We learned in the other thread that cue design theft is black or white. So with that said, you are either for it, or against it... cast your votes.
Cue Design Theft... Are You For or Against
- Thread starter Worminator
- Start date
Not wanting to start a war, or flame war but if cuemaker "A" make a simple 4 Point Cue, with 4 Veneers, has not that "design" been done in the past, so is the design stolen?
Now if someone was to "copy" some of Ed Prewitt Ring work that is unique, is that design theft, or Prewitt inspired.
I also believe the LATE BERT SCHREGGER was the first guy to make a Six Point Pool Cue, so are Six Point Cues a THIEFT of Bert's Design?
Now if someone was to "copy" some of Ed Prewitt Ring work that is unique, is that design theft, or Prewitt inspired.
I also believe the LATE BERT SCHREGGER was the first guy to make a Six Point Pool Cue, so are Six Point Cues a THIEFT of Bert's Design?
well jaime if you didnt come up with such cool twist on desings no one would want to steal them....:grin: i fill that everything has been done before so i would send pics of a cue and say i want that exact cue can you make it....but i dont see anything wrong with taken parts of one cue and adding stuff from others....but damn it is hard to pic anything traditonal that hasnt allready been done....i am not sure were i follow on your poll....i dont think you should rip of someones cue detail for detail but some of us are limited to what we have seen in the past and more so in what we like....there is only so many ways you can put a diamond here spear there railroad track ring there and so on and so on....anyway jaime it was nice hanging out with you at the expo and hope to see you again next year....mickey ps i read the pool options unique desgins shouldnt be robbed but what do you consider a "unique" design? just to help me vote..
Last edited:
Jamie was pretty specific about "unique designs" and I don't think there's any justification for copying a unique design.
Maybe the word "current" should be added.
Designs that were unique 20-years ago, are common now.
Taking a current unique design and finding a cuemaker to copy it seems like a weird thing to do.
There's so many nice cues out there and great cue builders to build them, why would anyone want to do that.
Maybe the word "current" should be added.
Designs that were unique 20-years ago, are common now.
Taking a current unique design and finding a cuemaker to copy it seems like a weird thing to do.
There's so many nice cues out there and great cue builders to build them, why would anyone want to do that.
Paper veneers, half joints, and sleeved ivory joints. All design elements that have been done in probably the last 5 years copied at will by ANYONE who wants one done.
JV
i agree with you joe....kinda the reason i asked what was unique...
I didn't vote, and I wouldn't know how to respond to this poll as it's worded. Seems pointed at a very gray area.
Ask me if I'm for or against piracy & misrepresentation in the marketplace, then I'd see a clear distinction in the choices " for or against".
Ask me if I'm for or against piracy & misrepresentation in the marketplace, then I'd see a clear distinction in the choices " for or against".
patent needed.....
I think it is a free for all..... If a cuemaker thought their design was novel and worried about it being copied they should have patented the design.... Everytime I see these Cue Theft Design threads come up, the only cues I think have fell under this topic is southwest.... and certain makers ringwork, (i.e. southwest again, prewitt, haley, barnhart, zinzola.....)
there's only so many ways to turn a tomato stake into a cue...:thumbup:
I think it is a free for all..... If a cuemaker thought their design was novel and worried about it being copied they should have patented the design.... Everytime I see these Cue Theft Design threads come up, the only cues I think have fell under this topic is southwest.... and certain makers ringwork, (i.e. southwest again, prewitt, haley, barnhart, zinzola.....)
there's only so many ways to turn a tomato stake into a cue...:thumbup:
I drew the design that Art Cantando used to build this fine box cue. It was later remade by Master Class Cues and Brianna. They changed the proportions and stylized the propellors. Later, Ron Haley made a reproportioned copy...with permission from the Cantando Family. Sometimes "design theft" falls into the class of "homage" or "Tribute."
As one who has experienced first hand the reproduction of a design, I feel flattered, not ripped off. Somebody liked a concept and thought, with their spin on it, they could do it better. Immitation is a form of flattery.
I interviewed Ernie for the 3rd Blue Book. He has probably been copied more than any living cuemaker. His comments were supportive of other cuemakers who make similar cues or echo his innovations. He was however, strongly against those who would forge exact copies of his work.
As one who has experienced first hand the reproduction of a design, I feel flattered, not ripped off. Somebody liked a concept and thought, with their spin on it, they could do it better. Immitation is a form of flattery.
I interviewed Ernie for the 3rd Blue Book. He has probably been copied more than any living cuemaker. His comments were supportive of other cuemakers who make similar cues or echo his innovations. He was however, strongly against those who would forge exact copies of his work.
