Cue Design Theft?

[SSach]

You're right.. I would just climb on your momma's back...

Joe

I could see we went a little off subject....

The arguement is not over the cuemakers, as much as it is about how far one can go without creating a false image of his work (at least to me) . I enjoy the debate, but stick to the debate.

Those Phillippi's cues are without a doubt made to resemble Ernie's work, no one here is arguing that. But everyone in the industry with some sort of knowledge can pick them apart.

So, what is considered a copy? Same style, but different woods? 5 veneers instead of 4... dyed versus real wood veneers, Staggered points (high/low)versus even points...

When can we accept the cuemakers work as flattery and when is it out right theft? Can someone who worked as an apprentice be allowed to take the designs he learned and used with his mentor, continue to create cues on his own?

A million questions, but we all have different answers. Stick with the subject... this a good forum no need for insults

 

[RSB-Refugee]

Ghost Busters was in copyright infringement of I Want a New Drug. And it went to court, and Huey Lewis won (out of court). It wasn't a "direct copy," but it infringed.
Fred

Fred,

I don't want to argue with what you wrote, I think you have it right.
But as for the "Ghost Busters" and "I Want A New Drug" point, did you ever notice in Huey's song, the guitar solo near the end, that is a blatant tribute to Jimi Hendricks. I never heard of the lawsuit before and after I read your post, the Jimi tribute seemed a bit ironic to me.

Tracy

 

[Rackin_Zack]

I agree that the debate is good and no matter how many times people try to label me as some nazi or hard liner I will continue to point out that I am open to certain gray areas and want to hear opinions from all sides. I never thought I would change the world, there are too many people out there with money and too many broke cuemakers to think that integrity will ever prevail, but if the next time someone thinks about this issue and makes a few changes I think it'll be better for the cue world. I believe as long as copies are an excepted practice it cuts into the creativity of the cuemaker and cuts down the growth of new designs. I want to see new and exciting cues pop up, the same ole same ole is nice but in the words of someone I respect "it's been done"

Jim

RE: the posted phillipi cues - I think that they are very close to the originals but not copies. I, personally, wouldn't ever order a cue that close to a fancy original cue and if I ordered a similar design I would have made sufficient changes where it had never been done before, much like my burl Skip.

RE: Basic vs Complex designs - I'm a big fan of applying standards across the board and feel that the standards should be the same for all cues and not different for different levels of cues. That being said, I have no idea how you would apply standards to the basic cues now that haven't been applied throughout history.

RE: Crossing the Hypocritical line - I agree with you and I too see the hypocrisy in my feelings, although, I ordered that cue 8 months ago before I had read any of these discussions. I think it is very common for someone to see something they like and then put their own spin on it, which is what I felt I did with the burl Skip. Like I said, had I been exposed to this debate a year ago I would have probably done something different with the butt sleeve. This will definitely be considered in all future cue purchases. I guess at this point it all boils down to the fact that I don't see anything wrong with taking bits from other places and letting that inspire you to create something different, this has been done, and praised, in all forms of creativity! That being said, I don't agree with exact copies, plagiarism or idea theft. As in all things there is a line there that separates the two and as we've all said at this point, no one really knows where the line is.

 

[Rackin_Zack]

whose zack?

I'm Zack and Joe did not sell me the burl Skip, I ordered it from Skip directly, however, he did sell me my other Skip!

 

[Rackin_Zack]

yeah, you got the receipt so its not mistakable for you moron. but when ya sell it you are gonna sell it to someone who wants a southwest style cue. thats why you had it made like than and thats why itll sell like that. you should call southwest and apologize.

In all fairness, if you put this cue in a line up with other Skips, southwests, botis, and who ever else you had in your list, anyone who has ever seen Skips work could tell that it is his work. Also, anyone who has ever seen an actual southwest would know that this is not a southwest cue. The perportions are different, the veneers are hardwood, no sw rings, etc.

 

[JimBo]

Jim,

Again you take things out of context.. In my post I write whether right or wrong thats our norm(society).. Murder is not a norm of our society..

