pool and billiards forum

pool is cool
It is currently Thu Oct 19, 2017 11:13 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: design theft and JB
PostPosted: Mon Mar 06, 2017 1:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 12:30 pm
Posts: 827
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1531228 ... 8157703153

Jb taking a stand against design theft, which I find interesting. One of the biggest buy/sell groups out there.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: design theft and JB
PostPosted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 11:40 pm
Posts: 4742
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ultuxf3tqmg
If you want to hear him rant.
For 3 hours. :shock:

_________________
Happy 4th.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: design theft and JB
PostPosted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 8:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 12:30 pm
Posts: 827
I find it interesting just because it is the most active buy/sell billiard site. I don't particularly like copies of cues or cases, and I'm wondering how the people of the group ultimately react. Will they continue to use the group, or simply migrate to other groups to sell their items.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: design theft and JB
PostPosted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 9:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 12:39 pm
Posts: 1666
cubswin wrote:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1531228417160207/1842650336018012/?comment_id=1843953702554342&notif_t=group_comment_reply&notif_id=1488808157703153

Jb taking a stand against design theft, which I find interesting. One of the biggest buy/sell groups out there.

Can you copy/paste/screenshot for those not on Facefuck.

_________________
-H

Disclaimer: I'm really a shit pool player and you probably shouldn't listen to any advice I may give.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: design theft and JB
PostPosted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 12:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:08 am
Posts: 4714
Location: Mis'sippi....dammit
how soon jbidiot forgets ! hasn't been that long ago since people were trying to show him the error of his case design fraud...lol !

_________________
“he is puffed up with conceit and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy craving for controversy and for quarrels about words, which produce envy, dissension, slander, evil suspicions” (I Timothy 6:4)

www.internationalcuemakers.com
www.pro9.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: design theft and JB
PostPosted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 1:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 12:30 pm
Posts: 827
Icon of Sin wrote:
cubswin wrote:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1531228417160207/1842650336018012/?comment_id=1843953702554342&notif_t=group_comment_reply&notif_id=1488808157703153

Jb taking a stand against design theft, which I find interesting. One of the biggest buy/sell groups out there.

Can you copy/paste/screenshot for those not on Facefuck.



John Barton
March 3 at 8:29pm
New Rule about case knockoffs. I am implementing a rule barring the sale of blatant ripoffs of case designs. starting with the iconic Justis three diamond inlay design.
VINCINTORE and J&J cases, both brands all models are now barred as well. They have engaged in 30 years of blatant design theft and on top of that have no warranty.
Whitten copies are not allowed. Whitten created an iconic look and I will not allow blatant copies to be sold on OBM.
EDIT: I should not HAVE to say this but in light of some of the comments...designs that are similar which have been made with PERMISSION and ATTRIBUTION to the original maker ARE ALLOWED. That people can't make this distinction should not surprise me but I have more faith in human intelligence than I should.
Attached are two examples, one is the original and one is a knockoff. No the knockoff is NOT an exact copy. But it is similar enough and IS substantially reliant on the design of the original to be attractive.
I know that this is not a popular move but it is my decision. I have suffered for 20 years seeing my designs ripped off and this is at least one small thing I can do to fight back. Just because something is legal does not make it right. I will no longer allow those who can't innovate to profit off of the design work of others.
Yes we can have a LIVELY discussion on just what is a copy, a knockoff etc... and how far is too far, who was first etc...all good points to discuss. But keep it civil or I will remove you.
Lastly if our small community won't support those who create original work then who will? It's simply not right to see someone create original art and have it be ripped off and mass produced by the next maker. The entire facebook billiards community should tell the knockoff artists to stop stealing from the actual artists. Tell them to spend their time and money and brainpower creating original art as well.
That way we all have more to choose from and more to celebrate.
-------------------------------------
TERMS:
Trademark: this is a brand. nothing to do with design.
Copyright: protection against copying for ART which is not utilitarian. Cue cases designs cannot be copyrighted in the USA.
Patent: protection for utilitarian designs that are new and novel. Does NOT cover the look of something.
Design Patent: covers the look of a utilitarian item. Essentially worthless unless you have a ton of money to fight with to defend it.
Knockoff: an item that copies the look and design of an original substantially. Not illegal if trademark is not used.
Counterfeit: a knockoff that is identical to an original including the use of the trademark logo. These are 100% ILLEGAL.
Public Domain: Designs and art which has been in use so long that any copyright or design patent that may have applied is no longer applicable. Work can fall into the public domain when rights holders don't vigorously defend against infringement. Mostly though it is not ILLEGAL to rip off a design, just tacky and immoral. So for the most part the designs on cues and cases are in the public domain and can be LEGALLY copied.
Asshole: Someone who makes knockoffs instead of creating their own original designs so that they can PROFIT off the work of others. These people essentially use real creators as their unpaid R&D department by shamelessly copying in whole or in part the work of others.
Upstanding Awesome Person: Someone who resists the urge to allow blatant ripoffs to be presented without at least giving credit to the original artist who created the design. I find it reprehensible that in some cases the knockoffs are thought to be the originals because of ASSHOLES (see above) who don't give credit for the origin of the design and not enough Awesome Upstanding People who hold them accountable.
[/size]


