"Tribute" cues? Seriously?

Monstermash

Monstermash

Lock Ness Monster
Silver Member
So I have been seeing a lot of so called "tribute" cues over the past few years. They are usually made by some crappy maker in Asia (most specifically JD) and quite frankly I'm getting a little sick of it. Where do they get off ripping off other makers designs and calling them "tributes" when it's obvious that they have no creative ability of their own so they just keep ripping off other's designs?

There is nothing about these cues that are made to honor the makers they are ripping off. They are just simply stolen designs made for their own personal gain.

So lets call a spade a spade and call them what they really are.. Counterfeits!

The last time I checked there are laws against this sort of thing. WTF?
 
Monstermash said:
So I have been seeing a lot of so called "tribute" cues over the past few years. They are usually made by some crappy maker in Asia (most specifically JD) and quite frankly I'm getting a little sick of it. Where do they get off ripping off other makers designs and calling them "tributes" when it's obvious that they have no creative ability of their own so they just keep ripping off other's designs?

There is nothing about these cues that are made to honor the makers they are ripping off. They are just simply stolen designs made for their own personal gain.

So lets call a spade a spade and call them what they really are.. Counterfeits!

The last time I checked there are laws against this sort of thing. WTF?
Click to expand...
I have ordered cues that were designs I had seen in other cues. I had Szamboti make me a cue that was like a Gina I had seen. I also had a Szamboti that was a perfect copy of a Balabushka with rings and MOP diamonds.

The funny thing though, when I got the cue Szamboti had added three veneer rings above the butt cap that matched the points. I guess so the cue could not at some point be passed off as a Balabushka. That was not my intent I just liked the simple designs of Balabushka.

I know the term "Tribute" is another way of saying copy, but there are few new designs under the sun. No one can claim the rights to MOP diamonds or stitch rings around the joint. Cue makers seem to do a lot of the same stuff in general.
 
They're not counterfeit. Counterfeit would be if they were labelled as the cues they are paying homage to. That doesn't seem to be the case. They are using familiar designs that are popularized by other builders, but there are a lot of people who do that.

What about the -R- 'bushka tribues? Or when Jeff Olney or any number of other makers also turns out a cue in the SW style? Are you as equally bothered by those?

I'm not trying to negate what you're saying, I have mixed feelings about it myself. I tend not to mind when I see a really nice builder doing it, but I find myself more bothered by the cheaper ones that seem to be in abundance. But...I also realize that it's a distinction without a real difference and both builders are basically doing the same thing.

It's important to remember that most cues designs are just not that radical. Southwest is known for their 6 point style but that is hardly something completely unique to them. They don't own the rights to building a cue in that style, they've only popularized it. If they can claim ownership of that then who owns the 4-point/4-veneer style that the large majority of builders are doing?

You say their are laws against this sort of thing but unless a design is protected with a copyright or patent, and I'm not sure if either are applicable in this case, then there really isn't any law against it.

Again, not saying I think it's right and it can bother me too, but it's not the clear and clean lined pictured you're trying to paint here.
 
macguy said:
I know the term "Tribute" is another way of saying copy, but there are few new designs under the sun. No one can claim the rights to MOP diamonds or stitch rings around the joint. Cue makers seem to do a lot of the same stuff in general.
Click to expand...

I'm not referring to using the same materials or inlays. I'm referring to what JD cues does on almost everyone of his cues. And that's to make an exact copy of another maker's cue.

And no offense, but if you think there are no new designs to be made you are not to familiar with this industry. I see the likes of Tonkin, Zen, Manzino, PFD, Jake Hulsey, and many others pushing the design enevelope on a regular basis.
 
slide13 said:
They're not counterfeit. Counterfeit would be if they were labelled as the cues they are paying homage to. That doesn't seem to be the case. They are using familiar designs that are popularized by other builders, but there are a lot of people who do that.

What about the -R- 'bushka tribues? Or when Jeff Olney or any number of other makers also turns out a cue in the SW style? Are you as equally bothered by those?

I'm not trying to negate what you're saying, I have mixed feelings about it myself. I tend not to mind when I see a really nice builder doing it, but I find myself more bothered by the cheaper ones that seem to be in abundance. But...I also realize that it's a distinction without a real difference and both builders are basically doing the same thing.

It's important to remember that most cues designs are just not that radical. Southwest is known for their 6 point style but that is hardly something completely unique to them. They don't own the rights to building a cue in that style, they've only popularized it. If they can claim ownership of that then who owns the 4-point/4-veneer style that the large majority of builders are doing?

You say their are laws against this sort of thing but unless a design is protected with a copyright or patent, and I'm not sure if either are applicable in this case, then there really isn't any law against it.

Again, not saying I think it's right and it can bother me too, but it's not the clear and clean lined pictured you're trying to paint here.
Click to expand...

Really? This is the stuff I'm referring to.

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=379525

These almost EXACT duplicates of the original. Right down to the ringwork. And also, basic designs are a little different. The Southwest assembly line just keeps churning out the same thing over and over and over so if someone else wants to make another 6 point cue that looks similar, who gives a shit. I'm more referring to detailed ORIGINAL designs.