My point had nothing to do with right or wrong aspect my point was that in your opinion since it's being done that means I need to accept it. I disagree, I guess if you want I could change the word Murder with Abortion, something that many people think is ok while others don't. My point isn't to make light of murder or abortion just to point out that just because some people do it doesn't mean others must accept it.

That is why people are arrested and we have police to go after this problem.. YOu cannot compare the 2.. What I am saying is even If you agree its wrong there are more people who believe it isn't..

I think this is wrong, I think more people don't realize it or don't care, which is totally different then saying they accept it, part of the point of this thread and my posts over the last few weeks is to get people to see the problem and to bring it to their attention, maybe once some people think about it then we will start to change the public opinion on something that's wrong.

Thats why we dont have police arresting anyone for this..

No we have people getting away with it because it's just not a big enough problem to make it worth the expense to fight it, IMO there is no doubt Ernie would win a court case if he sued over these 2 cues. But what could he win??? The case would only serve to make the lawyers rich and Ernie has enough of a reputation that it doesn't impact his sales, so spending money to make a point isn't high on his list of priorities.

The government doesn't care..

There are a lot of things the government doesn't care about, when was the last time you saw a DA going after a band for stealing a song??? Fact is most things the government doesn't care about they rely on the person who feels wronged to peruse and then they rule on it in court. The music industry is multi billion dollar industry so it makes it worth it to sue, cues are not multi billion dollar industry.

I dont know the right answer here , right or wrong, but we can all agree it is a accepted norm of our society,culture..

I think we can all agree that MOST people in society would have a minor heart attack if they heard what the Ginacue that this design sells for, the fact is MOST people have no idea what goes into a custom cue, it's design or it's price, as a matter of fact from reading here it's clear many here have no idea.


Murder is not.. You have a right to stand up and say its wrong...I agree...but you cannot compare it to murder..

I hope this is easier to understand..

I understood the first post, I just think you focused on the wrong aspect of what I was saying. I was never saying it's anywhere near murder, just saying that just because it's done every day doesn't mean we should accept it.

Jim

 

[SplicedPoints]

I think the designs from the Phillipis are undoubtly Ginacue inspired. But would a cue collector (someone who's slightly knowledgeable) be confused and mistaken that for a Ginacue, probably not. Even though the cues have different colors, geometric porportions, and etc, they're getting a bit too close to Ginacue. Like I said in an earlier thread, Phillipi's not doing themselve any favors by making these inspired cues often. The collectors all know this and their corresponding market value suffer as the result.

 

[Fred Agnir]

http://www.wuscues.com/images/BSch/bsch004-1.jpg

Bill Schick made it, so what. It has everything Szamboti from the point geometry, to the inlays. When I pointed this out before, the link convienently didn't work for one person, albeit BS, but if someone is going to fry Phillippi, they would have to say the same thing about Mr. Schick and so far its been avoided. Why would that be? Friendship, maybe Bill's name is bigger than Phillipi's.. many reasons could be there.

I think you're pulling a red herring on the friendship idea.

If this is a Szamboti copy, then, IMO, it's wrong. Bill doesn't need to be making copies of anyone's work to make a name for himself. But, I don't know if this is a tribute cue or anything like that. Nor do I know if anyone ever started a post saying, "you want to see a Szambot?" and then post the Schick cue.

My beef is not with the copying, as I stated its been going on a long time, and its been done by cuemakers that are considered masters. My only beef is with jimbo's selective applying and singling out certain cuemakers. Blanket statements do not cover this and are not good enough.

I don't get this paragraph. I see a blanket application by Jimbo that all cuemakers who ripoff designs are doing something wrong. He started right with Timmy and went down the line to include Paul.

Who cares? Its been going on for ages.. there is no one innocent. You can go to cueaddicts and see spot on Szambotis from McDaniel, even Gilbert built a few cues for them that looked like SW. the list goes on and on and on. You would think if it was such a big problem the cuemakers would have done something a long time ago.

I care. And I think you care. I also think 99% of cue buyers and cuemakers don't ever consider it, but that's because nobody talks about it. But, it's wrong in other industries where they do talk about it. Pool cues shouldn't be any different.

