Please offer your opinions on cue design theft

[JB Cases]

No, John, you're right. Please continue with the mud slinging. These topics get so much clearer when you guys do that

Koop - forgets what the original debate was about.

What mud slinging? Come on man. All the posts that have been about CDT from me have not had any mud-slinging. Don't put red-herrings into this.

You think that because no one dissected his post that it proves his point?

So your point is that anyone who thinks CDT is ok in any way is part of the "herd" and the herd is diluting the "crime" by attacking the victim? You don't see any grey area here at all? Like it's purely a black/white thing, CDT is a crime for which there is no grey area and those guilty must hang?

I mean honestly I fail to see where Eric's point meets reality. If you honestly think that he is right and CDT is a black/white proposition then I have to say that looking through my Blue Book and my Billiard Enclyclopedia I can say with pretty good accuracy that 99% of living cue makers are guilty of Cue Design Theft and their customers who demand such and such elements in their cues are complicit.

Is that how you think it should be?

 

[Jive]

I was contacted by Richard Churdy this afternoon, and no matter what anyone else thinks he was glad that some one took a stand and made the comments that I made. He was also not surprised that so many others could care less, or that they found nothing wrong with stealing a unique design that he was alone known for because he said he had seen similar threads on this forum concerning this very topic.

He also asked for links to the thread so the he could read / review all the debate and thoughts of the forums members. I don't know if he is a member of this forum or not, but I hope if he is so that he will share his thoughts on this subject.

I also sent Richard a link to the original post that has pictures of the cue in question, however, I could not include the name of the makers name because of course he does not want anyone to know who he is. I do not know if this is a guilt response or if he is not proud of his work, and at this point I do not think it really matters too much anyway, because it is better for him to stay under the rock he has chosen to hide under.

JIMO

Hi Craig,

Hi Craig,

I haven't been involved in this whole debate because i feel that i'm not knowledgeable enough when it comes to pool cues. And i would prefer not to comment on discussions i am not familiar with and just take and sit and lesson/learning role.

However one thing i can correct you for sure is that this cue maker isn't hiding, fact is he doesn't even know this is going on. He can't understand English and he lives in a relatively secluded part north of China, most importantly he doesn't even know the existence of AZ.
AZ is a very popular community and an influential one, but we're in China and English exactly the first language here. So there might be a Sushi Forum in Japan that is so influential that can intervene and suggest all Sushi's be made with brown rice instead of white, or that the best meat is rotten rat with wasabi..I just wouldn't know cos it would be in Japanese and really popular for people who's into that cuisine and can understand japanese. Point is AZ is popular but we just need to accept that there are still people who don't know or don't care about AZ. This current cue maker is one. As to how he gets his knowledge or resources, well there's tonnes of website in chinese that and provide them.

I can't comment on Cue designs, but i've been in a design related industry long enough to know what it's about. I've worked with top tier designers in the industry and have paid 30,000euros few years back just for some sketches of products. I'm a manufacturer and i know how fu*ked i feel when i pay that kind of money and someone rips me off and copies me a few month later. BUT being in this industry long enough has thought me something, if i can be replaced it's on me. If my clients decides to buy the copy instead of buying from me 2 things crosses my mind, 1) That's a hell of a screwed up client, better to lose now than later! 　2) What am i not doing right that the client would prefer to buy a copy than my original?

If i have a product that i've originated and made it synonymous to my brand it is up to me to keep it that way. If i can be replicated and bettered to the point i can be replaced then it's on me, because i HAVE NOT thought about how to better a product sooner or made the product challenging enough not to be replicated by others. I must also not be providing something extra to retain my customer be it the prestige of owning my product, the fine quality and craftmanship, an incredibly irresistible price, excellent service...

