Poll: Is it ethical/do you feel comfortable having a jeweler recreate a ring you like but can''t aff

[verticalhorizon]

One of the biggest problems we had in making the site is that the designers thought people would take our photos and have them knocked off. Most saw the vision of exposing their work to the greatest number of possible consumers. Some feared the mass exposure would leed to the breaking down of the brand. There really is no comparison as to what these designers are producing and what others try to replicate. I have worked in the design field for over 30 years with my first designer being Eddie Sakamoto 30 years ago. He is the father of his design style and has inspired many other in his school of design. For a designer to be inspired to learn from his design is fine. To try to copy a artists exact design is highly unethical and shows no respect for anothers work. We work in a wonderful industry where we get involved in others peoples lifes. Many in their first walk down the isle. To suggest to these people that one can do it cheeper than the original designer suggests more of a money matter than love of true design.

I agree with Bill's statement. I never not agreed with this line of reasoning, despite what I was accused of.

It was my interpretation of earlier posts that some people felt there was no differentiation in creating exact copies from similar inspired jewelry based on famous brands. It was also implied that there is little difference between stealing paper clips, cars, or ring designs, which I believe are also false analogies. Accurate analogies proved harder to come up with and nay-sayers were quick to attack the negative without noting the positive.

Not until the post was further defined to say e-rings (which is why most of us are here) and to limit the topic question to exact copies did the conversation become more focused and paletible.

A comment on exposure: Whether on the internet, through magazines, television or galleries, any artist has to risk exposure (or even overexposure) in order to sell. Part of the downside of that exposure is potential copies and the revenue lost as a result. It has always been my intent to display that this is a part of business reality and that companies factor this into pricing. Doing so does not make me the expert as to what companies should make for profit. It's just economics.

Also, this statement is not to say that I support crime or that because companies factor loss into pricing, that's it's ok to steal. Such conclusions are accusatory, overemotional, irrational, and illogical. (It's like saying: George Bush fights terrorism. John Kerry dislikes George Bush. Therefore John Kerry supports terrorism.)

Companies have the right prosecute infringing perpetrators and choose to do so on a case-by-case basis dependent on the intent which varies and the estimated outcome (be it monetary or PR). Situations that can vary are seldom black or white. Situations that are seldom black or white often require arbitration or judicial hearings. Situations that require judicial process are done so by a court of one's peers... to which consitutes a community's established ethics.

PS: To be on the safe side, once again, I ask if I'm going to be quoted, to quote the post in its entirety.

 

[JHeebner]

SuperI is going to have to answer those specifics. However, SI's entire post indicated an entirely negative experience!

 

[Superidealist]

Why don't we just agree that those who voted "yes" in the poll are nothing but common criminals and those who voted "no" are holier-than-thou hypocrites. We can all agree on that, can't we?

Greg took the words out of my mouth.

I'd like to hear what the Pricescope vendors have to say on this.

 

[verticalhorizon]

Why don't we just agree that those who voted "yes" in the poll are nothing but common criminals and those who voted "no" are holier-than-thou hypocrites. We can all agree on that, can't we? Greg took the words out of my mouth. I'd like to hear what the Pricescope vendors have to say on this. -D Riley

I believe THAT I can agree on!

 

[mepearl53]

When you look to the past this problem with "knock off" design, which is what we are talking about, has been around forever. The original houses of Cartier, Tiffany, Winston, Webb etc. all had this problem. No one actually was able to copy these designs but tried. But, for those of you who have watched the prices that these SIGNED pieces bring today at auction and by estate dealers it is amazing. So the true designers of today will be very high in demand for their work in the future. This is not to say everybody can afford or demands this level of workmenship but with what I see people spending today it is attainable.

I have not been on this site very long but it seems most of the consumers are trying to learn about their purchases. What is really a fair price? We all know the diamonds are a sliver of what they used to be. Maybe this has lead to the consumer trying to get the designs at a sliver also and jewelers in the trade trying anything to generate a sale. Are they really serving their customer by using unethical practices? I would venture to say that one behavior begets another.