Maybe some of these cuemakers who do ripoff SW's look have read the recent article in InsidePOOL and are now reconsidering what they do for business. I know at least one cuemaker who has called me about it. So, the more it's talked about, maybe the more people will consider that there is a faction that is consistent with other art industries that looks down upon design copyright infringements.

Fred

 

[SplicedPoints]

I don't have a subscription to InsidePool. What was the article about?

 

[JimBo]

This is not a reply to any post in general and not directed towards Spliced or anyone else. What I think you guys seem to be missing is that I never intended to make this about someone trying to counterfeit or mislead buyers, I don’t think people look at that cue and think it’s a Gina, Phillippi signs there cues. My point is in this day and age with the technology and machines that are out there, there is no reason why artist need to steal ideas or designs. The imagination is limitless and these machines can make almost anything possible. What people seem to miss that I think I give a large amount of credit to is the fact that all these guys have is their designs. There are small time cuemakers out there (you guys all have a favorite, fill in the blank) that are building solid well built and good hitting cues that have great fit and finish. The only thing that sets apart some masters from these new guys is consistency and design work. Sure there are certain guys who are true artist in other aspects of their cues Schick with his engraving & Scrim and Edwin Reyes with his carving and scrim come to mind. But the point is what really gives these guys the edge is their design work and stealing that is just too important and can’t be dismissed. Stealing from the old timers might be considered a tribute in some people’s eyes but these new designs are much more complex and the resources available to these guys makes this unacceptable behavior, many people see a gray area, but Joe’s opinion that any design is fine to steal is plane ignorant and driven by a desire to protect monetary interests and friends. I still feel exact copies are wrong, inspired cues aren’t but when someone can look at those phillippi cues and think they are just inspired we have a huge disparity in our definitions.

Jim

 

[cuewhiz189]

i am curious as to why there is so much anger and accusationt about cue design theft.......as far as the looks of a cue there is only so much that is possible......i would on the other hand be concerned if some one was stealing the ideas of construction.......that would be worse in my opinion as that of someone stealing the design of inlays or point or the such......kinda like for years southwest was very arrogant about there pin acting like they had something that was theirs and theirs only...well look at it now....with the advancements in materials their joint pin is available and anyone can now use it in the making of there cue.....i feel the real reason people want to have thing that no one else has is to make it where they think that only they can work on there product.....but hey why should we hoard all this technology instead of sharing and bettering it and allowing everyone to be able to have anydesign done by their favorite cuemaker and not be ridiculed......cant patent the screw but instaed work to make it better for the next generation......i just hope we could all understand that cuemaking is something that is done from the heart with money having a big influence......i really hate to see cuemakers that are just after the money and not concerned with having the best product there is.......i hope and wish everyone really understood what it takes to be a cuemaker and pretend they do......i feel the only people that have the right to complain abut theft of any sort are the cuemakers that have spent there time and money to come with a idea to have it stolen by someone who is to sorry and lazt to get off there ass and come up with something original......just my thought, juston

 

[classiccues]

I think you're pulling a red herring on the friendship idea.

If this is a Szamboti copy, then, IMO, it's wrong. Bill doesn't need to be making copies of anyone's work to make a name for himself. But, I don't know if this is a tribute cue or anything like that. Nor do I know if anyone ever started a post saying, "you want to see a Szambot?" and then post the Schick cue.Fred

Really, well still nothing has been said, so I don't think there is anything red herring here. Its pretty obvious. What is to say the Phillippi's aren't Gina tributes. I think you are trying to make an excuse for someone who has a little bit of a name, moreso than the benefit of the doubt given to Phillippi.
Wait.. this post doesn't start out saying you want to see a Gina, unless you are still talking about the Dz thread.

I don't get this paragraph. I see a blanket application by Jimbo that all cuemakers who ripoff designs are doing something wrong. He started right with Timmy and went down the line to include Paul.

Really? When presented with actual copies he did not run screaming xxx is a thief as he did here on Phillipi. What he did with Timmy was similar to what you did with Bill right here... he made excuses. As far as the Mottey story, some of it true, but I am not at liberty to say or elaborate on what was done.