I bring it up with reason. I will, for the sake of argument say Ron Haley was the first to do paper veneers. Veneers and splices before this design change were basically unchanged for 100 years outside of the splicing technique itself. So this IMHO is a pretty big change, in the scope of points. But others have taken it upon themselves to use this change at their whim. Maybe they asked Ron, I don't know. But IMHO those who do these can never complain that their designs at any time, have been hijacked and it will happen.
Same with sleeving the ivory, and the short joint, which are not only design, but elements that might lead to the change in playability.
There is NO grey area, a thief is a thief, a dollar or a thousand. People who claim grey areas need to justify certain times when stealing is ok, when they know that all they are looking for is approval. It's like when you got caught as a kid and said you thought it was ok, your big brother was doing it.
Either its ok, or its not. I have no issue with it, primarily because its done so often, I know when a battle is lost.
JV (----knows this white flag went up before half the people reading this knew what a cue was
As long as ''tributes'' are considered in-bounds, I don't see anything wrong with ''copying''. After all, it's the same thing. Personally, if I were a cuemaker I wouldn't copy or build tributes. But that's just me.
It's simply wrong to copy a design and then get a pass because you say it's a tribute if you, in fact, feel that it's wrong to build copies. You should be equally against building tributes. Makers can't have it both ways. JMO, of course.
It's simply wrong to copy a design and then get a pass because you say it's a tribute if you, in fact, feel that it's wrong to build copies. You should be equally against building tributes. Makers can't have it both ways. JMO, of course.
Last edited:
I was talking with a cue builder yesterday about this subject. He has had building/design elements copied and/or reproduced over the years. One comment he made really resonated with me. To paraphrase: "You know, if xxxx had just called me and said 'I like this technique/design and would like to try it'. Of they had acknowledged in the AZ thread where they displayed a cue that they were influenced by me. I would feel a lot better about it."
To me (Scott), it is about respect for originator's else's work, sweat, expense and inspiration.
Scott
To me (Scott), it is about respect for originator's else's work, sweat, expense and inspiration.
Scott
Aside from the scallops, I have seen no copies. Cues dont look alike. Question though. Are scallops like tiny butterflies? Just curious. I think you can see where I am going with this.
And to answer the question. I dont give a shit. Eric is a self proclaimed ass that I will never have any desire to acquire one of his cues. And there are some members here that I have lost a lot of respect for. I know I am a small fish in a big pond. Hell, not even a fish. Tadpole maybe. But I know that right and wrong manner in which to talk to people and the other thread and this one are the wrong way to go about it. Bottom line, grow up, show some sack and keep on truckin'.
By the way, this should be in the main forum as this has no pictures or is trying to show technique. It is a POLL. These go in the main forum. And here is my vote. I vote for the 3rd option. Grow up.
And to answer the question. I dont give a shit. Eric is a self proclaimed ass that I will never have any desire to acquire one of his cues. And there are some members here that I have lost a lot of respect for. I know I am a small fish in a big pond. Hell, not even a fish. Tadpole maybe. But I know that right and wrong manner in which to talk to people and the other thread and this one are the wrong way to go about it. Bottom line, grow up, show some sack and keep on truckin'.
By the way, this should be in the main forum as this has no pictures or is trying to show technique. It is a POLL. These go in the main forum. And here is my vote. I vote for the 3rd option. Grow up.
Last edited:
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
http://www.cornerstonecues.com/cue409.htm
Scott that's a very nice post but what if the original maker really didn't like the idea but just didn't know how to say no? I don't think they should be put in a position to say yes or no, one way or the other.
Also, what if the cuemaker was alive but retired and couldn't be contacted? One other question... what if the cuemaker was dead, who would they get permission from then?
It seems the simple solution would be to not build tributes/copies.
btw...
For my own further education on this subject, what thread exactly is it that you're referring to, Jamie. I'd be interested to see if I find proof of it being a black & white issue "en masse".
The nearly universal term "classic" comes to mind... That's not, by any means, to say I'm a proponent of blatant (another required definition there) point for point copying. There's only so much truly new & innovated in cue design elements - as with music, etc.
The tribute and "enter name here - esque" design issue would be hard to avoid in cues not meant primarily as works of art - and even then...
I may have a Szamboti-esque cue. Doesn't make it a Szam. Never will.
Now if I intimate differently in representing it... That is black & white wrong.
Interesting discussion.
Gray and/or grey, I believe. Dictionary optional.:wink:
Last edited:
It used to take a while for cues to get around.
Not so long ago, only the major manufacturers had photos of their cues out there, and they were printed brochures.
Now, new design/structural elements are revealed instantly on the internet- worldwide.
The cream will always rise to the top.
Not so long ago, only the major manufacturers had photos of their cues out there, and they were printed brochures.
Now, new design/structural elements are revealed instantly on the internet- worldwide.
The cream will always rise to the top.
i wouldn't really call what was done theft of a unique design. i've seen similar cues made before.
nothing you can do about it really. people order SW style cues all the time
