Plagarism by Jacoby cues

Don't worry they're just jimtauer tribute cues.

If you didn't copyright your design, I don't think you will win any suit. It will be interesting to hear their response though.

You may not win a in court but ... on the other hand, this would be a civil action and I think with a halfway smart lawyer, you could easily articulate that this is a custom cue maker that a premium is paid for in order to obtain one off designs.

More difficult might be proving your design was in fact your design, and you didn't find it and copy it from somewhere else. Which they could argue. :thumbup:

old no 9 said:

don't worry they're just jimtauer tribute cues.

Click to expand...

lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

jimtauer said:

About a year ago I had a cue made by Jacoby. The cue included a custom design that I drew myself, that they had a custom CNC drawing done for the butt sleeve (although not fancy by any means, it was VERY distinct and VERY recognizable.) The custom drawing cost me $50 extra to have done on my cue.

When perusing eBay tonight, I came across another cue that sold recently with the EXACT SAME design, albiet with a different inlay/wood than my butt sleeve, it was painfully obvious that they re-used my design.

Is this standard practice in the cue industry? I sent them an email asking how many cues had been produced with MY design and wonder how much money they made on cues from MY design. I'm really PO'd about this and am considering consulting an attorney.

Any insight on this is appreciated. Am I over-reacting? Part of the point of designing my own cue is just that, it's MINE and one of a kind. Apparently no longer. I know one thing for certain, I will not buy anything further from Jacoby nor will recommend them to anyone, as much as I love the cue, it makes me sick to think about what, at a minimum, I would consider shady business practices by their company.

I

Click to expand...

I had a similar issue with Paul Huebler.
I had him design me a one of a kind cue with wood inlays in 1976.
About a month later, I ran into a man in St Louis with the exact design.
Only difference was mine was 60" and his was 58".
Paul also told him it was a one of a kind cue.
Never seen another like it though.
Good news was, after playing with it for 7 years, I sold it for the same price I paid for it.

I'm no lawyer but...

it might be hard to enforce, or gain anything in court, if the original contract/agreement didn't specify that the design wouldn't be used again.

This is probably one of those situations where you have to adjust your thinking in order to not let it ruin how you feel about (and shoot with) this cue.

It's kind of a drag but these things happen, try if you can to let it roll off your back.

Tony C

If you ask pretty much any cue maker to make a design that you draw up many will tell you that if you want your cue to be one of one you have to pay an up charge and NOT $50..That 50 probably was just for the code writer to produce the code for the pocket and part.. That's pretty cheap too! That's another reason for some makers charging big $ for certain cues... If you want it to be 1 of 1, make it as hideous as possible with weird wood combos. That way you're pretty safe. :grin:

jimtauer said:

When perusing eBay tonight, I came across another cue that sold recently with the EXACT SAME design

Click to expand...

Personally I would be happy that someone liked the design enough to buy the Ebay cue.
You would feel really bad if nobody bid on it.


:smile:

As an atty I can tell you that you have no civil case.
However, you should contact Jacoby and ask for some good will, at least the $50 dollars back....(that they didn't have to spend on the next cue).

As for future one of a kind cue buyers, if this is important to you, make your contract very clear about what can and cannot be done with your design, and what the penalty would be.

michael4 said:

As an atty I can tell you that you have no civil case.
However, you should contact Jacoby and ask for some good will, at least the $50 dollars back....(that they didn't have to spend on the next cue).

As for future one of a kind cue buyers, if this is important to you, make your contract very clear about what can and cannot be done with your design, and what the penalty would be.

Click to expand...

Do the cue makers and customers actually draw up contracts ? I kind of doubt a cue maker is going to do that because how much variance is there in cues over the years ? They might produce a cue so similar to another cue makers design that they would be accused of infringement .

If anyone says that this practice is OK, and cue design theft is not, then that person is a ducktard...

Second, no one but the OP and whomever he dealt with know the details, but as someone that had cadd'ed / sketched his own designs, if I sent them to someone by the end of the conversation it would be known that what I sent him was MINE.

As a consumer, if I was asked to front money for the design development, I would also expect that to be mine. Otherwise just charge and extra 50 dollars on top of the cue. I think by that money being itemized out of the purchase price, the OP could easily have taken that as development money for HIS sketch.

