I am not speaking to the debate about particular elements that you or anyone else has done. There isn't a cue maker alive who hasn't done something that some cue maker before him or her hasn't done. It's simply not possible at this point to make a cue without using techniques pioneered by someone else. And speaking from a purely decorative perspective just about every living cue maker has made cues with decorative elements from their predecessors.
And ANY act of modification no matter how small is a creative act. So it's not fair to assign levels or creativity and say that one result is more creative than another. That's belittling and divisive. My point was that copying happens, on all levels, and everyone does or has done it to varying degrees.
Once in a while someone does come up with a new technique that is a game changer though. That's the whole reason we have the term game changer. Because it changes the WHOLE game forcing all the players to adopt the new technique and begin to work on using that technique and innovate off of it.
As people we are more psychologically driven by praise than money. Most of us. We want recognition for our work, we want positive feedback, we want to feel successful without having to look at our bank account to prove it to ourselves. Of course making good money is a nice bonus but the real driver for creativity is recognition. When recognition is taken away it's painful. And even worse is when the creative act is belittled as if it has no value. No you not only don't get praise but you get criticism.
I personally don't understand the whole problem with copying in general. I know how it makes me feel to be copied as I outlined above but in general we learn by copying. We are told to copy all through school by being shown examples of how it's done right, whatever the school board thinks is right. We are told in numerous books to copy successful people, we are told to study others, we are constantly barraged with biographies of famous people and encouraged to be like them. We love to quote others and use their thoughts as substitutes for our own. Every craftsman cuts their teeth making "copies" because that's how you learn. You see a box then you try to build a box, that's it.
I don't see a need anymore to write long rants defending my decision to use elements from other case maker's work. Sorry but we live in a world where people share ideas simply by the act of taking an idea and making it real. If they don't want to share then they should build stuff that no one ever gets to see. Otherwise the idea made real and presented to the world becomes the world's to exploit. Now of course society has made laws to grant protection for some ideas made into real things and of course the application of those laws is for lawyers and judges to deal with. But in a connected world ideas are not esoteric, they are laid bare for all to work with and use.
I personally have seen millions of dollars in revenue lost to outright almost 1/1 copying of my designs when I owned Instroke. Most of the Instroke production designs were created by me over a four day binge period where I stayed up all night sketching out the cases while working with the factory during the days. That became the genesis of the Instroke cases you see on the market today and they have remained relatively unchanged since 1994 with the exception of a few modifications I did to make them good for modern cues.
People here talk about the copying of a ring or an element but I have had to deal with container loads of knockoffs hitting the market and being sold two booths down. Not only were my designs taken but they even took my descriptions, the paragraphs I wrote explaining the benefits and even in a few cases used my images to advertise their knockoffs. I have been through it on both ends. No less than Joe Porper knocked off my signature design element, the scallops on the Cowboy model and made some strange hybrid model and then that was knocked off by others. When that happened I felt angry and elated at the same time.
I mean damn it, Joe Porper was a big deal in cue cases, no stranger himself to being knocked off, why did he need to copy my centerpiece product? But on the other hand check it out, I must have arrived if the great Joe Porper thought I made something worth copying!!!
So the bottom line is that this big world with it's 7 billion people is a huge fertile melting pot of ideas. Once someone adds their idea to the stew then they don't get to take it back. If then someone else takes it and runs with it then they run, that's simply called life.
And honestly, this life is way too short to waste it talking about whether or not it's "ok" to use certain rings. It is ok. (depending on the relevant laws of course.)
You have the capability to create objects then create them. Let other people argue the merits and deal with the substance. Put the rings on good solid products and worry about what your customer thinks about what they are trading their money for. That's the praise that matters most. Whether your creativity only extends as far as parroting other people's designs or goes beyond to improvising on them is up to you but you belong to the class of people who makes tangible things and because of that you get to decide what you will and won't make.