Also, I feel it's a completely different story if you're paying homage to a deceased legend but duplicating a "classic" design. But in the case of the Carmeli and Tad "tributes" they are blatant ripoffs of the maker's designs.

Do you recall a few years ago when another cue maker made a cue that was similar to one of Eric Crisp's designs with the scallops? That is sort of "his" thing and while he certainly wasn't the first maker to use that design, he does use them quite often and in a way that is instantly recognizable as being his design. He was a little up set when it was reproduced and IMO he was justified in being upset. I can understand if a maker does 1 or maybe 2 "tribute cues" in a classic design but almost everything JD makes is a complete ripoff of someone else's work.

I'm not sure about how others feel, but to me cues are functional art. "Art" being the operative word here. What if some hack was painting exact replicas of a Monet or da Vince? Would that be ok if they called them "tributes"? I'm kinda thinking they would be arrested as forgers. So why is our kind of art any different and why shouldn't significant designs be protected under the same guidelines?
 
Last edited:
Who cares, they are priced at about 10% of what the real deal costs, it's not like the guy can be making a mint out of them. Not everyone can afford a Gina, or a Tad, but they like the look.
 
Cue Design Theft, sounds like Jimbo.




Monstermash said:
So I have been seeing a lot of so called "tribute" cues over the past few years. They are usually made by some crappy maker in Asia (most specifically JD) and quite frankly I'm getting a little sick of it. Where do they get off ripping off other makers designs and calling them "tributes" when it's obvious that they have no creative ability of their own so they just keep ripping off other's designs?

There is nothing about these cues that are made to honor the makers they are ripping off. They are just simply stolen designs made for their own personal gain.

So lets call a spade a spade and call them what they really are.. Counterfeits!

The last time I checked there are laws against this sort of thing. WTF?
Click to expand...
 
Seems to me, most people want the same boring cue with, 4-8 points, veneers, barbells, propellers, pecocks, whatever. You get the idea.

there is a guy close to us that "tributes" Keith's designs alot, and doesn't even give credit enough to say so... SO ANNOYING. His happen to have rounded points more often than not, so atleast there's that...
 
Monstermash said:
I'm not referring to using the same materials or inlays. I'm referring to what JD cues does on almost everyone of his cues. And that's to make an exact copy of another maker's cue.

And no offense, but if you think there are no new designs to be made you are not to familiar with this industry. I see the likes of Tonkin, Zen, Manzino, PFD, Jake Hulsey, and many others pushing the design enevelope on a regular basis.
Click to expand...
With all due respect I just pulled up some pictures by the cue makers you mention. I saw some knock designs of Gina, some long windows reminiscent of Joss West as well as other familiar designs that have been around forever. Not to say I didn't also see some pretty original stuff as well.

I have been messing with cues for over 50 years, and I think the first really original stuff I have seen ever, was Thomas Wayne and Samsara. You could also add to that Southwest/Kersenbrock that began building somewhat unorthodox looking cues.

Southwest built a market and following for their cues and bingo, everyone began building the same cues right down to the wood butt rings joint screw. They all copy.
 
jhanso18 said:
Seems to me, most people want the same boring cue with, 4-8 points, veneers, barbells, propellers, pecocks, whatever. You get the idea.

there is a guy close to us that "tributes" Keith's designs alot, and doesn't even give credit enough to say so... SO ANNOYING. His happen to have rounded points more often than not, so atleast there's that...
Click to expand...
Richard Black won an award for a cue that he let slip he had stolen the design from another cue maker.
 
Last edited:
Monstermash said:
I'm not sure about how others feel, but to me cues are functional art. "Art" being the operative word here. What if some hack was painting exact replicas of a Monet or da Vince? Would that be ok if they called them "tributes"? I'm kinda thinking they would be arrested as forgers. So why is our kind of art any different and why shouldn't significant designs be protected under the same guidelines?
Click to expand...

I don't believe there are any copyright protections left for those old masterworks...copying them is pretty common, you will often see art students doing so right in the museum itself and you can by actually painted reproductions. It's not forgery if they are not being sold as originals and are not signed/labelled as such.

I honestly don't know where cues fall with regards to copyright. The "functional" part of it can sometimes complicate things a little. Fashion design, for example, is not covered by copyright protection. When a designer creates a sketch a piece of clothing that sketch has copyright protection. But, as soon as it is turned into an actual garment it's no longer protected and anyone can reproduce something that looks just like it. They cannot label it with that designers label of course, labels/logos are protected, but the design and construction of a garment itself is not.

Again, not saying that makes it right, but you seem to be under this impression that what is happening is truly illegal and I don't believe that to be the case at all. Distasteful, sure, but not illegal I don't believe...unless the original creator does have some sort of copyright or patent protection.

Any copyright lawyers around who can weigh in, would love to know for sure on this?
 
I am not a fan of the "tribute" cues.

That includes -R- cues.

The only one that I really like is the Thomas Wayne, "Northwest" cue that was poke in the eye to Southwest cues.