JV

What a sad state of affairs the pool world is in when all the threads are "don't buy from "" " APA banger questions, or something like this where someone gets pissed over $50 paid to Jacoby for a "one of a kind stick design"

All this is followed by "forum experts" who start to tell you what chances you have in court.

classiccues said:

If anyone says that this practice is OK, and cue design theft is not, then that person is a ducktard...

Click to expand...

Joe, the OP said he supplied a drawing. If you know anything about drawings and turning them into a cue then you know it's not always cut and dry. In many cases the final result is only a facsimile to the original. Anyway any cue that is customer designed and worked by the maker to "fit" in a cue should cost the custome a reasonable up charge much more than $50 to not reproduce unless that is exactly what was agreed before hand.

Skins ------------ gonna "steal" the use of ducktard... Funny stuff right there

jimtauer said:

About a year ago I had a cue made by Jacoby. The cue included a custom design that I drew myself, that they had a custom CNC drawing done for the butt sleeve (although not fancy by any means, it was VERY distinct and VERY recognizable.) The custom drawing cost me $50 extra to have done on my cue.

When perusing eBay tonight, I came across another cue that sold recently with the EXACT SAME design, albiet with a different inlay/wood than my butt sleeve, it was painfully obvious that they re-used my design.

Is this standard practice in the cue industry? I sent them an email asking how many cues had been produced with MY design and wonder how much money they made on cues from MY design. I'm really PO'd about this and am considering consulting an attorney.

Any insight on this is appreciated. Am I over-reacting? Part of the point of designing my own cue is just that, it's MINE and one of a kind. Apparently no longer. I know one thing for certain, I will not buy anything further from Jacoby nor will recommend them to anyone, as much as I love the cue, it makes me sick to think about what, at a minimum, I would consider shady business practices by their company.

I

Click to expand...

Let's see the cue and the original design you drew...

The more I hear of these things, the more I respect, admire, and like Mike Johnson
of Jensen cues.
He made a cue for me that I designed...no big deal, very traditional, with a Hoppe
butt plate.....a certain color design.
He gave me an extremely good price "cause he wanted one of his cues in Canada.

After he shipped it, he called me to ask if he could make any more like that...
....he really liked the design......I said "Sure, I would be honored."

Mike Johnson is a class act, IMO

You and I, we know what it takes to come up with something "workable" into getting it into a cue. BUT when the end user comes up, even with a sketch, IMHO that is HIS sketch. Charge accordingly, if it is that much of a project, if you are going to ask for 50 dollars, just put it into the cue price.
But the parameters of the ownership of the design should be part of the discussions, bought up by the buyer at the time of the order.

Hey I sent a design in with some restoration work to a cuemaker, asking for a price. Then a year or two later I see my design in a cue, in a collectors collection. Cuemaker didn't remember where he got the idea... lol

JV

skins said:

Joe, the OP said he supplied a drawing. If you know anything about drawings and turning them into a cue then you know it's not always cut and dry. In many cases the final result is only a facsimile to the original. Anyway any cue that is customer designed and worked by the maker to "fit" in a cue should cost the custome a reasonable up charge much more than $50 to not reproduce unless that is exactly what was agreed before hand.

Skins ------------ gonna "steal" the use of ducktard... Funny stuff right there

Click to expand...

classiccues said:

If anyone says that this practice is OK, and cue design theft is not, then that person is a ducktard...

Second, no one but the OP and whomever he dealt with know the details, but as someone that had cadd'ed / sketched his own designs, if I sent them to someone by the end of the conversation it would be known that what I sent him was MINE.

As a consumer, if I was asked to front money for the design development, I would also expect that to be mine. Otherwise just charge and extra 50 dollars on top of the cue. I think by that money being itemized out of the purchase price, the OP could easily have taken that as development money for HIS sketch.

JV

Click to expand...

Well Joe, I guess i am a Ducktard I guess that is bad, huh? 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:

classiccues said:

You and I, we know what it takes to come up with something "workable" into getting it into a cue. BUT when the end user comes up, even with a sketch, IMHO that is HIS sketch. Charge accordingly, if it is that much of a project, if you are going to ask for 50 dollars, just put it into the cue price.
But the parameters of the ownership of the design should be part of the discussions, bought up by the buyer at the time of the order.

Hey I sent a design in with some restoration work to a cuemaker, asking for a price. Then a year or two later I see my design in a cue, in a collectors collection. Cuemaker didn't remember where he got the idea... lol

JV

Click to expand...

That's why I just asked the OP in my prior post to post pics the original design and the final cue... I'd like to see what was plagarized...