 

[noobie]

IS IT ETHICAL TO HAVE A JEWELER IDENTICALLY RECREATE A PIECE YOU LIKE BUT CAN'T AFFORD OR EASILY FIND LOCALLY?

OK Here’s my vote:

No, if it’s a unique piece

Yes, if it’s a common run of the mill piece like a four-prong cathedral or a three stone basket or other mainstream common design elements

I guess that makes me a common hypocrite

 

[verticalhorizon]

I would liken this example to what we're seeing in fancy diamonds right now.

Any cutter can produce a Princess cut diamond. The standards of quality vary and therefore the price fluctuates widely.

With the increase demand for square shape diamonds currently, cutters are patenting their specific cuts and the price then becomes more static. It would be wrong and ilegal to produce an identical Jubilee (whether or not you call it something different).

However, the Lucere is near identical to the Lucida, except for perhaps the 3 step crown instead of the 2 step crown and that's deemed as ok.

 

[Hest88]

Okay, if this makes it easier for everyone, we should deal with purely items that are trademarked. It might just be easier to link ethics with legality. If an item is trademarked, and you want to reproduce it EXACTLY, would you do it? You know my answer: nope! Even if there were no chance of getting caught, it would be unfair to copy something that someone else put so much time, creativity, and money into making and trademarking.

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 7/16/2004 12:51:12 PM Superidealist wrote:

Why don't we just agree that those who voted 'yes' in the poll are nothing but common criminals and those who voted 'no' are holier-than-thou hypocrites. We can all agree on that, can't we?

--

What about those who think there exists middle-ground on this? Who believe it's not that simple. I firmly believe that most designs have precident elsewhere. Does is make me a common criminal who is also a holier than thou hypocrite?

And, just for the record, I did not have the same experience. When I approached my jeweler, his demenor was one of - shop around - try on some rings - find what you like about it - what you didn't like about it vs what you liked in others. We looked in some setting books. He also said that I may find a setting to my liking just as is. I did. On other setting exploration adventures, my goldsmith asked to either point to something I liked he had or bring a pic of something along the lines I was thinking. And, at the same time arrange the stones to see what was pleasing. I saw nothing wrong with it. A pic is much more useful than a layman trying to describe what he/she may want. In no way, did I feel he was going to copy the design - just get a feel for what I may want style wise. An interior designer often either request pics of "rooms" that were pleasing to the client or have a book to choose from. I don't think the designer would go out and blindly purchase Federal furniture just because that's what his rooms all look like.

It's how the design process works. Not every jeweler is out to copy the work of another verbetum. I'm not blind to the fact that some do. But, it's hard to call a tiffany style 4 prong setting proprietary.

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 7/16/2004 3:38:20 PM Hest88 wrote:

Okay, if this makes it easier for everyone, we should deal with purely items that are trademarked. It might just be easier to link ethics with legality. If an item is trademarked, and you want to reproduce it EXACTLY, would you do it? You know my answer: nope! Even if there were no chance of getting caught, it would be unfair to copy something that someone else put so much time, creativity, and money into making and trademarking. ----------------

What if we aren't talking about current designs? What about Leonid's Pic of the Roman ring. I think that piece is an example of loose interpretation of "inspiration". And, that is where the slippery slope lies.

My postition is that I draw the line on exact copies of intricate & unusual designs. What's the fun of owning that?

But, why make the consumer the heavy? Seems like it's the consumer who is the evil one. I remember that thread about Tiffany sueing ebay. I don't understand why they don't go after the counterfieters. It's like punishing the person who passes one fake twenty off instead of going after the counterfieters & putting *them* out of business. Ebay is not the only venue for fake Tiffany.

I deal with some of this on a regular basis. Fakes are a problem. Reproductions just aren't the same. Not only are they usually taken out of historical context - they are usually bad. Thus, making many *desire* the original.

