Plagarism by Jacoby cues
- Thread starter jimtauer
- Start date
I think this is the most workable idea.
Even if you went to court and won the case, the judgement against them, would be based on how much damage it did to you financially or emotionally.
It's a shame that they did not at least contact you, and ask for permission, but I think you should have probably contacted them first also, before coming on here to vent.
To see what they said.
Maybe the left hand didn't know what the right hand was doing.?
Or something like that.
I do understand your being upset about it though, I would be too.
A lot of websites and "custom design" based businesses have in the fine print of their terms and conditions that any and all designs become their intellectual property upon production. A lot of custom t-shirt businesses etc do this.
It could be the case but it never hurts to contact their corporate and submit an inquiry. Also, a lot of lawyers will review your information and tell you if you have a case for free. They will also offer to accept your case and only make money if they win your case and get you money. You can't really lose with that path.
C
It could be the case but it never hurts to contact their corporate and submit an inquiry. Also, a lot of lawyers will review your information and tell you if you have a case for free. They will also offer to accept your case and only make money if they win your case and get you money. You can't really lose with that path.
C
Plagiarism- the practice of taking someone else's work or ideas and passing them off as one's own.
First off as someone mentioned earlier you would have to prove it was your design.
Next, you have not incurred any damages other than emotional it would seem
However you could theoretically be entitled to part or all of the charge for that design done on future cues
Finally-You ever looked on Jacoby's website? Their designs are all very very similar. Which means people either look at other peoples designs for ideas or that Jacoby releases a line of cues based on someones idea. We are also talking about a design that isn't trade marked which is probably the only way you pull of any legal action unless you patented something specific about the design process or an intricacy.
First off as someone mentioned earlier you would have to prove it was your design.
Next, you have not incurred any damages other than emotional it would seem
However you could theoretically be entitled to part or all of the charge for that design done on future cues
Finally-You ever looked on Jacoby's website? Their designs are all very very similar. Which means people either look at other peoples designs for ideas or that Jacoby releases a line of cues based on someones idea. We are also talking about a design that isn't trade marked which is probably the only way you pull of any legal action unless you patented something specific about the design process or an intricacy.
Possible to see any pictures?
This is unfortunate. I'd really like to see the cue design in question, please post a picture of your cue or link to similar cue on eBay.
From your perspective I totally get being upset.
From Jacoby's perspective I doubt they did it on purpose. They may not have realized this was a custom design of yours, maybe you saw it on some other cue, hard to say. If they did, it also likely became a CNC program file on their library and when it was reused they didn't know the origin of it.
If you're concerned about having your cue be a unique design then you should spell that out when ordering to make sure this doesn't happen. Ask them to remove the file from their library so it cannot be reused.
Not to say that excuses what happened, I just doubt it happened maliciously with the knowledge they were stealing your design.
I'll be curious to hear what Jacoby says in response. I like my Jacoby cue a lot, it plays great, but it was just a simple design I pulled of their in-stock wall. After playing with it I'd definitely consider going back to them for a custom design in the future if I wanted one but I too would be disappointed if I drew up my own design and found it duplicated down the road.
From your perspective I totally get being upset.
From Jacoby's perspective I doubt they did it on purpose. They may not have realized this was a custom design of yours, maybe you saw it on some other cue, hard to say. If they did, it also likely became a CNC program file on their library and when it was reused they didn't know the origin of it.
If you're concerned about having your cue be a unique design then you should spell that out when ordering to make sure this doesn't happen. Ask them to remove the file from their library so it cannot be reused.
Not to say that excuses what happened, I just doubt it happened maliciously with the knowledge they were stealing your design.
I'll be curious to hear what Jacoby says in response. I like my Jacoby cue a lot, it plays great, but it was just a simple design I pulled of their in-stock wall. After playing with it I'd definitely consider going back to them for a custom design in the future if I wanted one but I too would be disappointed if I drew up my own design and found it duplicated down the road.
I think THIS ^^^ is the best advice.
I wanted my Joss sneaky to be one-of-a-kind too, so far I have bought up 6000 identical cues
I just spoke with Brandon Jacoby. They said they didn't think it was something they couldn't/shouldn't reproduce, so he did make 3 (three) other cues with the same design. I told them to cease/delete that art file and not make any more, which he agreed to do. I don't think there's anything else that can or should be done at this point. Life lesson learned, I guess. He did say that if he was told it should be a one off that he would have upcharged me further and deleted the design afterwards.
The ebay cue was already sold, so unless I track down the buyer I can't have that one. Nor can I afford to just go out and buy the 3, much less one, cue at $800-$1200 per cue. He said all 3 that were built have since been sold.
I don't really feel like posting a picture of the cue on here, mainly for personal reasons - some people might think I'm weird but somehow my cue feels less special now that I know it has been reproduced and I don't really want to publish the design even further than it already has been. It's nothing that exotic or special, but it was unique to ME - and apparently a few others found it desirable enough to have on their own cues.
The ebay cue was already sold, so unless I track down the buyer I can't have that one. Nor can I afford to just go out and buy the 3, much less one, cue at $800-$1200 per cue. He said all 3 that were built have since been sold.
