would be very few pool cues made each year and where would cuemakers be in the learning curve of building cues. I bet many of those voting no have a fixture for doing something, say, cutting veneers, that was made by someone else and sold to a number of cuemakers. Are you a thief? Have you copied someone else's work? Are you making your points exactly like someone else with a technique developed by someone else who was nice enough to pass it on to someone else? If you think your design is so special and unique than copyright it. Otherwise it is in the public domain and open to use by anyone... just ask R. Crumb about the Keep on Truckin artwork. Is it bad form to use someone else's designs? Different question.

And thinking option 3 is ironic is moronic and lacks creativity.

Bob Danielson
www.bdcuesandcomix.com
 
My last post, at least for tonight, regarding the issue pertains to word usage. I see "copy", "mirror image", "exact" do you people know that these words have specific meaning?

A mirror image is an exact copy, to copy means to duplicate down to the last deatail. The cue that started this thread has similar design elements but in NO way shape or form is a copy. This can be said about a lot of the tributes and cues that regularly get accused of being "copies". Copy is a word that has a specific meaning, it means the same. Not almost the same, but the same. To make a duplicate.

Has anyone here seen a real copy of a custom cue? The answer is probably no.

JV
 
Let me ask a different question. Has anyone ever owned a cue that was emulated to closely? Maybe a there is a tribute cue that looks to much like the original?

How did you feel about it?

Dr. Phil... :wink:

Basically have you been the owner of a cue that was tributized by someone other than yourself...

JV
 
subdude1974 said:
Uh, oh. Every body watch out. We have someone who is copying someone else. This cuemaker is making a cue that looks similar to a Prewitt. Similar ringwork, joint and even the 3/8x10 pin. Call Ed and see what he has to say.
http://www.cornerstonecues.com/cue409.htm
Click to expand...

I know you're going to think I'm picking on you and I SWEAR I'm not. But exactly what about this cue looks like a Prewitt other than its made of wood, has a wrap, a pin, probably some shafts, etc.??
 
I was being sarcastic there as well in the other thread. But if you cant see a similarity in the ringwork, then I guess we just dont see the same thing. Pick all you want. I dont really care cause the last time you tried it made no sense. Irony? Irony in a stupid thread getting a true response. I meant exactly what I said. How is that ironic. I think you need a brush up on the definiton of irony.

Irony-
1. The use of words to express something different from and often opposite to their literal meaning.(Nope, didnt do that)
2. An expression or utterance marked by a deliberate contrast between apparent and intended meaning.(Nope, didnt do that)
3. A literary style employing such contrasts for humorous or rhetorical effect. (And my post wasnt long enough to have a style)

How is this for irony:
A person making comments about someone else calling their response as ironic when like a child you apparently dont know the meaning of irony.
 
Last edited:
Worminator said:
Yes... I was not happy about it.
Click to expand...

I'd ask you to show pics of the two cues but I am afraid that your to close and my to close are very different.

BTW since you sell Ron Haley cues and are a fan, what are your views on the paper veneers being used by others?

JV
 
Last edited:
classiccues said:
I'd ask you to show pics of the two cues but I am afraid that your to close and my to close are very different.
Click to expand...

Your view of the two cues does not matter to me...

classiccues said:
BTW since you sell Ron Haley cues and are a fan, what are your views on the paper veneers being used by others?

JV
Click to expand...

Ron does not have heartache from other makers using it. I do not believe he was the first to use them, but he certainly made them popular. He actually has shared his technique on this with fellow cuemakers. So there is a little of the grey area for you.

Now, if someone was to use his Florentine Diamond without asking him... that would be a different story.

Again, I believe there are grey areas... call me a hypocrite, I'm OK with that.
 
subdude1974 said:
I was being sarcastic there as well in the other thread. But if you cant see a similarity in the ringwork, then I guess we just dont see the same thing.
Click to expand...

Check your PMs.

In the meantime, I'll address this part of your post so as not to derail the thread any further.