 

[verticalhorizon]

eBay is guilty by omission of action against sellers of counterfeit products b/c they (sellers) are deceiving the purchasers AND because eBay earns money on each transaction sold on their site. If it weren't for the last part, they might get away with a 'caveat emptor' clause.

It is up to eBay to police themselves to prevent this from ocurring and make it a safe place to shop or they'll wind up losing all their legit business.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

As a retailer and designer (we have won some 20 odd design awards at no small effort and expense) who faces this problem all the time, here is a real and recent story.

Friend of friend told me that her friend proudly showed her a Precious Metals (my Co.) designed ring she had made at a local upstairs bench firm. She had had a personal consultation in our store and taken the sketches to the other guy.

Get this:

She said "Do you like my new ring?"
"It is a Precious Metals design".

 

[Hest88]

----------------
What if we aren't talking about current designs?
----------------

Again, we go back to the trademark aspect. Look, if I copy Pride and Prejudice everyone agrees I'm well within my rights to do so because it's no longer under copywrite. If I copy the latest Stephen King there are clear laws telling me I'm not supposed to do it.

Plus, that's why I wanted to talk about "exactly." And no, I'm not talking about the quality of the manufacturing, but whether or not the consumer and jeweler are trying to copy a ring down to the last detail.

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 7/16/2004 4:56:31 PM verticalhorizon wrote:

It is up to eBay to police themselves to prevent this from ocurring and make it a safe place to shop or they'll wind up losing all their legit business. ----------------

Nope, it's not up to them. You sign on knowing this. It's the way an auction operates. I would not call any auction a safe place to shop. It's the nature of the beast.

 

[Greg]

----------------
On 7/16/2004 5:09:40 PM Garry H (Cut Nut) wrote:

As a retailer and designer (we have won some 20 odd design awards at no small effort and expense) who faces this problem all the time, here is a real and recent story.


Friend of friend told me that her friend proudly showed her a Precious Metals (my Co.) designed ring she had made at a local upstairs bench firm. She had had a personal consultation in our store and taken the sketches to the other guy.


Get this:


She said 'Do you like my new ring?'

'It is a Precious Metals design'.----------------

Garry,
In that situation, were you more peeved at the lady who took your design elsewhere or the guy who used it to make the ring? I ask because it seems like she had a more active roll in ripping off the design, but he was in a better position to know better.

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 7/16/2004 5:09:40 PM Garry H (Cut Nut) wrote:

As a retailer and designer (we have won some 20 odd design awards at no small effort and expense) who faces this problem all the time, here is a real and recent story.

Friend of friend told me that her friend proudly showed her a Precious Metals (my Co.) designed ring she had made at a local upstairs bench firm. She had had a personal consultation in our store and taken the sketches to the other guy.

Get this:

She said 'Do you like my new ring?'
'It is a Precious Metals design'.----------------

I see this in a different light. It a unique setting particular to the client & designed for this particular client. She bascially had working drawings. Did the client pay you for your design services? If not, then oh brother. Curious if the benchmen knew *who* drew up the specs. I'd flat out refuse to make the item.

Showing a picture in a book & asking for something to closely resemble it is another thing all together.

 

[verticalhorizon]

----------------
On 7/16/2004 5:15:40 PM fire&ice wrote:

----------------

On 7/16/2004 4:56:31 PM verticalhorizon wrote:


It is up to eBay to police themselves to prevent this from ocurring and make it a safe place to shop or they'll wind up losing all their legit business. ----------------

Nope, it's not up to them. You sign on knowing this. It's the way an auction operates. I would not call any auction a safe place to shop. It's the nature of the beast. ----------------

Agreed. I certain wish they would police themselves.

 

[Rank Amateur]

----------------
On 7/16/2004 5:09:40 PM Garry H (Cut Nut) wrote:

As a retailer and designer (we have won some 20 odd design awards at no small effort and expense) who faces this problem all the time, here is a real and recent story.

Friend of friend told me that her friend proudly showed her a Precious Metals (my Co.) designed ring she had made at a local upstairs bench firm. She had had a personal consultation in our store and taken the sketches to the other guy.

