Flowers Style Case Update
- Thread starter JB Cases
- Start date
In house productioin of Flower's Style Case
John, I have no problem with a push back on delivery. Any idea just how long going "In-house" will extend production and delivery?
For me, as long as you communicate what's going on and keep current I find that acceptable, and professional.
You've been great on communication so far so just keep it up.
Look forward to hearing from you soon.
Vegas can be sooooooooo cruel sometimes :embarrassed2:
John, I have no problem with a push back on delivery. Any idea just how long going "In-house" will extend production and delivery?
For me, as long as you communicate what's going on and keep current I find that acceptable, and professional.
You've been great on communication so far so just keep it up.
Look forward to hearing from you soon.
Vegas can be sooooooooo cruel sometimes :embarrassed2:
ScottR said:
Immitation is the best form of flattery. Besides, there are no trademarks/patents on the design, are there? I don't think there's anything wrong if it doesn't have Jay Flower's name on the case. The case specifically says JB cases. So every company whom uses a SW style ring, or points, or something along those lines must pay them compensation, cause it's called SW style? Jeez.
Why don't Jennifer Aniston collect royalty from all the hair stylists in the world for copying her hairdo from friends in the 90's cause she made it popular?
SERIOUSLY?
Last edited:
ScottR said:
Scott,
I understand the good intentions in posting this, but I believe many casemakers have Flower's style cases for sale (JB, Brian Bonner, Justis, etc). I'm not sure if all these guys are paying royalty to Jay. Should they? I don't know, you can argue both ways, but I'm not going to poop on this thread by going off in a tangent.
Peace
I asked because I saw a picture of a logo that specifically said "J Flowers Cue Cases" and I assumed that some sort of licensing was occurring.
Scott
Edited to add the post I referenced.
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=1485809&postcount=5
Scott
Edited to add the post I referenced.
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=1485809&postcount=5
Last edited:
ScottR said:
There is no need to compensate anyone for doing a case that is different with a different brand name. These are cases done in the style that Jay Flowers created. Same way that Jack Justis, Brian Bonner, and many others do cases in the same style. The only difference is that I give credit to Jay Flowers for the creation of this genre of cases.
And for the brand name I chose to put J.Flowers on the case as well in order to honor Jay's contribution to the industry. Jay's brand name was J.E.F. Q Cases. Ours is J.Flowers. When I build the website for these cases I intend to have a history on it that correctly identifies Jay Flowers as the originator of this style.
All that said there is no monetary value in the "Flowers" name. 95 of a 100 people in a pool room wouldn't even know what a J.E.F. Q Case or a "Flowers" case is or was. The only value that SOME of the cases have is on the secondary market where transactions are private for used goods.
In legal terms, the brand is dead. Therefore it's completely free to use by anyone. But before you go off let's be perfectly CLEAR, I didn't use the J.E.F. brand, I made a new brand that uses the name J.Flowers because I want these cases to stand as a tribute to Jay. I can guarantee you that I have to build this brand like any other. If I had called them RosenBlumen cases then I would still give credit to Jasper Flowers for his contribution and influence on cue case making.
I have made a new case that evokes the style of the original. It is however a much improved version with lots of innovation. It's a different product with the only tie in being the name. Unlike the signed George Balabuska line which Competition Sports makes using the tag line "these are the cues that George would have made if he had lived" or something like that. They make cues that barely pay tribute and were only made to capitalize on the name after it was popularized in the Color of Money. Thus in that situation they should pay for using the brand name which happened to be the family name.
With my case there is no brand that has been made popular by any external means like being mentioned in a movie. It's simply a historical footnote that Jay Flowers made cases. Thus any following products which make note of the connection in style or name only serve to increase the awareness of the fact that Jay Flowers and his cases even existed.
It's my personal decision to call the cases J.Flowers cases. I did it this way to honor someone I met once and who influenced me greatly. I certainly don't expect to sell more cases because of using this name. These cases would sell no matter what name is on them. Legally and morally no one else is due any money for what I am doing on these cases.
I would however be happy to talk to whomever I need to in order to discuss the use of the J.E.F. Q Case brand. Although that brand is dead I'd be willing to revive it and provide some form of compensation for it to Jay's family if that is something that they want. Provide me the contact information and I will call them.
DawgAndy said:
Keefy is mistaken. These cases, with the exception of the current, special orders, will be done in the Jiasen Cue Case factory. Only the current special orders will be done BY JB Cases in our shop.
The brand of these cases is J.Flowers for the reasons I explained.
Each case is dated and numbered to provide the history of this brand from it's inception.