If folks would say this is a "Balabushka Copy" instead of a "Balabushka Tribute" I would have less of a problem. It think this was the OP point as well.

Ken
 
Just my opinion...I like them. As someone mentioned...you can get the look for a 10th of the price. It's tougher to copy the important aspect of the cue which as we all know is playability.
 
Tribute is similar in flavor to "Vintage" or "Antique" that is applied to 80% of items on ebay and craigslist. Most of it is just "Old Crap" but can't really call it that and sell it LOL. 1741 silver coin, Antique. 1975 plastic cup, Old Crap. Original first run Levis jeans, Vintage. 1990 Levis jeans, Old Crap.

I don't know if I'm for or against cue copies, but I agree that calling them "Tribute" cues is just renaming "Copy" so it's not so blatantly negative. Not counterfeits though, for that to be there they would need to try to pass off the cue as that from the original maker, or at least do the "I don't know about cues but a friend told me it's a ...." that we see on ebay. That latter one is just a way of trying to pass off a counterfeit without a clear way of ebay to go after you if the cue turns out not to be what you tried to pass it off as.

It's pretty tough to get a Balabushka made these days, so making a copy of that design is one thing, when you copy the work of an living cue maker, that's like typing up the text of A Christmas Carol, calling it "A Holiday Carol" and selling it under your name. Of course if a customer asks for a copy, it's money they need to make, but if I was a cue maker I would try like hell to make at least some clear changes to a cue.
 
Last edited:
jhanso18 said:
Seems to me, most people want the same boring cue with, 4-8 points, veneers, barbells, propellers, pecocks, whatever. You get the idea.

there is a guy close to us that "tributes" Keith's designs alot, and doesn't even give credit enough to say so... SO ANNOYING. His happen to have rounded points more often than not, so atleast there's that...
Click to expand...

Who could copy Keith and his 100 point cues lol. Someday I'll have one.

I'm not a fan of what people do with "tribute" cues. Unless you got a deal with the designer and giving them their cut or cutting their family in it's just stealing the design to me. Of course there are some designs that are just to common to claim it as a personal design.
 
My Josey is sort of a tribute...pantographed 4 veneered sharp points, all evenly high, but it does have his trademark MOP fleurs on the butt cap. I love the hit. I'm old, and pretty boring. Guess that's why I love the old more traditional designs. Ahhh, but it does sport Keith's signature, so I don't consider it a copy of anything.

Tons of "tributes" in the car world. One most would recognize is a '68 Mustang fastback done to copy the one Steve McQueen drove in the movie "Bullitt".
Everybody knows these cars aren't the real thing...so I see nothing wrong with them. Counterfeits are another story...I hate those. It's a federal offense to tamper with a car's VIN. Yet it happens...so caveat emptor.
 

Attachments

  • DSCN0232.jpg
    DSCN0232.jpg
    98.3 KB · Views: 469
Last edited:
Dockter said:
Who could copy Keith and his 100 point cues lol. Someday I'll have one.

I'm not a fan of what people do with "tribute" cues. Unless you got a deal with the designer and giving them their cut or cutting their family in it's just stealing the design to me. Of course there are some designs that are just to common to claim it as a personal design.
Click to expand...

There is a guy within a 5 hour drive that TRIES to rip off several designs from other builders. Try being the key word. I've seen a coupl cues that were near exact as some of Keith. I started asking him about it, and where he got the idea and such. When he said something like, "it just came to me", I whipped out my phone, and said, "Samething happened to Keith in 08'..." LOL. The look on his face was priceles...

I don't really have a problem with the barrowing of ideas, and designs, but just be honest about it. I got this idea from that guy. Most cues built since the 50-60's replicate some version of rambow, bushka, titlest designs. It's all good though.

The way a cue plays is what REALLY seperates the masters from the rest.
 
jhanso18 said:
There is a guy within a 5 hour drive that TRIES to rip off several designs from other builders. Try being the key word. I've seen a coupl cues that were near exact as some of Keith. I started asking him about it, and where he got the idea and such. When he said something like, "it just came to me", I whipped out my phone, and said, "Samething happened to Keith in 08'..." LOL. The look on his face was priceles...

I don't really have a problem with the barrowing of ideas, and designs, but just be honest about it. I got this idea from that guy. Most cues built since the 50-60's replicate some version of rambow, bushka, titlest designs. It's all good though.

The way a cue plays is what REALLY seperates the masters from the rest.
Click to expand...

Bingo on that...If the unthinkable happened to my Josey, I'd be crying until he built me another. I love the way it plays. Oh, it still misses...but that's on me. Stiff hit, great feedback. I can't ask for more. My advice to others...once you find a cue you like, you'd better hang on to it.
 
Last edited:
Most every modern Auto Maker has stolen designs from Ferrari.
In the past two decades, several have copied from Mercedes-Benz.

Virtually EVERY Tire coming out of Asia is a total rip-off of a U.S.
or European effort. It is what it is and you can call it anything
you like. I prefer to use the term Copy when I order a Custom Cue
which closely resembles one originally designed by another maker.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top