I care. And I think you care. I also think 99% of cue buyers and cuemakers don't ever consider it, but that's because nobody talks about it. But, it's wrong in other industries where they do talk about it. Pool cues shouldn't be any different.

I have stated many times I don't care. I have been around cues and pool since I was 14. I can tell you this has been going on for a long time. Some of it very publically, some of it not so. This doesn't mean I don't understand how some cuemakers would be pissed if it happened to them. I certainly understand the artist mentality. But I would be more worried if someone didn't copy a design, (out of horridness) if I was a cuemaker.

Maybe some of these cuemakers who do ripoff SW's look have read the recent article in InsidePOOL and are now reconsidering what they do for business. I know at least one cuemaker who has called me about it. So, the more it's talked about, maybe the more people will consider that there is a faction that is consistent with other art industries that looks down upon design copyright infringements.

Fred

Maybe... but again define ripoff and where the line is drawn. I have yet to see that done.

Joe

 

[classiccues]

This is not a reply to any post in general and not directed towards Spliced or anyone else. Sure there are certain guys who are true artist in other aspects of their cues Schick with his engraving & Scrim and Edwin Reyes with his carving and scrim come to mind. But the point is what really gives these guys the edge is their design work and stealing that is just too important and can’t be dismissed. Stealing from the old timers might be considered a tribute in some people’s eyes but these new designs are much more complex and the resources available to these guys makes this unacceptable behavior, many people see a gray area, but Joe’s opinion that any design is fine to steal is plane ignorant and driven by a desire to protect monetary interests and friends. I still feel exact copies are wrong, inspired cues aren’t but when someone can look at those phillippi cues and think they are just inspired we have a huge disparity in our definitions.

Jim

Since you didn't direct this towards anyone, but put my name in it I think I will respond. You keep skipping over obvious examples of theft, why? You won't define or give your opinion on how much of a cue makes a "design copy theft", why? We want to hear what makes a "DCT".

Don't try and spin your behavior onto me. You are the one not going after or even mentioning the theft by other more name cuemakers when the examples are bought up. So you are the one not going after "friends". I am not protecting anyone, but excersizing my right to disagree with you. You still have not shown an "exact copy" and the only thing you got right so far is the fact you have no clue to the definition of exact copy.

Joe

 

[XzyluM]

I don't have a subscription to InsidePool. What was the article about?

You can download every issue of IP magazine via their website at no charge. A great feature in my opinion.

As far as the post goes, cue design in my opinion is wrong. Any cue dealer that deals with custom cues and has one that is a SW design or other design, is unlikely to admit that it is wrong. Why? Because it's bad for their business, but when a dealer lists SW style in the description, what is their sole purpose? To increase their chances of reselling the cue. A Balabuska is a Balabuska. No one is ever going to be able to say they own a Balabuska if their cue was done by say Skip Weston. I don't see anything wrong with a cuemaker building a tribute cue of another cuemaker's cue. But when they start building those "tribute" cues on a regular basis, it's wrong. And it takes the whole slogan of building cues because they enjoy doing it away. It tends to lead others to believe they are just looking to make a profit. Most well known cuemakers come up with their own designs and styles. It's what seperates them from the rest. There is plenty of things that can be changed to put apart a Balabuska and say an insprired Balabuska. But why try to create the same cue exactly like the original. People have one-of-a-kind cues built because they don't want others to have the same design they have. It's flattering. If you had a cue designed that was your original idea and you posted pictures of it and three months later, another guy posts a cue from a different cuemaker with your exact design, what's your reaction? You're going to be pissed off. I'll love to see how some of the great cuemakers that have passed away such as Balabuska would respond to such. But hey, it's something we are going to ponder under we die. I don't see anything wrong with liking a particular design and being inspired by it. But the definition of bieng "inspired" is getting ideas, not copying. Anyone could pull apart two cues together with one being the original and one being inspired by the original. That's what seperates the two words "inspired" and "copied." Only so much can be done with points and rings, but when you combine the overall features, a lot can be altered to seperate the designs. It's not right to have an cue blatantly copied because you really admire it. Inspired and copied is two completely different meanings that are in no way related. I ain't taking sides. This is strictly my opinion and probably the last I say on it. But alas, to each their own.

