shaft

I dont know that I see a difference. I will take some time and try to understand. You cue makers have some different thoughts about what is kosher and what isnt. For example I was reading an article in "Inside Pool Magazine" I think,about different type of joints and preferences. SS, v's plastics and even animal horns. Dennis Diekman "SP', sorry, said that Animal horns are bad Karma to the cuemaker industry. If this is so, my question is, why??? Where does leather come from, you know the tips. What about true ivory? Furthermore why stop with animals, aren't trees a living and breathing creature as well. Where does mapel and all of the different exotic woods come from? The truth of the matter is, is that people justify everything while lying to themselves. You cant tell me that if someone payed you a million dollars to duplicate an exact match of another cue, whether it be a pencile cue or a joss, preditor, or what ever, You wouldnt?? Earn a million, pay out $500,000 in copyright infringements and legal fees any you still have made a half Mil. Welcome to coraporate America, USA. Look At the tobacco industry. I wouldnt hesitate one minute, and thats the truth. I will try to understand the other side as I mentioned I would. Thanks
John
 
bubsbug said:
I dont know that I see a difference. I will take some time and try to understand. You cue makers have some different thoughts about what is kosher and what isnt. For example I was reading an article in "Inside Pool Magazine" I think,about different type of joints and preferences. SS, v's plastics and even animal horns. Dennis Diekman "SP', sorry, said that Animal horns are bad Karma to the cuemaker industry. If this is so, my question is, why??? Where does leather come from, you know the tips. What about true ivory? Furthermore why stop with animals, aren't trees a living and breathing creature as well. Where does mapel and all of the different exotic woods come from? The truth of the matter is, is that people justify everything while lying to themselves. You cant tell me that if someone payed you a million dollars to duplicate an exact match of another cue, whether it be a pencile cue or a joss, preditor, or what ever, You wouldnt?? Earn a million, pay out $500,000 in copyright infringements and legal fees any you still have made a half Mil. Welcome to coraporate America, USA. Look At the tobacco industry. I wouldnt hesitate one minute, and thats the truth. I will try to understand the other side as I mentioned I would. Thanks
John

You are absolutely right. If someone offered me a million $$$ to reproduce that cue, I would, but first, I would sit down with Mike, work out a deal, and then proceed. Not the other way around.

I've always heard that it is easier to beg for forgiveness than it is to ask for permission. That may be corporate America's way but not in cuemaking. I can put you in touch with Mike and you can ask his feelings on the matter if you want.....
 
ratcues said:
You are absolutely right. If someone offered me a million $$$ to reproduce that cue, I would, but first, I would sit down with Mike, work out a deal, and then proceed. Not the other way around.

I've always heard that it is easier to beg for forgiveness than it is to ask for permission. That may be corporate America's way but not in cuemaking. I can put you in touch with Mike and you can ask his feelings on the matter if you want.....


This is exactaly what I am talking about. "Justifying" !!!! You think its ok because you got the origional owners permission first. What part of this is ok? Its like asking a banker if it's ok that I rob his bank. If people deem an act or behavior to be inappropriate or "bad" if you will, then there can't be a way for it to all of a sudden be ok.
If I were standing in a long line, say maybe 2,000 people long, to buy Indianapolis colts football tickets, and I asked the 5thr person in line if it was ok to cut in front of him, and he sayes sure, Is it ok?? What about the other 1995 people behind him? Shouldn't I seek there approval as well? So just asking the origional owner isn't enought, is it?

After thinking about it for awile, I have came up with the answer. "RESPECT" It's all about repect. When people belong to a club, ie cuemaking, they do or don't do thing basised upon a mutral agrement, or an accepted norm to that paticular club. The fact that someone violates an accepted norm to a paticular club can not be excused because cetain people agreeed to it, pure and simple! Why? Because everyone else is going to have doubts and skeptisisem and wonder what's going to be next. Now, there thoughts, doubts, and negative thinking have just become the consequences of your justified actions. In my opinion it is either ok, or not ok, Unfortunately for me, I am not there yet. Respect takes time, maturity, and recipience. Im sorry, call me imature or what ever but i feel that I dont posess full fleged "Respect" yet to this paticular club if you will. Some day I hope to but today isn't that day. Im just trying to be honest.
 
bubsbug said:
This is exactaly what I am talking about. "Justifying" !!!! You think its ok because you got the origional owners permission first. What part of this is ok? Its like asking a banker if it's ok that I rob his bank.

WHAT?? Are you kidding?

"I would, but first, I would sit down with Mike, work out a deal, and then proceed. Not the other way around. "

Did you actually read the above quote? You don't understand what the word "deal" means? You don't understand that rat is saying Mike would be compensated for the permission to make a cue based on his original work? You equate that to asking permission to steal from a bank?

You just want to make up your own rules as you go.

