Plagarism by Jacoby cues

I do tattoos, mostly custom work. It would be terrible to betray a customer's trust and reuse a custom design.
Pool cues are definitely not tattoos, but good business is a reward in itself. If a customer enlists you to perform a service you should always be respectful and appreciative, no matter how big your company is.
This guy knew damn well he shouldn't have reused this design. Doing so was a weak move. No court necessary, he exposed his lack of business ethics right there.
 
FranCrimi said:
It's foolish for you to assume that all I know is pool. I do other things too. I spent many days in court with clients.
Click to expand...

Forensic accountant??
I took a 2 hour lesson from you in the early 90's at Corner Pocket. You have a very nice reputation as a player/instructor/person.
 
Last edited:
phil dade said:
Well Joe, I guess i am a Ducktard:confused: I guess that is bad, huh? :confused: There is no such thing as a design patent, it must have function. As for copyright, it must serve a purpose, like identify your company...Nike swoosh, Adidas 3 stripes.

Copying or knockoffs of course upset the originator of the design, however this is the way it is. In the fashion business, big name designers hold shows and their designs go for thousands of dollars. Very quickly they are copied by many knockoff houses and sell in stores for all prices. The fight is called TRADE DRESS, it has gone on for decades and goes nowhere.

A few easy examples, think about the guy who invented the boat shoe, Sperry...not Sebago,Timberland, Gucci, Todds, or you pick it. Everyone has a boater. How about the inventor of a penny loafer, or say a woman or man's pea coat. Same thing applies to any design patterns unless they are assigned to something specific for a purpose.

Conversely, Burberry's plaid, in many colors is part of their trademark and identification due to the unique proportions. The red sole is brand identification for Christian Loubaton. Many years ago I had a stop selling a red white and blue sneakers because it was a conflict with the Tommy Hilfigger Brand ID....but I could still sell the design...it was the color combo designated infringing on Tommy.

To the OP, be flattered you design was well received. Now this Ducktard must go clean up before I go to bed.:thumbup:
Click to expand...

This Is the best answer given , folks still won't like it, but it's a fact. The law is on Jacobysside whether folks like that or not, this pretty much becomes a moot point. And yes, schuler cues did this to me many years ago on a cue, but I was not mad, I was happy that they liked my choice to make it one of their own. I did request they change the name of the cue to "RJ Special" but that did not happen :frown:
 
Last edited:
Fran,
I am sorry if I upset you, but I stand but the content of my posts in this thread but I did not mean to be abrassive to you and apologize for that.

However, like it of not, to get to court you must be able to quantify damages. Unfortunately in this case, the feeling and ego of the OP are the only damages and there is no legal action available for the reasons I have listed. The OP should be proud his design was appreciated and admired. Have nice holidays:smile:
Phil
 
phil dade said:
Fran,
I am sorry if I upset you, but I stand but the content of my posts in this thread but I did not mean to be abrassive to you and apologize for that.

However, like it of not, to get to court you must be able to quantify damages. Unfortunately in this case, the feeling and ego of the OP are the only damages and there is no legal action available for the reasons I have listed. The OP should be proud his design was appreciated and admired. Have nice holidays:smile:
Phil
Click to expand...

I wish all cases were this easy to quantify. The total value of the cues for sale with the stolen design is a good place to start. That immediately gives value to the design.

Keep it civil and I won't complain.
 
FranCrimi said:
I wish all cases were this easy to quantify. The total value of the cues for sale with the stolen design is a good place to start. That immediately gives value to the design.

Keep it civil and I won't complain.
Click to expand...

You amaze me.
 
GoldCrown said:
Forensic accountant??
I took a 2 hour lesson from you in the early 90's at Corner Pocket. You have a very nice reputation as a player/instructor/person.
Click to expand...

Thanks. Wow, early 90's --- that's awhile back. Hopefully, we've both improved our crafts since then. You probably mean Corner Billiards. That was a great pool room. Amsterdam Billiards eventually took over that space which is where they are now.
 
Design Patent

phil dade said:
Well Joe, I guess i am a Ducktard:confused: I guess that is bad, huh? :confused: There is no such thing as a design patent, it must have function. :
Click to expand...

Phil, I respectively disagree. I have filed many design patents over the years. (Bus parts not cue sticks). The cost is at minimum, several hundred dollars, could run into a few thousand dollars (patent fees, attorney fees, the cost of researching, with detailed drawings supplied) and normally takes 1 to 3 years to be granted. Meanwhile you use patent pending.

From the US Gov Patent website: Definition of a Design

A design consists of the visual ornamental characteristics embodied in, or applied to, an article of manufacture. Since a design is manifested in appearance, the subject matter of a design patent application may relate to the configuration or shape of an article, to the surface ornamentation applied to an article, or to the combination of configuration and surface ornamentation. A design for surface ornamentation is inseparable from the article to which it is applied and cannot exist alone. It must be a definite pattern of surface ornamentation, applied to an article of manufacture.

In discharging its patent-related duties, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO or Office) examines applications and grants patents on inventions when applicants are entitled to them. The patent law provides for the granting of design patents to any person who has invented any new, original and ornamental design for an article of manufacture. A design patent protects only the appearance of the article and not structural or utilitarian features.
 
JW_Redmon said:
Phil, I respectively disagree. I have filed many design patents over the years. (Bus parts not cue sticks). The cost is at minimum, several hundred dollars, could run into a few thousand dollars (patent fees, attorney fees, the cost of researching, with detailed drawings supplied) and normally takes 1 to 3 years to be granted. Meanwhile you use patent pending.