 

[JimBo]

i am curious as to why there is so much anger and accusationt about cue design theft.......

Who here is angry? as far as accusations go people who make copies get accused it's simple.

as far as the looks of a cue there is only so much that is possible......

I should have stopped reading after this line, this could be one of the dumbest things said in the whole 172 posts. Are you serious? In today’s day and age the possibilities are endless and people with talent prove it every day.

i would on the other hand be concerned if some one was stealing the ideas of construction.......

People have been doing things the same way for years, sure everyone has their own little secrets and special ways of doing things, but the basic building concepts are based in woodworking and joining techniques that go back hundreds of years.

that would be worse in my opinion as that of someone stealing the design of inlays or point or the such......

??????

kinda like for years southwest was very arrogant about there pin acting like they had something that was theirs and theirs only...

????

well look at it now....with the advancements in materials their joint pin is available and anyone can now use it in the making of there cue.....

If by this you mean people have copied their pin then I guess you're right, but I still think I missed your point.

i feel the real reason people want to have thing that no one else has is to make it where they think that only they can work on there product.....

I'm sure there is something in what you say that is based in truth, I think people just want to create something and stamp it as their own, it's a pride issue and it stems from people who thrive on creating something that they can call their own.

but hey why should we hoard all this technology instead of sharing and bettering it and allowing everyone to be able to have anydesign done by their favorite cuemaker and not be ridiculed......

Are you still talking about a pin?? Hoarding a pin?? You can't be serious.


cant patent the screw but instaed work to make it better for the next generation......

If we follow the opinions of many here there will never be any next gen stuff, because rather then work to create new and different things all the lazy ass cuemakers will just copy what is out already and selling, the people who do want to stand apart will stop trying because they know they will just be copied so why waste the time and people like Joe's boss will be happy that we are stuck in 1978.

i just hope we could all understand that cuemaking is something that is done from the heart with money having a big influence......

When it's being created it's from the heart, when it's being copied it's flat out money driven. When a guy like Skip Weston builds cues his way it's about love for creating something that's his, when he starts to copy other cues it turns into a money issue because someone like Joe tells him his work won't sell so stop creating and start earning. I'm sure he doesn't get the same enjoyment from it, but I'm also sure it makes paying the bills easier.

i really hate to see cuemakers that are just after the money and not concerned with having the best product there is.......

I don't believe it's a quality issue.

i hope and wish everyone really understood what it takes to be a cuemaker and pretend they do......

If you really understood you'd know what goes into creating something new and different the time and effort to create your own look, then and only then would you know what it felt like to be ripped off by some lazy guy trying to make a buck.

i feel the only people that have the right to complain abut theft of any sort are the cuemakers that have spent there time and money to come with a idea to have it stolen by someone who is to sorry and lazt to get off there ass and come up with something original......just my thought, juston

Your thought is right on in the last part, except cuemakers who are being ripped off won't come here to complain, they are too busy trying to stay one step ahead of the lazy crooks who are sitting at home waiting for the next design to fall into their laps. Someone like Jerry McWorter spends hours and hours of time trying to come up with a new and exciting design and then more hours figuring out how to make it work on a cue, his designs take more time to create then the final product, this is one reason he will build a few cues with the same design. If he had to make just one the cost would be unreal because of all the man hours that went into the creation, the same can be said for Ernie. Another issue is that they can't think up that many new ideas to keep things fresh, you can see the proof by asking how much these guys would charge for a 1 of a kind cue, this is why you see many cues with the same design from Ginacue. I know why phillippi does it, it's like having a design department working for you for free, Ernie does all the work and markets it and then they just copy what works and build it, makes great business sense if you can get away with it. If there were more money in the cue market I guarantee you'd see people being sued and this practice would end.

Jim

 

[JimBo]

You keep skipping over obvious examples of theft, why?