Kelly
 
Kelly_Guy said:
WHAT?? Are you kidding?

"I would, but first, I would sit down with Mike, work out a deal, and then proceed. Not the other way around. "

Did you actually read the above quote? You don't understand what the word "deal" means? You don't understand that rat is saying Mike would be compensated for the permission to make a cue based on his original work? You equate that to asking permission to steal from a bank?

You just want to make up your own rules as you go.

Kelly

Absolutely not my friend, you are making rules up as you go! Because you made a deal with the owner you both think that its ok because of compensation. Again "justifying" If the banker said yes but give me 25% then he just became an accomplist. What about the agreed origional cuemaker? There are still other people involved! Take the commath, thal shal not bare false witness against thy neighbor. What if you do bare false witness against thy neighbor to spare him his life or something equally as benefiting. Is this ok to do? If so where do we stop! What next, And who is accountable?
 
bubsbug said:
Absolutely not my friend, you are making rules up as you go! Because you made a deal with the owner you both think that its ok because of compensation. Again "justifying" If the banker said yes but give me 25% then he just became an accomplist. What about the agreed origional cuemaker? There are still other people involved! Take the commath, thal shal not bare false witness against thy neighbor. What if you do bare false witness against thy neighbor to spare him his life or something equally as benefiting. Is this ok to do? If so where do we stop! What next, And who is accountable?

How can the original designer of said cue be an accomplice to something that is wrong? He owns the rights to it. If someone comes to him and asks permission to make a cue patterned after his original work, and agrees to compensate him for the right to do that, and the original designer agrees to it, who else needs to be consulted?

You go from saying it is ok to copy someone's cue without permission to saying you can't copy it even if you get permission from and COMPENSATE the original designer and maker of that style cue?

And you tell me I am making up the rules as I go?

Kelly
 
OK, go ahead, ask the banker if you can rob the bank, assume he says yes, and see what happens. The banker does not own the bank. You will also need permission from shareholders and the Federal Gov?t.

If you want to cut in front of 1995 people, you need the permission of the 1995 people.

Yes, it boils down to respect of property. If you copy designs now because you are not well respected in cuemaking, good luck in the future.

You've asked for a lot of advice on this forum, which is what it is for. But now you use the advice against the same people that gave it to you. Not a good move.

Why stop with Mike Neal? Why not copy a Samsara or Barenbrugge? See what happens........
 
Let sort through things to keep it clear to everyone.

Fact 1. Rat sayes its not ok to steal someone idea.
Fact 2 Rat retracts and sayes its not ok to steal someones idea unless you compensate them. (pay them off) my injection

Whats next, you cant steal someones idea unless you pay them off on the second tuesday of next month while eating a chili dog out of you left hand and smanking the monkey with you right all wile trying to do the moonwalk on a moving floor at the airport.

Justifying only makes the problem worse. Do you see it yet! There is a much greater lesson here than just taking someones idea. Which to my understanding when working with wood is difficult to define. If you can not clearly define something then it cant be wrong, or can It?
 
Let sort through things to keep it clear to everyone.

Fact 1. Rat sayes its not ok to steal someone idea.
Fact 2 Rat retracts and sayes its not ok to steal someones idea unless you compensate them. (pay them off) my injection

Whats next, you cant steal someones idea unless you pay them off on the second tuesday of next month while eating a chili dog out of you left hand and smanking the monkey with you right all wile trying to do the moonwalk on a moving floor at the airport.

Justifying only makes the problem worse. Do you see it yet! There is a much greater lesson here than just taking someones idea. Which to my understanding when working with wood is difficult to define. If you can not clearly define something then it cant be wrong, or can It?
 
Kelly_Guy said:
How can the original designer of said cue be an accomplice to something that is wrong? He owns the rights to it. If someone comes to him and asks permission to make a cue patterned after his original work, and agrees to compensate him for the right to do that, and the original designer agrees to it, who else needs to be consulted?

You go from saying it is ok to copy someone's cue without permission to saying you can't copy it even if you get permission from and COMPENSATE the original designer and maker of that style cue?

And you tell me I am making up the rules as I go?

Kelly
How can the original designer of said cue be an accomplice to something that is wrong? He owns the rights to it. If someone comes to him and asks permission to make a cue patterned after his original work, and agrees to compensate him for the right to do that, and the original designer agrees to it, who else needs to be consulted?

Because both have violated a common norm to the group. ie cuemakers. It was rat's origional claim that it was bad rep to cuemakers to copy someones idea, not mine,which I find questionable at best. Now I rolled with it meaning the exact same replica. I think that a bic pen and a # 2 pencil are completely different, but uses the same concept. Definitaly questionable at best. Rat is being wishy warshie, saying its not ok here, but is ok over there. "Justifying"!! If all of a group deems something to be bed rep. then it is 100% alwary bad or alway not bad.