Are the rings similar? Yes. Are they the same? Not by a long shot. In fact, if you took a look at the Richard Black ring, the red shapes aren't even circles... like the Prewitt rings. So, similar yes. Would this fall under design theft? Not even a little. And if what Bill says is true, the Richard Black cue in question likely preceeded Ed Prewitt's use of this somewhat similar ring design.

Besides, I'm sure by now we ALL know that when it comes to those Prewitt rings, Tim Scruggs invented them. Nick Serdula already informed us of that a few months ago.
 
Worminator said:
Your view of the two cues does not matter to me...

Ron does not have heartache from other makers using it. I do not believe he was the first to use them, but he certainly made them popular. He actually has shared his technique on this with fellow cuemakers. So there is a little of the grey area for you.

Now, if someone was to use his Florentine Diamond without asking him... that would be a different story.

Again, I believe there are grey areas... call me a hypocrite, I'm OK with that.
Click to expand...

Like I say, I am sure it's not even a close copy, but regardless, that's ok.

If he shared the technique then there is no grey area. He can't complain when its used. I don't see anything grey there. Since the origin may not be his, he would have no standing anyways. However if the originator came forward, and voiced an opinion, would everyone stop? That's the bigger question.

JV
 
I have a quick story that is on topic if you will indulge me. Just so you know I was very good friends w/the late, great Bert Schrager and this is about his cue designs that were copied and passed off as the other cuemaker's design.

The other cuemaker created a cue that used the forearm design off of a cue in Bert's catalog, and the buttsleeve from another cue from the same catalog. There was a big cue show that Bert was unable to attend so this cuemaker decided to pull it out and it won best of show. Bert knew nothing of this.

How Bert found out about it was because this other cuemaker took out a full page ad in the Billiard News thanking everyone for selecting "his" design as best of show. Lou Butera saw this and called Bert asking him "isn't this your cue"? Bert was furious and ended up leaving the ACA because they wouldn't do anything about this, blah, blah, blah.

My feeling after hearing plenty about this from Bert, was if the other cuemaker would have simply said the design was inspired by Bert Schrager and Bert got his recognition and due, he would not have been so angry and all would have been fine.

My point is that the cue world is a small one and the customer drives the market so there may be requests to build something similar. "Borrowing" cue designs is going to happen, but they should never be pawned off as their original ideas, inspired by is the way to go and pay tribute to the original. Treating your fellow cuemakers w/respect is the way to go.

This is a sensitive subject and in a perfect world each would be the creative force behind their own designs, but even the great artists paint the same fruit, or fields, or portraits, they just don't do it exactly the same way (most of the time).

Dave
 
Last edited:
Spimp13 said:
Just as an example lets say Eric's lead time is 7 years. If I want to have a cue made with scallops that is similar in style a lot sooner then 7 years am I sh*t out of luck?
Click to expand...

Spimp13 said:
Crickets...?
Click to expand...

Yes you are. Unless you want to find one on the secondary market.

Scott
 
If a builder has the talent to build it they should

When Timi and Mike got tierd of everyone else building bridged veneer cues they stopped building them. The guys just wouldn't do it. They went in another direction.
And truely most people doing it now do not build them the way Timi and Mike did.
Scallops smallops. Just because another builder is doing them doesn't mean their construction methods are the same on the inside. You get what you pay for usually.
One mans deal is another man's follie.
This may not apply to anything here though. But chances are better than not it does.
Shouldn't let things get under your skin you can't control.
Nick :)
 
Worminator said:
No... I have one for sale right now... :D
Click to expand...

Lol, duly noted...but you have to at least see my point on it. Let's pretend you or anyone else didn't have a brand new one unchalked for sale. I have a problem with waiting 7 years for something due to an inlay, or ring I like that "Cuemaker A" has an unwritten patent on it.

I guess I would be SOL then...that sucks but oh well. It could be worse. The lead time could be 8 years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top