From the US Gov Patent website: Definition of a Design

A design consists of the visual ornamental characteristics embodied in, or applied to, an article of manufacture. Since a design is manifested in appearance, the subject matter of a design patent application may relate to the configuration or shape of an article, to the surface ornamentation applied to an article, or to the combination of configuration and surface ornamentation. A design for surface ornamentation is inseparable from the article to which it is applied and cannot exist alone. It must be a definite pattern of surface ornamentation, applied to an article of manufacture.

In discharging its patent-related duties, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO or Office) examines applications and grants patents on inventions when applicants are entitled to them. The patent law provides for the granting of design patents to any person who has invented any new, original and ornamental design for an article of manufacture. A design patent protects only the appearance of the article and not structural or utilitarian features.
Click to expand...

And many people are fooled into believing that design patents cover the functional part of a product. I was manning a booth for a chinese case maker in 2008 and another chinese case maker brought the attorney for the BCA over to the booth to complain about a case on display which had a folding stand built in. They showed me a design patent claiming infringement. It wasn't my booth or my products but I knew enough to know that a design patent wouldn't cover it.

They had filed for a design patent thinking it would keep his cases out of the market but in fact it was useless for that purpose.

Design patents are generally regarded as not worth much as the design only has to be changed slightly to avoid infringement. There have been cases where the little guy has won though, one that I remember reading was when Wal Mart copied some designer's design and he had patented it. He took them to court and won. Most don't though.
 
benjaminwah said:
I do tattoos, mostly custom work. It would be terrible to betray a customer's trust and reuse a custom design.
Pool cues are definitely not tattoos, but good business is a reward in itself. If a customer enlists you to perform a service you should always be respectful and appreciative, no matter how big your company is.
This guy knew damn well he shouldn't have reused this design. Doing so was a weak move. No court necessary, he exposed his lack of business ethics right there.
Click to expand...

Your point is well made but we should also recognize the differences in what it takes to prepare and do a tattoo vs. what it takes to prepare and manufacture a cue.

I think that cue makers should have two prices.

The - yours and only yours - price.

And

The - I will do it but reserve the right to use this design - price.

If the customer isn't willing to bear all the development costs then they should be willing to share the design. I can tell you that if I increase the cost of a case by $500 to cover the time spent on development 99% of customer would refuse to pay it.
 
alstl said:
You weren't timid about calling out Jacoby. Post a picture of the cue.
Click to expand...


If he posts pics, he is taking a chance that another production cue company with a
gadzillion distributors will knock-off the design, and give it a model number.
Soon you'll be able to buy one from alibaba
 
JW_Redmon said:
Phil, I respectively disagree. I have filed many design patents over the years. (Bus parts not cue sticks). The cost is at minimum, several hundred dollars, could run into a few thousand dollars (patent fees, attorney fees, the cost of researching, with detailed drawings supplied) and normally takes 1 to 3 years to be granted. Meanwhile you use patent pending.

From the US Gov Patent website: Definition of a Design

A design consists of the visual ornamental characteristics embodied in, or applied to, an article of manufacture. Since a design is manifested in appearance, the subject matter of a design patent application may relate to the configuration or shape of an article, to the surface ornamentation applied to an article, or to the combination of configuration and surface ornamentation. A design for surface ornamentation is inseparable from the article to which it is applied and cannot exist alone. It must be a definite pattern of surface ornamentation, applied to an article of manufacture.

In discharging its patent-related duties, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO or Office) examines applications and grants patents on inventions when applicants are entitled to them. The patent law provides for the granting of design patents to any person who has invented any new, original and ornamental design for an article of manufacture. A design patent protects only the appearance of the article and not structural or utilitarian features.
Click to expand...

You are correct, we disagree. Unless the design has a functional benefit, they just do not hold water. Example Shape up Tone up shoes. They do not hold.
 
JB Cases said:
Your point is well made but we should also recognize the differences in what it takes to prepare and do a tattoo vs. what it takes to prepare and manufacture a cue.

I think that cue makers should have two prices.

The - yours and only yours - price.

And

The - I will do it but reserve the right to use this design - price.

If the customer isn't willing to bear all the development costs then they should be willing to share the design. I can tell you that if I increase the cost of a case by $500 to cover the time spent on development 99% of customer would refuse to pay it.
Click to expand...


Amen...so right.
 
JB Cases said:
And many people are fooled into believing that design patents cover the functional part of a product. I was manning a booth for a chinese case maker in 2008 and another chinese case maker brought the attorney for the BCA over to the booth to complain about a case on display which had a folding stand built in. They showed me a design patent claiming infringement. It wasn't my booth or my products but I knew enough to know that a design patent wouldn't cover it.

They had filed for a design patent thinking it would keep his cases out of the market but in fact it was useless for that purpose.

Design patents are generally regarded as not worth much as the design only has to be changed slightly to avoid infringement. There have been cases where the little guy has won though, one that I remember reading was when Wal Mart copied some designer's design and he had patented it. He took them to court and won. Most don't though.
Click to expand...

good points JB, just like Phil Dade's. Everyone and their brother has "knocked off" Instroke case design, and I'm sure there are those that even knocked off some of yours.
 
FranCrimi said:
Thanks. Wow, early 90's --- that's awhile back. Hopefully, we've both improved our crafts since then. You probably mean Corner Billiards. That was a great pool room. Amsterdam Billiards eventually took over that space which is where they are now.
Click to expand...

Was Corner Billiards. I saw you play at SBE...and your name came up as an instructor. My buddy and I drove to NY from Pa on a Sunday morning. It was a good/valuable lesson. Definitely improved. I'm playing good enough to have fun. That's all I'm looking for. Hope you're doing well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top