I don't really feel like posting a picture of the cue on here, mainly for personal reasons - some people might think I'm weird but somehow my cue feels less special now that I know it has been reproduced and I don't really want to publish the design even further than it already has been. It's nothing that exotic or special, but it was unique to ME - and apparently a few others found it desirable enough to have on their own cues.
I wanted my Joss sneaky to be one-of-a-kind too, so far I have bought up 6000 identical cues
For an extra 50-bucks Dan Jaynes will build you a true one-of-a-kind Joss sneaky.
If you see a thousand or two identical custom / production Joss sneakies pop up on
Ebay, take Joss to court, and get a 50-dollar settlement.
In fact, order two and I will split the 50 with you.
It's actually your fault. If you would have told them you didn't want them to reuse the design you would have been charged the going rate for a custom code programmer, $150 an hour. Average time to reproduce an average design and the code for it production is about 4 hours but could be much longer depending on the design. So would you have placed the order if the cue, being a "one off", would have cost you a minimum of $600 more? That's the real question...
Feel your pain, Jim. I'd feel violated too if this happened to me. It is just one of life's benign lessons that teaches you to pay attention to details up front and trust no one that you are not familiar with.
Looking at recent listings that have sold through Ebay in that price range ($700-$1500) for Jacoby cues, it seams that the terms "rare" and "custom" are mentioned quite often.
http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_odk...ol+cue.TRS0&_nkw=jacoby+pool+cue&_sacat=21568
Looking at recent listings that have sold through Ebay in that price range ($700-$1500) for Jacoby cues, it seams that the terms "rare" and "custom" are mentioned quite often.
http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_odk...ol+cue.TRS0&_nkw=jacoby+pool+cue&_sacat=21568
I'm not a lawyer, but I think you are confusing Trademarks with Copyrights. Trademarks are logos and other identifying marks. IIRC, Trademarks have to be specifically declared to be enforceable.Well Joe, I guess i am a Ducktard
Copyright applies to written, artistic, musical, intellectual property (like computer code), etc. Copyrights are implicit, so you don't have to specifically declare them, although it is wise to do so to establish preeminence.
I'm not sure if this is legally correct or not, but it seems to me that the original design that the OP drew is protected under copyright. The CNC code/plan/design/instrucitons/whatever are also probably copyrighted, although I'm not sure by whom. There is the concept of a "derivative work", so they may transfer to the OP.
I have no idea about the cue itself or other similar cues.
Fine. 3 cues like yours made. Consider this. There is NO CUE like yours. Period. You can not perfectly match the BEM or whatever wood was used exactly like yours. It simply can't be done. It is still unique. If you choose to wallow that it is less special, sell it and go about it different next time. I have plenty of cues that are one off's, yet others made close to it. I don't care.
I know your design makes it different, but at least know that others appreciated the design because it was produced and sold. Compliments to you. Maybe you have an eye for design? Just a different spin for you to consider.
I understand how the OP feels. The lesson here though is never to assume that any design you give to a maker is not going to be reproduced.
A consumer has to spell that out and be prepared to absorb all the extra setup costs associated with doing a one-off design. Makers are able to offset their development costs by making more of a design. Otherwise each item should and would cost a lot more money.
That said, if a customer supplies the design then I will certainly bring it up and give the pricing options for destroying the "mold" so to speak.
I think both parties are "at fault" here. I wouldn't say Jacoby plagiarized though because they made a tangible product from a consumer-supplied design with no discussion of who would own the resulting actual design files. I am not entirely sure but I would have always thought that a rendering is protected by copyright the same as mickey mouse drawings are protected. My thought is that if you create a drawing then someone else shouldn't be able to reproduce that drawing on a cue legally under existing copyright laws without permission. Copyright however doesn't protect utilitarian items.
AFAIK though it does protect the ornamental designs applied to utilitarian items as long as that design has been copyrighted.
John - not a lawyer.
A consumer has to spell that out and be prepared to absorb all the extra setup costs associated with doing a one-off design. Makers are able to offset their development costs by making more of a design. Otherwise each item should and would cost a lot more money.
That said, if a customer supplies the design then I will certainly bring it up and give the pricing options for destroying the "mold" so to speak.
I think both parties are "at fault" here. I wouldn't say Jacoby plagiarized though because they made a tangible product from a consumer-supplied design with no discussion of who would own the resulting actual design files. I am not entirely sure but I would have always thought that a rendering is protected by copyright the same as mickey mouse drawings are protected. My thought is that if you create a drawing then someone else shouldn't be able to reproduce that drawing on a cue legally under existing copyright laws without permission. Copyright however doesn't protect utilitarian items.
AFAIK though it does protect the ornamental designs applied to utilitarian items as long as that design has been copyrighted.
John - not a lawyer.
A bit off topic, but not much... I hardly ever play the lottery but I happened to be at the store and the pot was a gazillion or so. So I walk up to the counter behind another person and the cashier asks me to step back. I asked why, she says "so you don't see the other customer's numbers".....
Last edited:
I don't blame you for being unhappy about this. So, basically what he told you was that he charged you to give him new ideas for cue designs that he could use for sale to the public, and he would have charged you more for it to be exclusive.
No, that's just wrong. Your design belongs to you. First, he needs your permission to use it for public sale, and second it's totally justified for you to receive a fee from him for reuse of your design, not the other way around.