Let's talk Watches since i'm more familiar with that and quite a few AZers are too (would love to talk furniture but i think it wouldn't be that popular..).
Take for instance Panerai, a resurrected brand in 1997 by the Richemont Group. Check out their watches and you'll notice that there's NOTHING complicating about the design. It works because it's a good design, a very old design. And it's a HUGE brand right now, in terms of manufacturing there's nothing challenging about the design, any good CNC can make the stainless steel case, movements are/were from ETA (they've started to make their own but partially) and straps from Austria. You know why watches are so big these days and why big watches are COOL? It's Panerai. Panerai brought the wave and it's still here. Before Panerai came along 42mm sized watches were Mens sized watch, anything bigger would be considered crude by connoisseurs or uppity gentlemen in fine italian suits. Now it's cool to have a chunky watch stick out of the tailored shirt, many even tailor their shirts with left or right side cuffs bigger JUST to accomodate their watches or make the Cuff smaller so that the watch remains above the cuff.
Here's the interesting bit, it's so easy to copy Panerai's design but those that have tried failed, partly due to brand loyalty BUT also that Panerai were on their toes constantly coming up with updates, new movements, limited editions. You could just say smart marketing. My point? If you have a good design good for you, but don't be lazy. If your good design can be copied,replicated or adapted and that your fan base leaves you then there's a problem with you. You must not have provided your consumer enough. If you're good, you're good there's nothing to worry about.

If really don't want to be copied, be like Coca Cola and Pepsi, nobody else knows the secret formula...

I just reread my post to be sure i didn't digress. I know where i'm heading with my post, i'm just not sure anybody else who reads it does...

 

[Koop]

What mud slinging? Come on man. All the posts that have been about CDT from me have not had any mud-slinging. Don't put red-herrings into this.

You think that because no one dissected his post that it proves his point?

So your point is that anyone who thinks CDT is ok in any way is part of the "herd" and the herd is diluting the "crime" by attacking the victim? You don't see any grey area here at all? Like it's purely a black/white thing, CDT is a crime for which there is no grey area and those guilty must hang?

I mean honestly I fail to see where Eric's point meets reality. If you honestly think that he is right and CDT is a black/white proposition then I have to say that looking through my Blue Book and my Billiard Enclyclopedia I can say with pretty good accuracy that 99% of living cue makers are guilty of Cue Design Theft and their customers who demand such and such elements in their cues are complicit.

Is that how you think it should be?

John,

In all honesty, I don't get that worked up about it. I read these threads because it interests me what you people are saying. I say you people meaning people in the industry, not customers like myself. I just thought what Eric wrote was worthy of being pointed out because no one did to that point. That's all. Not to mention, his voice carries more weight than most, as does yours, because you are both artisans that this affects.

Regards,
Koop

 

[sengkun108]

Hi Craig,

I haven't been involved in this whole debate because i feel that i'm not knowledgeable enough when it comes to pool cues. And i would prefer not to comment on discussions i am not familiar with and just take and sit and lesson/learning role.

However one thing i can correct you for sure is that this cue maker isn't hiding, fact is he doesn't even know this is going on. He can't understand English and he lives in a relatively secluded part north of China, most importantly he doesn't even know the existence of AZ.
AZ is a very popular community and an influential one, but we're in China and English exactly the first language here. So there might be a Sushi Forum in Japan that is so influential that can intervene and suggest all Sushi's be made with brown rice instead of white, or that the best meat is rotten rat with wasabi..I just wouldn't know cos it would be in Japanese and really popular for people who's into that cuisine and can understand japanese. Point is AZ is popular but we just need to accept that there are still people who don't know or don't care about AZ. This current cue maker is one. As to how he gets his knowledge or resources, well there's tonnes of website in chinese that and provide them.

I can't comment on Cue designs, but i've been in a design related industry long enough to know what it's about. I've worked with top tier designers in the industry and have paid 30,000euros few years back just for some sketches of products. I'm a manufacturer and i know how fu*ked i feel when i pay that kind of money and someone rips me off and copies me a few month later. BUT being in this industry long enough has thought me something, if i can be replaced it's on me. If my clients decides to buy the copy instead of buying from me 2 things crosses my mind, 1) That's a hell of a screwed up client, better to lose now than later! 　2) What am i not doing right that the client would prefer to buy a copy than my original?

If i have a product that i've originated and made it synonymous to my brand it is up to me to keep it that way. If i can be replicated and bettered to the point i can be replaced then it's on me, because i HAVE NOT thought about how to better a product sooner or made the product challenging enough not to be replicated by others. I must also not be providing something extra to retain my customer be it the prestige of owning my product, the fine quality and craftmanship, an incredibly irresistible price, excellent service...