Say I do get permission to make the cues at said pay off. Say I make 100,000 of these and they all sell to different people. How many people are going to think that the cues made made by me are origional Neal cues. Right there is deception. Have you even bothered to think about the retail people yet. I have to get to football practice. Net lesson will continue!


Copensation, justifying, kidding yourself are not answers or solutions to an act that you feel is wrong. ie stealing someones design is wrong!
 
bubsbug said:
Net lesson will continue!
QUOTE]

No, the net lesson won't continue.

You are incapable of grasping a fundamental concept of someone who owns the intellectual rights of something choosing to give permission to an individual(s) to use it, whether compensated or not.

You are unable to grasp the concept that there is a difference between duplicating work that is solely attributed to one person without permission in a deceitful manner, and being given expressed permission by that owner. If you can't grasp the difference between those to things, discussing this with you is hopeless. In your dimwitted narrow view, you do not even consider the possibility that disclosure of the deal, disclosure of the manufacturer of the new product is made known to prospective buyers.

Amazing that you are unable to grasp that when you are manufacturing shafts who's design is attributed to someone else.

The fact that you were wanting to copy the work, then when it became a point of discussion, you say it would be wrong for anyone to make the cue, even if the owner of the design gives his expressed permission and even if he is compensated shows you just want to argue.

You can have a net lesson with yourself, but not with me. You have successfully become the only person on this entire bulletin board on my ignore list.

Kelly
 
Last edited:
Some people in this country still have a since of honor and pride, which is becoming rare these days. Ethics can be a individual trait, and be seen differently in different people, and on a case by case basis depending on the circumstances.

I can't tell you what is right and wrong here, or try to explain what some just feel in their heart. I would not build this without the permission either, but that is Me. If someone offered Me a MILLION, well that's a lot of money for a cue and plenty to go around, so I would probably contact the gentleman also to even commission the cue through him or ask permission. I'm not a greedy person, and I could be happy with as little as half that money, as to compensate him for My own piece of mind, and I would hope He would give his blessing and possibly even some advice on the build in return. What You feel is right, is up to You, if someone else has to tell you what's in your heart, then possible You will never get It.


You can sit here and try to catch someone up in their own statements, that's easy enough to do to almost anyone, but from what I see at least he gives a #^%*, enough to think about It, and if He could live with himself or not with such a decision. I tend to agree That's It's not completely ethical, but again that's Me, and It's obvious that some would do what It takes to try a justify It. For Me I could not without the man's blessing.:)

True some things that have become industry standard once came from somewhere originally, but since patents weren't a issue, and they are only one element of a cue, It's not really the same thing. Even artists have used, and copied brush strokes from past masters, or used the same canvas materials, but that's still not the whole painting, only different elements to form their own ideas, and create an original from. Besides that If the guy is still alive, then there is a chance he may still be able to sell his creations. That is if It's not like there is no one alive to still make It. Your talking about straight up copying his design from one You saw, not just using elements in your own design, or building a tribute. While even using some elements could be questionable, there is no question about totally copying someone else. That's just My opinion, and how I feel, nothing more, so If You feel the need to pick My post apart too in order to justify Your ethics then Have at it. Possible we were just raised differently, and see things from a different angle.:)


Most Cuemakers aren't ruthless business men that are good at justifying decisions like that, there are many more profitable trades that they would be more suited for if so, and could make a much better living doing. They have to make a living, but not dreaming about taking the world By the horns or anything, and looking for ways to copy others. getting ideas to bring out one's own creations is one thing, completely copying is another IMO. Greg
 
It's easy to rationalize unethical behavior to yourself if you don't have a value system of your own. Unfortunately, I think Bug knows right from wrong, but has rationalized his morals/ethics away.
 
I've seen Mike Neals Zipper cue and alot of patience went into the build. It is unique by all means. As far as repping out cues, maybe the Burton Spain estate is owed alot of money by alot of cuemakers! After all we basically copy his splicing techniques. I don't think all the huff is justified based on this. If someone wants to patent something we have laws for that. I don't want to build any zipper or pencil cues, however imaginative. I will thank Burton, bless his soul, and try to keep the sharp points rolling. Permission? It sure is a sign of respect!
 
Kelly_Guy said:
bubsbug said:
Net lesson will continue!
QUOTE]

No, the net lesson won't continue.

You are incapable of grasping a fundamental concept of someone who owns the intellectual rights of something choosing to give permission to an individual(s) to use it, whether compensated or not.

You are unable to grasp the concept that there is a difference between duplicating work that is solely attributed to one person without permission in a deceitful manner, and being given expressed permission by that owner. If you can't grasp the difference between those to things, discussing this with you is hopeless. In your dimwitted narrow view, you do not even consider the possibility that disclosure of the deal, disclosure of the manufacturer of the new product is made known to prospective buyers.