Get this:

She said 'Do you like my new ring?'
'It is a Precious Metals design'.----------------

Fortunately you know your designs will be ripped off and price them accordingly!

 

[noobie]

----------------
On 7/16/2004 5:09:40 PM Garry H (Cut Nut) wrote:





As a retailer and designer (we have won some 20 odd design awards at no small effort and expense) who faces this problem all the time, here is a real and recent story.

Friend of friend told me that her friend proudly showed her a Precious Metals (my Co.) designed ring she had made at a local upstairs bench firm. She had had a personal consultation in our store and taken the sketches to the other guy.

Get this:

She said 'Do you like my new ring?'
'It is a Precious Metals design'.
----------------

I'm sorry this happened to you Garry. I do not agree that this is right for a consumer to do. This falls into the no vote category for me.

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 7/16/2004 5:35:59 PM noobie wrote:

----------------
On 7/16/2004 5:09:40 PM Garry H (Cut Nut) wrote:



As a retailer and designer (we have won some 20 odd design awards at no small effort and expense) who faces this problem all the time, here is a real and recent story.

Friend of friend told me that her friend proudly showed her a Precious Metals (my Co.) designed ring she had made at a local upstairs bench firm. She had had a personal consultation in our store and taken the sketches to the other guy.

Get this:

She said 'Do you like my new ring?'
'It is a Precious Metals design'.
----------------

I'm sorry this happened to you Garry. I do not agree that this is right for a consumer to do. This falls into the no vote category for me.
----------------

To add: couldn't you put a lien on the ring? If she didn't pay you for your design, I wonder if you could take the ring. Was the design on your stationary? Isn't

I'm sure you are too busy to pursue. But, it might be worth the fun for us.

 

[pricescope]

Actually, Garry is happy about this situation because it shows that people like his designs and he's got a brand.

 

[JHeebner]

Garry, that is awful, and I am very sorry. I realize how hard designers work to achieve any sort of accomplishment. Again, this is the sort of thing that I had in mind when I posted this poll. I see more knockoffs from basic jewelry houses copying designers then I do from retail jewelers and consumers asking, though.
This year in Vegas, everybody was on the micro pave band wagon! No legal infringements that I'm aware of, just copycats and unoriginal thinkers. "Look at me, look at me, I do micro pave, too!" And sometimes you have to laugh too: A designer and creator of a certain cutesy alcohol-inspired jewelry line was steaming mad at a recent show when a guy across the aisle from had a very similar creation. The designer of the original angrily ranted to a colleague of mine: "His 'tinis have straws, but he's copying!" The image of two grown men potentially duking it out over little gemstone glasses of "spirits" is just so comical. But, very serious, nonetheless.
Your post has some truth to it, Leonid. Now Gary nows he definitely "has arrived" in some consumers' minds. Michael B., Scott Kay, watch out!

 

[noobie]

Jennifer and custom design vendors, let me just offer some views as a consumer that’s just spent the equivalent of a family car in jewelry in the past few months and will continue to make purchases in the years to come. You guys have been very helpful to me so here something back that you can either take or chose to ignore.

Please lets park any judgment of ethics for the time being and be a little practical, and by all means go after and sue the counterfeiters looking to make a quick profit from your work.I don’t blame the trade for having such an emotional stand at all.I’d be downright upset in your position as well.But let’s look at purchasing behavior and maximizing your sales and margins

Suppose we park the issue of copyright, look at straight dollars and cents and take a few cases,

Would I go get a knock off of a Mark Morrell or Leon Mege design?No. These guys do great work, have a lot of artistic input and their premiums are not outrageous.I would definitely buy the real thing.Would I knock off one of those great designs that Dave Riley posts, No. Would I go to Garry have him draw up a design and knock it off, No. Remember we’re not talking ethically here but what I would buy.