So if I want to make Szamboti style cues it is ok for me to mark them G. Szamboti because that wasn't the exact marking he used?
Why not just mark them JB Cases? You knew this would cause a sh!t storm. Maybe that is why I guess. No publicity is bad publicity.
If you want to use the guys name to "honor" him while making a profit just cut a deal with the family for a small piece of the net and you go from goat to good guy.
<------thinks the honor and tribute business is getting a little out of hand
Why not just mark them JB Cases? You knew this would cause a sh!t storm. Maybe that is why I guess. No publicity is bad publicity.
If you want to use the guys name to "honor" him while making a profit just cut a deal with the family for a small piece of the net and you go from goat to good guy.
<------thinks the honor and tribute business is getting a little out of hand
JCIN said:
No, because the Szamboti name is still a live brand of cues. I can't call any cases I make Justice, Just Us, Mernak, It's Gawge, or other brand name that is currently in commercial use.
Yeah I knew that some people would have an issue with it. But this isn't a Democracy and the minority doesn't get to vote on how I run my business. Some people take exception to anything I do and seek to discredit me however they can. So something like this plays into their hands for the "I gotcha" mentality.
It's my thing and what I want to do. There is no "deal" that needs to be cut because the "brand" is not worth anything. This is a dead brand that I chose to revive because I want to. Outside of AZ Land it has next to zero recognition factor. I do find it funny though that when it's me and I spell out me reasons clearly then I am accused of being unethical. However you (and others) let others off with a free pass. No I am not going to name names but if you think about it you will find several who just plastered an old brand name on a new and inferior product.
In this case it is a tribute and the case are an improvement. The only thing this will do is to further enhance the small reputation of Jay Flowers as the father of this style of cue case making. Through me Jay Flowers' legacy will live on for decades more.
If that's a problem for you then so be it. I do what I want to for my own reasons. One reason I do this is so that I don't get accused of copying Jack Justis. I give credit to the one who started this whole thing and that's Jay Flowers. And I do it by putting his name on the product I make and making that product better than he did.
If the Flowers family wants to talk to me about reviving the J.EF Q Case brand then have them contact me. I will be more than happy to do so and provide income to them for the use of that brand if we can come to reasonable terms that are mutually beneficial.
I have already been thanked several times in private communication by people who applaud honoring Jay this way. And for the record Jay himself told me I could make a Flowers brand of case when I met him in the late 90's in Vegas. I never followed up on it then but I am in a position to do it now.
Well, no matter, it's controversial and as you say all publicity is good publicity. I knew that when I made the decision to call the cases J.Flowers cases. But it's my decision to make and it was made in full conviction that I am right, legally and morally. If I make a profit off of connecting a NEW product to an old brand then that's my right and no one is owed for it. If I had used the J.EF brand then I would be obligated morally to do something with the heirs of that brand. I am pretty sure that I wouldn't be obligated legally to do anything with them though as a when a brand is dead, meaning it's no longer used in commerce, then it's considered public domain as I understand it. I am sure that if I am wrong on this point someone here will be happy to correct me.
JCIN said:
Is this not the same as the companies making fake watches and purses using established name brands without permission for personal gain?
If Jay Flowers could see whats happening here, you can be assured he would be on someones trail.
ScottR said:
Of course I would fight that because it would be confusingly similar to a LIVE brand. If I were dead and my heirs weren't doing anything to preserve the VALUE of the brand then it wouldn't matter one bit.
I fought hard to keep people from wrongly using the Instroke brand when I owned Instroke. That's because it's a live, ongoing, brand and people were using it to sell their inferior products.
Is J.EF or "Flowers" an ongoing live brand? What is the "reputation" that you speak of that is so valuable? What in your estimation is the value of the Flowers brand? You want me to pay someone something so tell us what you think it's worth?
To me the only worth to using this brand is to establish provenance of design and genre. To me it's nice to show that history of this style of case. If the Flowers name had any real commercial value then I'd be slapping it on every cue case I made regardless of design.
It's not wrong and you know it. But you could care less about legality and morality if it does not fit in your view of what's legal and moral.
Jack Justis said:
I WAS WAITING TO SEE IF YOU WOULD GIVE YOUR OPINION. THANKS FOR YOUR INSIGHT.
MARCUS<----DOESN'T CARE WHAT THE CASES ARE CALLED, I WAS JUST CURIOUS WHAT JACK THOUGHT.
Jack Justis said:
Not at all Jack. If someone is making a copy of a product and putting a live brand name on it then that is a crime. For example if I made a case, in any design, and put "Jack Justis" on it then that would be illegal because you are making cases and your brand is live.