Joe I haven't skipped over anything, I asked you too do what I did, post the picture of the cue Bill copied, yes it's clear to see it's a Szamboti stlye cue, if you post me a picture of a Boti with the same number of points and the same inlay pattern I will be happy to call it s copy and speak out about how wrong it is. Where is the original it's copied from? I Said the TW cues were stolen designs and TW himself would admit to it, he would then tell you a story behind why he did it and it has very much to do with what we are talking about. It's not my place to tell a second hand story, but make no mistake he knew he was stealing a design and he did it to make a point, was it wrong? Yes in my opinion it was without a doubt wrong and in this case it's a basic SW design the woods don't matter, I don't need to see an exact SW to say it was a theft, but in the Szamboti/Schick I would need to see an original and you have yet to show it. You keep saying I am trying to protect certain people yet you have not once proven that to be the truth, let it end or prove me wrong, it's never happened.

You won't define or give your opinion on how much of a cue makes a "design copy theft", why? We want to hear what makes a "DCT".

We?? We want to hear?? Who is this we?? I've said it already a hundred times Joe, it's not up to me to decide, but you are so far off it's not worth trying to explain. You want to make claims about being around pool since you're 14 and what a big expert you are yet you aren't man enough to admit that Phillippi stole those designs, anyone who takes you serious is a joke in my book, you want to play both ends, first you claim it's fine to copy cues then you aren't man enough to say yup those are copies so what. How bout you stand behind your convictions. I'm not trying to be some all mighty know it all, it's not up to me to decide what makes up the design, but I do have the eye to spot a copy and the balls to point it out, unlike you. I've already said it, just ask Phillippi where they came up with that idea and I bet they say "we took it from the Ginacue" when you are some 1/2 ass wannabe salesman you learn to double talk and interchange words like Inspired instead of the truth which is "stole". I think it's obvious to anyone with a brain that in this debate you have the agenda, I on the other hand just have an educated and informed opinion, I don't take part in this behavior nor do I profit from it, you on the other hand have made your name here on it. I don't need to defend anyone and I am not and have never tried to protect anyone, all of these so called friends you keep speaking of know me well enough to know that I don't kiss anyone's ass and I never hold back, if you believe I wouldn't say whatever I wanted to any cue maker out there then I guess you don't know me well. And on that same line of thinking I am respected for my opinion and I doubt it would impact any friendship I may or may not have with all these "friends" as you put it.

Don't try and spin your behavior onto me.

I don't need to spin anything we are 180* apart, you feel copies are fine I think they are not, what more can be said other then to look at why each of us feels the way we do.

You are the one not going after or even mentioning the theft by other more name cuemakers when the examples are bought up.

How dumb are you? If you want to bring up an example it's easy post the copy then the original, and then and only then can it be commented on, you have yet to do this once. PLEASE JOE PAY ATTENTION. COPY, THEN ORIGINAL.(2 cues, 2 pics)



So you are the one not going after "friends".

What "friends joe?? COPY THEN ORIGINAL, 2 PICS.

I am not protecting anyone,

No you're trying to profit from this behavior and trying to protect your boss, are you worried if you speak the truth you'll have to pay to get into VF Expo this year?? Maybe you won't be able to add a sig line and try to get that extra attention and credibility you strive for?


but excersizing my right to disagree with you.

You can disagree, but that's not what you're doing. You see Joe to disagree would be to post your opinion (it's ok to make copies of any cue) and then to give your opinions as to why, stand behind your words and back them up with facts. What you have done here is try to make this personal, you've tried to lie and say I flip flopped you tried to lie and said I was protecting friends and big names, but really all you've done was to make this more personal then it had to be. You keep trying to attack me and I'll keep exposing you for the fool you are. I still love you and hold no ill will and I still consider us friends. I'm sure nobody here up until this being said would guess we are friends and to me it won't change but you want to try to lie about me and you get exposed, nothing personal on my end, as we already know I don't change my opinions for friends and you're no exception.

You still have not shown an "exact copy" and the only thing you got right so far is the fact you have no clue to the definition of exact copy.