Would I go knock off a Vatche? Most probably not.These are more mainstream, and even with the fixed pricing are priced a point that getting one made at a high level of quality could cost almost as much, so why bother. Maybe that’s why I don’t see too many of them, although I could be wrong.

Where it gets harder is when a designer that can charge a premium feels that they can do so on the diamond as well.Would I pay a premium for Ritani, yes.Would I pay a premium for a Ritani diamond?Why should I?It’s not even Tiffany diamond.I have no problem paying a premium for something that deserves a premium, but why should I pay a premium for a standard round brilliant cut diamond that I can’t even really chose?Just because you chose to bundle it that way? This kind of marketing encourages people to knock off.

So what’s the message?As a retailer or designer you definitely can influence consumer behavior with your policies whether they be pricing, bundling and services (sorry I’m stating the obvious) Charge the premium where the value is, in the design, don’t try to take it where there is no extra value.

What’s this mean, probably nothing, just some insight into what makes this one consumer tick.Whether or not I’m in your target market is up for you to decide.

 

[FishFerBrains]

I'm new here and simply a diamond consumer.

I empathize with designers who have had their designs "taken elsewhere" or identically (by mold/casting) duplicated in violation of copyright/TM laws. There's also a truism that a great designer isn't alway the greatest business person if their not taking every possible step to protect themselves.

That being said, I AM comfortable telling someone I'd like a particular style of ring made for me based upon some idea from former work of art. My desire is to get the best value for something that I like, and not to misrepresent a ring, etc. is of a pedigree (TM, etc) that it's not. To say I want a "Tiffany style" setting is different than saying "can you duplicate (counterfeit) this Tiffany ring down to the TM on it".

My $0.02.
Keith

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Jennifer it is an interseting idea, and Leonid has stated my position in this case. I am not unhyappy.

All my staff and I were flattered. We work hard to provide a premium service and the fact that people see an additional value is what it is all about.

But consider the basic theme of this discussion: ripping off a design is bad. People use the itnertnet to rip off designs. Now is the Internet bad? Or are people bad?

I suggest ripping off designs is a human nature thing to do, and if people do not want it to happen to their products or services then they should take legal protection. But in our case we see that we have an inexhaustible possability to provide new designs. What becomes more important is

"How do we market ourselves?"

We regulalry find people here on this BB choosing to pay a Tiffany premium. Some people can not understand why.

Consider this hyperthetical:

The husband of my 'rip off lady' gives his wife a choice of two wrapped up gifts for her 50th birthday, both cost the same amount. One is from the jeweller who made her ring, and the other is in our beautiful presentation package. She know that the scrap value of the first one is higher, but the styling may not be so great. She knows that she may get smaller gems.
Given she describes her ring as a Precious Metals design, surely it is a no brainer which she will choose

 

[starfire]

As a retailer, I do not feel that I should penalize all my other valuable customers by pricing our designs high, just to buffer against people ripping off our designs. It just isn't fair to our regular clients.

I have even seen people making drawings of our jewelry at our shop window, and not even bother to come in. I have also seen people snapping pictures of our jewelry with their mobile phones.

Maybe some of them do it just for fun, but I am sure that at least some will rip off our designs. Interestingly, I have seen at least one staff from other well-known jewelry store from the same mall making drawings until we told him to stop.

Sometimes, we manage to stop this. Othertimes, you just can't help feeling sad that there are always those people who are too cheap to pay for good service, good quality and intellectual property. One wonders what else they will be too cheap to pay for?

We could choose to flatter ourselves, and say that imitation is the sincerest flattery. But why kid ourselves? Theft is theft. Even if you rationalize it and call it "inspiration", it is still plagiarism at best unless you credit the author/designer. Moral and ethical relativism does not change this fact.

Would you choose to teach your kids that it is not ok to steal from their friends, but well if you are hungry you could, or it is ok to steal from people they don't know? Would you teach them that moral and ethical values are all relative? If this is how you view life, and how you teach your kids, then I am sorry that your kid might end up in jail someday. (Note to Rank Amateur, this comment is directed to PS readers who endorse ripping off, and not you personally)

----------------
On 7/16/2004 5:35:26 PM Rank Amateur wrote:

----------------

Fortunately you know your designs will be ripped off and price them accordingly!