Let's talk Watches since i'm more familiar with that and quite a few AZers are too (would love to talk furniture but i think it wouldn't be that popular..).
Take for instance Panerai, a resurrected brand in 1997 by the Richemont Group. Check out their watches and you'll notice that there's NOTHING complicating about the design. It works because it's a good design, a very old design. And it's a HUGE brand right now, in terms of manufacturing there's nothing challenging about the design, any good CNC can make the stainless steel case, movements are/were from ETA (they've started to make their own but partially) and straps from Austria. You know why watches are so big these days and why big watches are COOL? It's Panerai. Panerai brought the wave and it's still here. Before Panerai came along 42mm sized watches were Mens sized watch, anything bigger would be considered crude by connoisseurs or uppity gentlemen in fine italian suits. Now it's cool to have a chunky watch stick out of the tailored shirt, many even tailor their shirts with left or right side cuffs bigger JUST to accomodate their watches or make the Cuff smaller so that the watch remains above the cuff.
Here's the interesting bit, it's so easy to copy Panerai's design but those that have tried failed, partly due to brand loyalty BUT also that Panerai were on their toes constantly coming up with updates, new movements, limited editions. You could just say smart marketing. My point? If you have a good design good for you, but don't be lazy. If your good design can be copied,replicated or adapted and that your fan base leaves you then there's a problem with you. You must not have provided your consumer enough. If you're good, you're good there's nothing to worry about.

If really don't want to be copied, be like Coca Cola and Pepsi, nobody else knows the secret formula...

I just reread my post to be sure i didn't digress. I know where i'm heading with my post, i'm just not sure anybody else who reads it does...

What a Great Post........:thumbup:

After read your post...i know exactly that you are experience enough to involved in bussiness...there is no doubt of it...excellent post

 

[manwon]

Hello Jive and thanks for your participation in this thread. Your comments are a very good read / very informative I clearly see your point and understand your thought's

I wish everyone would stick to the topic like you have, and be as respectful as you have been. There is certainly nothing wrong with a difference in opinions, and I wish that everyone would understand that sharing one's thought's on a subject is not the same as trying to force everyone to see things from a single point of view.

Thanks for your post

 

[PVD1]

Response to "jb"

all this has been discussed ad infinitum here and on other pool forums for 15 years now.

The basic sentiment is that if a cue maker or case maker or widget maker has a "signature" thing that they do then it should be kind of off limits for other makers to do it. Of course the people who steadfastly believe this don't apply justice equally when someone offends.

In other words some people get a free pass to sell or promote or make copies, tributes, inspired pieces, etc.... With or without giving credit to the source, while others are burned at the stake for the same thing.

No one cares about the actual legality because there is a moral pedestal to climb on. So the argument becomes, "who cares if it's legal, that doesn't mean you should do it." - so basically you're screwed in the eyes of these design-theft moralists if you break the law and you're screwed if you follow the law.

Personally i think that there should be some sort of copyright that can be applied to cues. Thomas wayne successfully had copies of his cues pulled from the shelves but i don't know if that was a courtesy thing or whether he claimed infringement.

But anyway, this horse has been beat to death so many times and reincarnated that it's really old news by now.

It's funny you know. In all the books we tell people that to be successful you should copy what successful people do until you learn it inside and out. But when it comes to cues then god forbid someone should dare to try something that someone somewhere else did. There is a line between exploring a technique and simply snagging designs and cue makers know when they have crossed it. Let them worry about it.

My take on this is if you don't want your designs to ever be copied in any way then don't show them off. Don't have a website, beg your customers to keep their cues off the web and simply do your best to withhold the food for thought that drives people to take what you have done and remix it their way.

Once upon a time i told the aca that they were responsible for the copies of their cues being made in china. What??? Blasphemy.

No, simply access.

In the 80s and early 90s jsut about the only designs being knocked off regularly were the mcdermotts and meuccis. Before that it was palmers and paradise cues.

Why?

Very simple, those were the easiest cues to get nice detailed catalogs of.

In the 90s all the cue makers started competing to see who could make the nicest brochures. As a result plenty of literature showing off cue designs came into being, a cue calendar, the billiard encyclopedia, the blue book of cues, and of course by the end of the 90s websites.

So the cue factories in china had plenty of great new designs to choose from. And they did. Only in the last decade have they started to do their own designs but still with a lot of influence from cues past.