In this instance I am making a different product that is influenced by a pioneer in the business and giving him credit for the design influence. There is no permission needed to do this because no one is being harmed here. There are no J.EF cases being made, the "Flowers" brand has been dead for more than a decade.
If Jay Flowers were alive then he and I would be cooperating on these cases and they would be made with his full blessing because he gave me his blessing when we met in Las Vegas. He isn't and I am making sure that his name is not forgotten as to WHO originated this style of case. Future generations of pool players will be able to look back and see that Jay Flowers, not John Barton, not Jack Justis, not Brian Bonner, or anyone else doing this style of case is responsible for it's existence. They will be able to see this because of the J.Flowers name stamped on the case.
Many have appropriated Jay's designs without giving any credit whatsoever or at best given a passing reference. I am completely upfront about where the designs came from, what my reasons are for doing it, and how I see it.
Since you brought it up though I have a question? On this forum you once mislabeled me as a "design thief" when you were looking for the maker of a leather case that looked very similar to your style. (the design thief in this instance was J&J, your customer, not me) Your first cases were very very close to Jay Flowers cases that were being made at the time. You said that you decided to begin making cases because Jay told you it would be 8 weeks to get one of his. Would you consider your early cases to be a theft of Jay Flower's designs? I ask because I want to know if you think that you harmed Jay's business in any way by coming out with extremely similar cases? In light of everything that has been discussed would you consider yourself a design thief for making cases that were incredibly like the Jay Flowers cases being made at the same time?
I know that this is going off on a tangent but I'd like to hear your thoughts on this.
Last edited:
I don't think it is a real issue in this case, however, each state (in the U.S.) could look at the situation differently, depending upon their particular statutes. The issue would be whether there is trade name infringement, and/or the fact that name association may give the product value.
Trade name regulation serves four purposes. First, the law seeks to protect the economic, intellectual, and creative investments made by businesses in distinguishing their trades. Second, the law seeks to preserve the good will and reputation that are often associated with a particular trade name. Third, the law seeks to promote clarity and stability in the marketplace by encouraging consumers to rely on a merchant's trade name when evaluating the quality of its merchandise. Fourth, the law seeks to increase competition by requiring businesses to associate their own trade names with the value and quality of their goods and services.
Both state and federal laws provide protection against trade name infringement. At the federal level, trade names are regulated by the Lanham Trademark Act (15 U.S.C. ? 1051 et seq.). At the state level, trade names are regulated by analogous intellectual property statutes and various common-law doctrines. In general, the law of trade name infringement attempts to protect consumers from deceptive trade practices. The law does not treat consumers as unwitting dupes and may require them to make reasonable distinctions between competitors under appropriate circumstances. When consumers have been deceived by use of a deceptively similar trade name, an injured business may avail itself of two remedies for infringement: injunctive relief (a court order restraining one party from infringing on another's trade name) and money damages (compensation for any losses suffered by the injured business).
trade name n. a name of a business or one of its products which, by use of the name and public reputation, identifies the product as that of the business. A trade name belongs to the first business to use it, and the identification and reputation give it value and the right to protect the trade name against its use by others.
Trade name regulation serves four purposes. First, the law seeks to protect the economic, intellectual, and creative investments made by businesses in distinguishing their trades. Second, the law seeks to preserve the good will and reputation that are often associated with a particular trade name. Third, the law seeks to promote clarity and stability in the marketplace by encouraging consumers to rely on a merchant's trade name when evaluating the quality of its merchandise. Fourth, the law seeks to increase competition by requiring businesses to associate their own trade names with the value and quality of their goods and services.
Both state and federal laws provide protection against trade name infringement. At the federal level, trade names are regulated by the Lanham Trademark Act (15 U.S.C. ? 1051 et seq.). At the state level, trade names are regulated by analogous intellectual property statutes and various common-law doctrines. In general, the law of trade name infringement attempts to protect consumers from deceptive trade practices. The law does not treat consumers as unwitting dupes and may require them to make reasonable distinctions between competitors under appropriate circumstances. When consumers have been deceived by use of a deceptively similar trade name, an injured business may avail itself of two remedies for infringement: injunctive relief (a court order restraining one party from infringing on another's trade name) and money damages (compensation for any losses suffered by the injured business).
trade name n. a name of a business or one of its products which, by use of the name and public reputation, identifies the product as that of the business. A trade name belongs to the first business to use it, and the identification and reputation give it value and the right to protect the trade name against its use by others.