Amazing that you are unable to grasp that when you are manufacturing shafts who's design is attributed to someone else.

The fact that you were wanting to copy the work, then when it became a point of discussion, you say it would be wrong for anyone to make the cue, even if the owner of the design gives his expressed permission and even if he is compensated shows you just want to argue.

You can have a net lesson with yourself, but not with me. You have successfully become the only person on this entire bulletin board on my ignore list.

Kelly

You are right I cant spell worth a crap, so so ahead rub it it. What im getting at here is PRINCIPAL which appeartently you dont have any. This senaro is based on Principal. It may be okay to duplicate something on a legal leval because both are compesated but the underlying principal has already been broken. Im done with this, you guys win!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
I guess I don't see how I've been wishy, washy but I will try to "sort" this
out for you Bub.

1. If you copy the cue without permission, you are stealing.

2. If you gain permission, it is no longer stealing. You "borrow" the
design and give proper credit where it is due.

I cannot make it any simpler that that. You can try to mince my words and play little games but in the end, you know you are in the wrong so do not point a finger at me. Your argument is weak and your examples do not even pertain to this situation. Your time is better spent coming up with your own unique design or product that we can discuss and admire.
 
Ok, maybe just one more post. Perhaps I haven?t been very clear in getting my message across so I will take it very slow.

First, I believe that copying someone?s exact replica is wrong!! If I choose to make one its not going to be because I was paid to do so. Two wrongs doesn?t make a right.

Making a Bic pen instead of a # 2 pencil, in my opinion is Ok. I believe that this is different, period. To a laymen a pool cue is a pool cue just as to God People are people. It has been mentioned that the panicle cue is spelized. I however don?t see it that way. Black, white, Japanese, Chinese, English, French Spanish are all people with different traits. I see no difference between this and copying a cue that originally had 3 points and your new one with 6 points. I rolled with the thought of producing an exact replica to show how people rationalize and justify anything and everything for there own benefit, especially when there is monetary gain. Look at the movie indecent proposal!! I just feel that if you are going to do something whether it be good or bad then you should do it all by yourself without any type of outside influence. Keep reading it will become more clearer. I don?t know, maybe I am justifying by making a bic pen.

America lives in what I call a risk/reward relationship. This means that If Im willing to pay the price of consequences then its ok to do.
If a millionaire decides to disregard a speed limit sign of 60mph and knows that the speeding ticket is $200 for going 80mph and thinks to himself who cares, my last car wash cost that much. Does it make it Ok? He is still a law breaker. Who cares if he paid his debt.

If a man kills his wife, does 30 years in prison, does his time, and gets out, does it make him right??

The Bible says, ?Thall shall not KILL?! It says ?thall shall not kill, period, end of story! If a robber breaks into your home and demands money, or your life is it ok to kill him instead.? No!! No!! No!! No its not ok!!!! The bible says that shall not kill. Instead it would probably say something like this. If a robber enters your home and demands money or you life then give him all you have. Give him you checking account numbers, savings account numbers and credit cards. Go to the basement and open the hidden safe and empty the content into his bag. For what profits a man if he savith his money but looseth his life. Give him all. If I kill a man I will surly pay for it somehow later. (truthfully though I would have a lot of temptation)

We all agree that plagiarism is bad right. You can be kicked out of school, fined, sued and maybe imprison for it. Let say I asked permission to copy a writers book ver bantam from front to back and permission is granted. Is this ok?? Maybe it is between the writer and the new author but still in my mind and hart I plagiarized. I COPIED SOMEONE ELSE?S WORK! Even if its ok with the rest of the world I still plagiarized. How does this all of a sudden become something different then plagiarism.

For me principals can not be bought! I am either going to do something, right or wrong based on my belief and what I want to do. If I were going to do something for a million dollars than I would probably do it for nothing. If I were going to copy a mans cue then I would do it and be done with it. I wouldn?t ask for permission and I certainly wouldn?t attempt to bribe him. If I?m convicted of a crime then I pay my dues, hopefully learn something and move on.

I was just curious about how the stick was made. Truthfully I am at least 1-? years away from doing any butt work other than repairs. Right now I am a shaft man only. Once I feel that I have mastered it I will move on. Currently I do not see any wrong in making a Bic pen or something similar from an item that I was inspired from.

Kelly, Ratcue and everyone else I am only trying to express my beliefs and I hold nothing personal as I hope you do the same. It is ok to disagree!
 
Here are some pics
 

Attachments

  • DSC_0156.JPG
    DSC_0156.JPG
    39.4 KB · Views: 175
  • DSC_0158.JPG
    DSC_0158.JPG
    60.9 KB · Views: 166
  • DSC_0159.JPG
    DSC_0159.JPG
    85 KB · Views: 165
Back
Top