Joe

I've told you before it's not an exact copy of the cue, for that to be done the joint and wrap and pin would all have to be the same, the bumper and woods would all have to match. What I have been talking about from day one was the design, and if you can't tell it's the same design I really have no way to explain it to you, sorry it's not my job to explain what a design is to you, after all you've been doing this since you were 14 (LOL). You're not dumb Joe just stubborn I'm talking about designs and every time I do in your head you are interchanging that word with counterfeit or exact copy and those just aren't the words I intended for you to read, someone can't take a complex design recreate it and change the wrap and say it's a whole different cue or it's just inspired. You want to pretend to be some big shot insider and pretend to know the butterfly story (even though you're not at liberty to talk about it LOL) then you would know that cue was 10X further from a copy then the cues in question here and if you really (as you claim) know the outcome you'd agree with me 100%. I'll continue to give my opinion on any cue that you post pictures of, but please Joe 2 pics the original and the copy, until you do that stop trying to bait me.

Jim


PS 2 Pics, the ORIGINAL and the COPY, then let me know who I am trying to protect.

PSS we’re still friends J

 

[Fred Agnir]

Really, well still nothing has been said, so I don't think there is anything red herring here. Its pretty obvious. What is to say the Phillippi's aren't Gina tributes. I think you are trying to make an excuse for someone who has a little bit of a name, moreso than the benefit of the doubt given to Phillippi.
Wait.. this post doesn't start out saying you want to see a Gina, unless you are still talking about the Dz thread.

How serious do you expect me to take you on this? YOU are the first person I ever heard say with tongue in cheek "did you check out those Gina's at the Phillippi booth." YOU were mocking them. YOU were making fun of them. YOU were implying the joke of it. I know I'm no profiler, but I would have bet dollars to doughnuts that you didn't approve. I find it hard to believe I'm reading from the same person.

Are you trying to say that the number of Phillippi cues that look like Gina cues are a tribute? Are you trying to say the Bill Schick does a number of Szamboti-style cues in the same perecentage as the Phillippis do with Ginas? Are you seriously trying to equate the two?

As I said, I don't know about the Schick Cue. If it's a copy, then it's wrong, plain and simple. How's that an excuse? It's wrong if it's a copy. I don't know much about the cue it was copied from.

Really? When presented with actual copies he did not run screaming xxx is a thief as he did here on Phillipi. What he did with Timmy was similar to what you did with Bill right here... he made excuses.

I can't make any excuse if I don't see any copying. The only thing shown on this thread was two pictures of Phillippis and two pages of Ginas.Anyone who has eyes can see the blatant ripoff of the design. If Bill ripped-off a Szamboti design, then I think it's wrong., IMO. If Timmy ripped off a design, then it's wrong, IMO. Neither needs to be doing that to get business.

Maybe... but again define ripoff and where the line is drawn. I have yet to see that done.

Joe

But that was the original question posed by Jim, from the first post.

Making a cue in the "old style" or "traditional look" is fine, IMO. But to put the inlays in the same pattern as George or Gus is wrong. To use a design that was specific to them is wrong, IMO. And what the Phillippis are doing is wrong, IMO. It's obvious they've got the building talent. Why make so many cues look like other cueamakers' cues?

Fred

 

[committeemember]

Quote:
How serious do you expect me to take you on this? YOU are the first person I ever heard say with tongue in cheek "did you check out those Gina's at the Phillippi booth." YOU were mocking them. YOU were making fun of them. YOU were implying the joke of it. I know I'm no profiler, but I would have bet dollars to doughnuts that you didn't approve. I find it hard to believe I'm reading from the same person.

BUSTED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HaHa

 

[classiccues]

How serious do you expect me to take you on this? YOU are the first person I ever heard say with tongue in cheek "did you check out those Gina's at the Phillippi booth." YOU were mocking them. YOU were making fun of them. YOU were implying the joke of it. I know I'm no profiler, but I would have bet dollars to doughnuts that you didn't approve. I find it hard to believe I'm reading from the same person.Fred

I think you are wrong here. I have only ever commented on any copies when I first met John Showman and thought his cues were some of the best Gus copies I had seen. I don't hang with you at the show, except when you and Jimbo occasionally walk by our booth. You may have had this conversation, but it wasn't with me. In fact I don't walk around much at the show because its not beneficial to me, since I like to sell cues and I cannot do that if I ain't in the booth, I do not get around and I hardly ever go into cue booths unless I know the cuemaker. And I can honestly say I have only been to the Phillipi booth once in 7 shows and it was to see a friend who works there. (neither Phillipi) Now we used to have a guy associated with us that was a Phillipi dealer, it is possible you saw him, but he has not been part of our booth in 3 years.