Anyway, dead horse, progress, life. I already lost my millions due to people "stealing" my designs. I am over it.

As to the protection of billiard cue designs, my prior response was to claim "Design applied to a billiard cue" in a Copyright Registration ( Form VA-Visual Arts). This only applies to the artistic "Design applied....", not to the cue (utilitarian article). The claim is made to the "Design", not the article. This is the only point I offered for consideration. Obtaining a Federal Copyright Registration is a prerequisite for filing with the Bureau of Customs to bar importation of products which are claimed to infringe. Paul Del Giudice "PVD1".

 

[JAMSGOLF]

...There is certainly nothing wrong with a difference in opinions, and I wish that everyone would understand that sharing one's thought's on a subject is not the same as trying to force everyone to see things from a single point of view.

Craig,

VERY WELL STATED...

I was wondering though...how much would Balabushka's be worth today had they not been copied? It's a question that can only be speculated at at best...but my belief, is they wouldn't be worth anything near where they are today.

People pay the price they do, because it was the "original" in both design and process...

They've been copied repeatedly over the years (or attempted as such) with only a few...and I mean a very few...being able to fully succeed at copying both form and function...and yet those who did succeed at attaining those characteristics are also considered "masters"...

So when cuemakers "attempt" to take the design features, but miss the "playability" features of the "masters", I believe it adds more value to the "original" because it's so difficult to replicate ALL the attributes of the "original".

Just rambling...but trying to stay "on-topic"...

Jason

 

[JB Cases]

As to the protection of billiard cue designs, my prior response was to claim "Design applied to a billiard cue" in a Copyright Registration ( Form VA-Visual Arts). This only applies to the artistic "Design applied....", not to the cue (utilitarian article). The claim is made to the "Design", not the article. This is the only point I offered for consideration. Obtaining a Federal Copyright Registration is a prerequisite for filing with the Bureau of Customs to bar importation of products which are claimed to infringe. Paul Del Giudice "PVD1".

I think that this should have a shot. After all if I were to make a pool cue with an inlaid representation of Mickey Mouse then I feel certain that any court would side with Disney in granting that it infringes on their copyright of that character.

I think it could get messy with most cue designs though figuring out what was derived from others.

However as threat and possible deterrent I think it has merit. Were I the president of the ACA I would set up a fairly automated system to allow cue makers to submit drawings of their designs and co-submit the designs to be registered for copyright. Once registered I would then put them in the database at Customs and serve notice to all the importers of note that their shipments could be subject to search and seizure if they engage in the wholesale importation of cues that bear registered designs.

(or at the very least provide the simplest possible template for them to do it themselves - but I think that if the ACA and similar cue groups do this collectively then they have a better shot at getting it done and also being represented should it come to that. Perhaps the cuemakers could pay a small extra fee to the ACA that goes into a general legal fund to handle the incidental cease-and-desist type letter that may be needed)

It should be noted that the cue makers should do flat 2d drawings and not 3d renderings. The courts have tossed out copyright protection for real objects made from 3d renderings in the past. While the drawing itself is protected the object made from it is not. I think you and I are on the same page that we are speaking of ornamentation on the object.

 

[manwon]

Brunswick is out of business?

As far as making Cue Sticks, Brunswick is out of business they have not made a cue in one of their factories since around 1967 or 1968.

That was my intent when I made the comments in my post, you may not agree but I hope it clears up what I was thinking, I should have been more clear.

Take care John

 

[$TAKE HOR$E]

This is the first I have seen of this thread so forgive me for not reading almost 200 posts. Im sure this has been covered but how close is design theft and a "tribute cue"? You dont really see any of the top cuemakers turning out any tribute cues so in anyones opinion are the ones you see for sale really "tributes" or a way to possibly sell a cue a little faster or for a little more $$ by playing off of someone elses name or makers mark? Dont get me wrong, im not degradding any of these cues and in fact I have seen some I really like but I for one would buy a cue for its quality, playability or investment value and not because someone makes it to resemble someone else's.

 

[scdiveteam]

Hi,

Unless you copywrite your art designs it is fair game and in the public domain and you have no right to complain if someone comes along and uses your art or design.

When someone does copy you just remember, someone copying your stuff is the greatest form of flattery. You must be doing something right is this is happening.

Rick G