Yes, I am LAZY!
- Thread starter Mc2
- Start date
WOW! That's a machine only Jim can design .
Jim, thanks for all the tips and tricks on setting up my caveman cnc tapererer.
I would have never done it w/out your FREE guidance.
Macros are not for the lazy. They're for the practical.
Jim, thanks for all the tips and tricks on setting up my caveman cnc tapererer.
I would have never done it w/out your FREE guidance.
Macros are not for the lazy. They're for the practical.
Thanks for the responses guys. I would sell a machine like this for $6000. Of cousre some things would still needed to be added. A better spindle for inlays, Mach3, and a good CADCAM. I would also need a little time to build it.
Jim.
I knew I should have taken programming instead of LAN.
But looks like a Dynomite machine Jim.
What are the dimensions?
But looks like a Dynomite machine Jim.
What are the dimensions?
Not really. If you haven't noticed Lee has not responded. The only post I have seen recently is a promise that has yet to happen. Eventually people will not buy into these smoke and mirror tricks. Lets see, how about a multi shaft machine. This was a great one. He took an old cnc machine and just layed a few taig spindles and dove tails on top. Then took pictures with alot of hype. Oh the machine is real. The setup is not. I doubt he could get it running without my help to save his life. I wonder whom he will call for this one. Oh thats wait that project died. The list can go on and on.
Sorry, just venting as I have been abused like alot of others on here.
Jim.
People can only take advantage of you if you allow them too.
The first definition of "Allow" is - To put no obstacle in the way of; permint to occur or do. Only Chris can say if Chris allowed Lee to "take advantage of him" and it is only Chris' business if Lee did. We live in a free enterprise system that allows each of us to make our fortunes as we see fit. You have entered into the market of pool cue making. Maybe some old timers see this as being taken advantage of? Maybe some see it as progress. You certainly have not reinvented the pool cue, anymore than Lee has reinvented machines and while you, or anyone, may or may not agree with how Lee has conducted his business I fail to see where it is anyones place to judge whether someone has been taken advantage of except by those that may actually have been.
Have no idea.........I was just making a generalized statement.
If that's the way you interpret it, that's your biz.
I have no dog in this hunt.
Personaly, I dont see any reason behind this debate.
You cant fault Lee for buying parts, assemble a lathe, and then selling it.
It is the American way and others are doing the same thing.
If there are patent infringements that is what our legal system is for.
Look at all the design theft that is rampant in cue making.
Who owns the diamond design patent?
Did you know that one cue maker has the patent on the one piece jump/break style ferrule ?
How many other cue makers make and install them on cues for people!
Drilling a hole in the tip end of the cue for less deflection?
A cue maker has the patent on that too!
If you want to debate infringement there is plenty of it besides off the shelf parts assembly.
Taig will sell parts to anyone with money and there are other companys that use those same parts to make lathes for other purposes already (pen making).
As I see it, the issue Chris had was that Taig agreed to make parts to his specifications and not to sell those specific parts to anyone else.
As far as I know Taig is abiding by that agreement.
If they are not then his issue is with Taig ... not the buyer.
So ... if anyone can buy off the shelf parts and assemble a lathe of course it is going to look like every other lathe built using those same off the shelf parts.
Others have tried to duplicate Chris Hightower's lathe, but I do not believe anyone has been successful yet.
There are a lot of little differences that make one BIG difference.
Chris has the experience and knowledge to support what he sells and his reputation of helping cue makers learn the craft is very well known.
You get more than just the machinery from Chris.
In fairness I will say the same thing about Unique Products and the way they support their customers also.
Their equipment is protected by patent law as it is original design.
Nothing off the shelf looks like Unique equipment.
You cant fault Lee for buying parts, assemble a lathe, and then selling it.
It is the American way and others are doing the same thing.
If there are patent infringements that is what our legal system is for.
Look at all the design theft that is rampant in cue making.
Who owns the diamond design patent?
Did you know that one cue maker has the patent on the one piece jump/break style ferrule ?
How many other cue makers make and install them on cues for people!
Drilling a hole in the tip end of the cue for less deflection?
A cue maker has the patent on that too!
If you want to debate infringement there is plenty of it besides off the shelf parts assembly.
Taig will sell parts to anyone with money and there are other companys that use those same parts to make lathes for other purposes already (pen making).
As I see it, the issue Chris had was that Taig agreed to make parts to his specifications and not to sell those specific parts to anyone else.
As far as I know Taig is abiding by that agreement.
If they are not then his issue is with Taig ... not the buyer.
So ... if anyone can buy off the shelf parts and assemble a lathe of course it is going to look like every other lathe built using those same off the shelf parts.
Others have tried to duplicate Chris Hightower's lathe, but I do not believe anyone has been successful yet.
There are a lot of little differences that make one BIG difference.
Chris has the experience and knowledge to support what he sells and his reputation of helping cue makers learn the craft is very well known.
You get more than just the machinery from Chris.
In fairness I will say the same thing about Unique Products and the way they support their customers also.
Their equipment is protected by patent law as it is original design.
Nothing off the shelf looks like Unique equipment.
Will, I think you're missing the whole point to this.
LOL ... possably ... too many Shiner Bocks will do that sometimes.
Thank You Joey.
Several people have missed the point so let me lay it out in it's simplest terms.
This is not about patent infringement. No one involved in this dispute has a patent on anything so let's take that off the table and leave it out of the discussion. It only serves to cloud the issue.
What this boils down to is the 'taking' of someone's intellectual property, claiming it to be their own and selling it for personal gain.
Now, before the keyboard lawyers start spouting their version of what's legal and what's not legal, let me save you the strokes. It's about personal ethics.
There is no judicial provision for that. BDcues, go look that up and tell us what you find.
It's about how we conduct ourselves, how we do business and how we treat our fellow man. Apparently, these qualities take second chair when money is involved.
I don't need to hear about what goes on out in the world and have that used as justification for the injustice that I see here on a daily basis.
I'm honestly disturbed by the behavior that some here will condone. Not only condone but outright promote and protect. I'm sorry, but some people are beyond shame.
Has the moral structure of our society declined to such an extent that behavior of this type is now considered acceptable? Obviously this is a rhetorical question because it's equally as obvious that it has.
Who among you is waiting for someone to tell you what is right and what is wrong? I truly hope that you find out which is which while it still matters.
Several people have missed the point so let me lay it out in it's simplest terms.
This is not about patent infringement. No one involved in this dispute has a patent on anything so let's take that off the table and leave it out of the discussion. It only serves to cloud the issue.
What this boils down to is the 'taking' of someone's intellectual property, claiming it to be their own and selling it for personal gain.
Now, before the keyboard lawyers start spouting their version of what's legal and what's not legal, let me save you the strokes. It's about personal ethics.
There is no judicial provision for that. BDcues, go look that up and tell us what you find.
It's about how we conduct ourselves, how we do business and how we treat our fellow man. Apparently, these qualities take second chair when money is involved.
I don't need to hear about what goes on out in the world and have that used as justification for the injustice that I see here on a daily basis.
I'm honestly disturbed by the behavior that some here will condone. Not only condone but outright promote and protect. I'm sorry, but some people are beyond shame.
Has the moral structure of our society declined to such an extent that behavior of this type is now considered acceptable? Obviously this is a rhetorical question because it's equally as obvious that it has.
Who among you is waiting for someone to tell you what is right and what is wrong? I truly hope that you find out which is which while it still matters.