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: design theft and JB
PostPosted: Sat Mar 11, 2017 1:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 3:48 pm
Posts: 28
He's ranting about Titlist cues now on FB...

Ok, rant!
WTF is WRONG with people? You take a Willie Hoppe Titlist PRODUCTION cue that sold for $40 new in 1950, add a few rings and change the joint and now it's a $4000 cue?
I love cuemaking and cue makers and have the highest respect for the skill and art of making a precision instrument with exacting parameters.
But I call FOUL on this practice of using Hoppe production cues as blanks and making what is essentially a plane jane cue with 1950s veneers in them and charging thousands for it.
I don't know what the cuemakers themselves are charging to do this work as I have never even asked one what they would charge for it.
But I can see the results and UNLESS someone can come with a reasonable justification for this astronomical price tags I will continue to think that's it's a modern form of marketing hype that drives the pricing.
Also it opens up the question of what determines of what makes a cue's characteristics special to a particular cuemaker IF 90% of the butt was made by someone else? The shaft? The rings? The logo?
I get the whole titlist conversion thing but I don't get the whole crazy prices thing and I also wonder how much pride the cue maker themselves have in a cue that was 90% built by someone else.
I mean it like this exactly. If a cue maker builds cues with Prather Blanks or Davis blanks we expect full disclosure of that in order to set the market price because there is this notion that a cue maker who builds his own blanks is doing more and thus the cues should be worth more......when the cuemakers have relatively equal reputations for quality that is. But when it comes to using a 50 year old production cue as a blank then suddenly the script is flipped and the cue is worth MORE than if the cuemaker had built the exact design from scratch.
As most of you know I am all about getting value for the price paid. Forgive me for ranting but I just don't personally see the value in this. I can certainly see the "desire" and obviously the market is bearing it as there are numerous such Titlist conversions out there for sale at any given time. But how much of the desire is hype driven?
Can anyone make a reasonable case for these prices other than just because someone will pay them?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: design theft and JB
PostPosted: Sat Mar 11, 2017 6:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 3:11 am
Posts: 1553
ironchef. wrote:
He's ranting about Titlist cues now on FB...