----------------

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Charlotte I do not price my designs highly because I get ripped off.
I price at what I believe is the right price to run a successful business.

That price covers providing a nice environment and somewhere comfortable to sit with drawing tools etc and access to well trained staff, gemologists and craftspeople etc.

That means we charge more that most others, but we also deliver more. Macdonalds vs ala'carte.

Will some people not be prepared to pay our price - yes!!!
How can we protect ourselves? By being better and showing it. By being there if anything goes wrong. You know the stuff I mean

And those who will not pay the premium? Well thats life - but the luxurious surroundings are our best protection to keep them away.

 

[starfire]

Garry I was address the question about the need for pricing higher to cover rip-offs. I do not agree with the need to price higher for this reason.

But I agree with you about pricing premium for premium service and quality and I do the same as well here. We price at reasonable prices, which cover the things you talk about. We also aim to deliver more than chain stores.

Hope this clarifies my point.

----------------
On 7/16/2004 11:37:02 PM Garry H (Cut Nut) wrote:

Charlotte I do not price my designs highly because I get ripped off.
I price at what I believe is the right price to run a successful business.

That price covers providing a nice environment and somewhere comfortable to sit with drawing tools etc and access to well trained staff, gemologists and craftspeople etc.

That means we charge more that most others, but we also deliver more. Macdonalds vs ala'carte.

Will some people not be prepared to pay our price - yes!!!
How can we protect ourselves? By being better and showing it. By being there if anything goes wrong. You know the stuff I mean

And those who will not pay the premium? Well thats life - but the luxurious surroundings are our best protection to keep them away.----------------

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 7/16/2004 6:38:44 PM noobie wrote:

Would I go knock off a Vatche? Most probably not.These are more mainstream, and even with the fixed pricing are priced a point that getting one made at a high level of quality could cost almost as much, so why bother. Maybe that’s why I don’t see too many of them, although I could be wrong.

quote]


I can speak from experience that the Vatche name has a very hefty premium attached to it. Vatche is a keystone item which means that the retailer should charge double what the wholesale is. That ring can be made by an award winning platinumsmith w/ the same (if not better) quality stones for what Vatche's wholesale plus 20-30%. This was a generous estimate on the "hand-crafted" setting. I bought the Vatche because, at the time, I was able to get the setting within reason of the estimate - the bird in the hand.

I relay my experience because some of these designers are retailing *their* settings at an unwarrented premium. My setting is a classic (read copy: read inspired by) basket set center stone w/ two side tapered baguettes. Nice quality - feels good on the hand - but nothing spectacular. And truley derivative. In my opinion, if these "designers" can't compete competitvely in price *or* create some really inspirational designs then I don't feel sorry for them losing sales.

This is a classic example of why a consumer would look to a craftsman to make *a* setting for them. Nice to patronize the individual artistic crafts-person.

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 7/16/2004 6:11:49 PM JHeebner wrote:

And sometimes you have to laugh too: A designer and creator of a certain cutesy alcohol-inspired jewelry line was steaming mad at a recent show when a guy across the aisle from had a very similar creation. The designer of the original angrily ranted to a colleague of mine: 'His 'tinis have straws, but he's copying!' The image of two grown men potentially duking it out over little gemstone glasses of 'spirits' is just so comical. ----------------

This is precisely my argument. This is the most ridiculous claim of piratecy. That Martini pin is a *copy* of a ton of Martini pins produced (copied) by several costume jewelry houses of the 40's & 50's. It's common. Some even have green stones for an olive.

Clear cut example of recycling. And, IMHO, not proprietary.

I'm sure those costume piece was a copy of one of the designer houses from the time. In the end, the orginial designer pieces hold the best value. Something that Bill Pearlman mentioned; and, in many cases I concur with his thoughts.