Are you trying to say that the number of Phillippi cues that look like Gina cues are a tribute? Are you trying to say the Bill Schick does a number of Szamboti-style cues in the same perecentage as the Phillippis do with Ginas? Are you seriously trying to equate the two?Fred

I am equating stealing with stealing. Thats it. You cannot say because a cuemkaer copied ONE cue he is less a theif than a guy who copied 6. As far Shicks number that mimick Szamboti, there are 2 alone on Wu's site and I can show pics of maybe two more that we have sold. So if I can count 4 I would bet there are many more.

As I said, I don't know about the Schick Cue. If it's a copy, then it's wrong, plain and simple. How's that an excuse? It's wrong if it's a copy. I don't know much about the cue it was copied from.

The excuse is that you made it sound like it could be a tribute cue and my point is how do you know the Phillipi's aren't?

The only thing shown on this thread was two pictures of Phillippis and two pages of Ginas.Anyone who has eyes can see the blatant ripoff of the design. If Bill ripped-off a Szamboti design, then I think it's wrong., IMO. If Timmy ripped off a design, then it's wrong, IMO. Neither needs to be doing that to get business.

But thats what you aren't seeing. Neither one probably doesn't need to do it, but they do. Richard Black had a cue in his LINE called the ivory crown. It was made from the mid 80's till the 90's. Have you ever seen this cue before?
http://www.classiccues.com/graphics/cues/242_fore_hi.jpg
http://www.classiccues.com/graphics/cues/242_butt_hi.jpg

What would you consider this cue put next to this cue???
http://www.classiccues.com/cues/ginacue.htm
Look at the last cue on the page, eddie taylors cue

One reason I am soft on the issue is like I said before, its been done ad nauseum, by many of the great cuemakers. Go to this page and you will see some cues that are very familiar...
http://classiccues.com/cues/kulungian_kollection_2.htm
Cue 565 is the original to Cosmos cue in his "Warning.. thread".
547 and 546 are Gus Szamboti's that show Szamboti "trademark" inlays. You will see the red veneer cue on Pauls site, as he made a twin at Marks request, but since he owns the original, its ok, right Jim
But the amazing thing is that on 546 and 547, unmistakably and without question Szamboti inlays, if you copy Gus's base cue combination and adorn it with Gus inlays, how can anyone say thats not theft?

fact is it is.. as you like to point out in the music industry.. if you need to pay roayalties on a single riff, then surely the same would apply for a single inlay. Right?

But that was the original question posed by Jim, from the first post.

Yeah and we have him to quantify HIS position. Thats what has been asked by 4 people here.

Making a cue in the "old style" or "traditional look" is fine, IMO. But to put the inlays in the same pattern as George or Gus is wrong. To use a design that was specific to them is wrong, IMO. And what the Phillippis are doing is wrong, IMO. It's obvious they've got the building talent. Why make so many cues look like other cueamakers' cues?

Fred

So then you must feel that the one cue talked about here is wrong, that is Marks cue from Murray.. right? It has everything you just mentioned in the above paragraph.

Joe

 

[JimBo]

I am equating stealing with stealing. Thats it. You cannot say because a cuemkaer copied ONE cue he is less a theif than a guy who copied 6. As far Shicks number that mimick Szamboti, there are 2 alone on Wu's site and I can show pics of maybe two more that we have sold. So if I can count 4 I would bet there are many more.


Joe

OMG LOL you called him Shick, anyone who knows anything knows that Bill Schick is one of the top cue makers of our generation. LOL How can anyone take you serious you don't even know who Schick is LOL. ROFLMAO and your the one who's supposed to have more knowledge in his little pinky then I have in my whole body LOL LOL Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha what a joke you are. I doubt anyone can even take anything you say now serious, some cue expert you are. If you don't even know a guys name how can any of us expect you to be able to tell one design from the next??

Jim <---See how stupid it can get Joe, maybe when looking up the 30th anniversary cue in the blue book you should have checked out the spelling of Bill's name.