Ok, rant!
WTF is WRONG with people? You take a Willie Hoppe Titlist PRODUCTION cue that sold for $40 new in 1950, add a few rings and change the joint and now it's a $4000 cue?
I love cuemaking and cue makers and have the highest respect for the skill and art of making a precision instrument with exacting parameters.
But I call FOUL on this practice of using Hoppe production cues as blanks and making what is essentially a plane jane cue with 1950s veneers in them and charging thousands for it.
I don't know what the cuemakers themselves are charging to do this work as I have never even asked one what they would charge for it.
But I can see the results and UNLESS someone can come with a reasonable justification for this astronomical price tags I will continue to think that's it's a modern form of marketing hype that drives the pricing.
Also it opens up the question of what determines of what makes a cue's characteristics special to a particular cuemaker IF 90% of the butt was made by someone else? The shaft? The rings? The logo?
I get the whole titlist conversion thing but I don't get the whole crazy prices thing and I also wonder how much pride the cue maker themselves have in a cue that was 90% built by someone else.
I mean it like this exactly. If a cue maker builds cues with Prather Blanks or Davis blanks we expect full disclosure of that in order to set the market price because there is this notion that a cue maker who builds his own blanks is doing more and thus the cues should be worth more......when the cuemakers have relatively equal reputations for quality that is. But when it comes to using a 50 year old production cue as a blank then suddenly the script is flipped and the cue is worth MORE than if the cuemaker had built the exact design from scratch.
As most of you know I am all about getting value for the price paid. Forgive me for ranting but I just don't personally see the value in this. I can certainly see the "desire" and obviously the market is bearing it as there are numerous such Titlist conversions out there for sale at any given time. But how much of the desire is hype driven?
Can anyone make a reasonable case for these prices other than just because someone will pay them?


In the 1950's you could buy a beautiful handmade Harvey Martin leather cue case for $30. So now add some padding and much, MUCH less durable leather, with somebody else's design stamped on it, and all of a sudden it's worth $2,000 - $3,500? What a stupid, STUPID rant.

A friend of mine bought a brand new, straight out of the shipping carton George Balabushka cue in 1975, in a pool hall from a guy who hit a couple balls with it and decided it wasn't for him. The original purchaser had paid $175 and waited several months, so he charged my friend double that ($350). Anyone care to guess the value of that cue today?

In 1925 you could buy the TOP OF THE LINE Ford automobile (Model A) for $300....

'nuff said.
TW



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: design theft and JB
PostPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 5:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 11:40 pm
Posts: 4742
Gotta love John's wisdom.
He used to argue with me saying no big company has gone out of business from fakery .

_________________
Happy 4th.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: design theft and JB
PostPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 6:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 12:37 pm
Posts: 4828
ironchef. wrote:
He's ranting about Titlist cues now on FB...

Ok, rant!
WTF is WRONG with people? You take a Willie Hoppe Titlist PRODUCTION cue that sold for $40 new in 1950, add a few rings and change the joint and now it's a $4000 cue?
I love cuemaking and cue makers and have the highest respect for the skill and art of making a precision instrument with exacting parameters.
But I call FOUL on this practice of using Hoppe production cues as blanks and making what is essentially a plane jane cue with 1950s veneers in them and charging thousands for it.
I don't know what the cuemakers themselves are charging to do this work as I have never even asked one what they would charge for it.
But I can see the results and UNLESS someone can come with a reasonable justification for this astronomical price tags I will continue to think that's it's a modern form of marketing hype that drives the pricing.
Also it opens up the question of what determines of what makes a cue's characteristics special to a particular cuemaker IF 90% of the butt was made by someone else? The shaft? The rings? The logo?
I get the whole titlist conversion thing but I don't get the whole crazy prices thing and I also wonder how much pride the cue maker themselves have in a cue that was 90% built by someone else.
I mean it like this exactly. If a cue maker builds cues with Prather Blanks or Davis blanks we expect full disclosure of that in order to set the market price because there is this notion that a cue maker who builds his own blanks is doing more and thus the cues should be worth more......when the cuemakers have relatively equal reputations for quality that is. But when it comes to using a 50 year old production cue as a blank then suddenly the script is flipped and the cue is worth MORE than if the cuemaker had built the exact design from scratch.
As most of you know I am all about getting value for the price paid. Forgive me for ranting but I just don't personally see the value in this. I can certainly see the "desire" and obviously the market is bearing it as there are numerous such Titlist conversions out there for sale at any given time. But how much of the desire is hype driven?
Can anyone make a reasonable case for these prices other than just because someone will pay them?


I love my Titlist conversion!

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=1709


Scott

_________________
This space for rent


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group