shape
carat
color
clarity

Another ethics question.

yssie

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
27,416
ORIGINAL POST:

I know this will likely be a controversial thread. I'm going to post anyway: I personally had a surprisingly visceral reaction to a recent discovery - misguided or not, it is what it is, and I am curious about others' takes on it, especially those of you who have gone through the custom design process with a much-trusted vendor.


I will say up front that I am in general very loyal to and protective of brands whose products I consistently like, vendors I trust and respect. This thread concerns the effort that a certain popular PS vendor put into helping me design one of my most treasured possessions. I absolutely can't take full credit for the design: my rep, the CAD folk, and I spent quite literally weeks going back and forth on the details of both iterations, and as PSers know only too well it's the details that make the piece.

To see those details apparently copied *exactly* by a different vendor - a direct competitor of my vendor, in fact, frankly irks me beyond belief. To be clear: my reaction is NOT at all anger at seeing a copy of my piece - in fact, I think that's just awesome! And to the owner of the piece in question - it is beautiful, and I am so happy you're getting enjoyment from it (I'm honestly totally flattered by that ::) ) My issue is with this vendor that apparently had no issue with making an exact copy of direct competitor's labour - not an inspired by, with some amount of change in looks, to all appearances it really is a clone, right down to the taper thickness.

I have no problem with MY vendor selling whatever iteration of the design they want. They own it, and they certainly have a right to profit from it - they were integral to its creation! I have a BIG problem with other vendors making and selling and profiting from it.


Thoughts? Where should vendor loyalty end? I am honestly surprised by how strongly I feel about this... I don't work for them, and am not in any way affiliated with them beyond purchase history. I assume, since my vendor has made it a stock piece, that such a thing can never happen again. I also assume that at the time the competitor produced it this was not the case, so legally there's no cause for my raised hackles - on anyone's behalf, misguided or not. Ethically? Well - my gut sure has an opinion, and my respect for this other vendor is currently at rock bottom.
 
Nevermind me too.
 
IndyLady|1313995792|2996334 said:
Nevermind me too.

Sorry Indy - changed my mind yet again.

To reply to your earlier reply - I was credited as inspiration, so I must assume the other vendor knew beforehand that it was a pre-existing piece, one obviously not made by them, though I suppose I could be wrong! There was no legal reason not to copy it, pre-existing piece or not, as I said - my vendor hadn't yet made it stock. Just that squirming in one's stomach, I guess. WRT design - it, like everything else in the jewellery world, is itself an inspired-by - but it's distinctive enough that my vendor did make it a stock piece without stepping on anyone else's toes. It seriously looks the SAME - the same prong thickness taper, same stone angle, same stone sizes and same configuration as the first iteration, same (unusual) metal choice as the second iteration...

Obviously I think it's absolutely beautiful ::)



I am just baffled, because - well, take Gypsy's Aurora band. It is GORGEOUS, and if I wanted one (which I was seriously considering for my mum, before I came up with something else more practical) I would have gone straight to one vendor and one vendor only: the one that made the original. Whether or not it was a stock design, I would have thought very poorly of a different vendor that was willing to copy it!
 
I would probably be irked too - and if I had to chose which vendor to but I too would go with the one who made the original.
 
I'd just register the compliment and forget about it.
I totally do not understand why women get upset over stuff like this or another woman showing up at a party with the same dress or whatever.

I'm not telling you what to think or what to do.
People vary and this is my just my gut reaction ... It's no biggie. Not even worth mentioning.
Everyone else's varied reactions are equally valid.

Now if some woman got plastic surgery to become your identical twin, surgically altered her vocal folds and sinus cavities to copy your voice, got ahold of all of your personal info, stole your wallet, moved into your house, slept with your husband, ordered your kids around and showed up at your job that would be some copying to be upset about.

This is just someone somewhere out there in the world who has paid you the ultimate compliment via by copying your lovely ring.
You will never even see the copy.
Plus by making a stink about this, now she may longer feel good about her ring.
That's kind of sad.

I have no problem with people disagreeing with me but please do not tell me my feelings are not permitted, but just in case I am donning my flame suit.
 
Thanks for your thoughts Honey.


No flaming, Kenny, I asked for opinions. I do want to clarify, as I think you've perhaps misunderstood my post: I'm not at *all* upset about there being a copy floating around - I happily assume there are many, actually! I know there is at least one more - the photos on my vendor's website are not of my piece ;)) Absolutely no same dress at the party issues.

I'm just (perhaps bizarrely?) defensive of my vendor's right to be the only company allowed to make that copy - even when it's not a legal stronghold, if that makes sense.

Again, I truly don't begrudge the other owner her piece at all. It is lovely, and I hope she has many happy years with it! This thread is not about her or her piece, it's strictly about vendor ethics.
 
kenny|1313998914|2996350 said:
I'd just register the compliment and forget about it.
I totally do not understand why women get upset over stuff like this or another woman showing up at a party with the same dress or whatever.

I'm not telling you what to think or what to do.
People vary and this is my just my gut reaction ... It's no biggie. Not even worth mentioning.
Everyone else's varied reactions are equally valid.

Now if some woman got plastic surgery to become your identical twin, surgically altered her vocal folds and sinus cavities to copy your voice, got ahold of all of your personal info, stole your wallet, moved into your house, slept with your husband, ordered your kids around and showed up at your job that would be some copying to be upset about.

This is just someone somewhere out there in the world who has paid you the ultimate compliment via by copying your lovely ring.
You will never even see the copy.
Plus by making a stink about this, now she may longer feel good about her ring.
That's kind of sad.

I have no problem with people disagreeing with me but please do not tell me my feelings are not permitted, but just in case I am donning my flame suit.
Did you read the original post? I agree with you, those are some good points, but what you're saying is quite off topic.

Yssie, I think you're right - ethically, what this vendor did was pretty low. I would understand your reaction of annoyance on "my" vendor's behalf. I mean I know especially the more classic and famous designs are copied all the time, and "inspired by" designs are all over the place...but directly copying a recent custom piece by a competitor...yeah, definitely seems unethical to me.
 
Thank you for your thoughts as well, Porridge.

I'm honestly surprised by how - protective really is the best word - I feel. Goodness knows they don't need a watchdog in me! I guess I shouldn't be surprised, though - I usually am loyal to a fault - to people, companies, projects, you name it..
 
I totally know the feeling. Have you discussed it with them at all to find out what they think? I have no idea what the laws are about copying custom designs like that, both for jewelry and everything else. I mean, for example, are people free to go on etsy, copy everything they see exactly and start selling? Or how does it work?
 
Porridge|1314001016|2996357 said:
I totally know the feeling. Have you discussed it with them at all to find out what they think? I have no idea what the laws are about copying custom designs like that, both for jewelry and everything else. I mean, for example, are people free to go on etsy, copy everything they see exactly and start selling? Or how does it work?


No - I haven't discussed anything with anyone. I'm curious too - what do people feel is normal, what is acceptable? In this example - maybe I'm just too biased, but it feels very cut and dried - the other vendor should've referred the client to the original maker, or insist on a certain amount of change like w/ actually legally copyrighted pieces, to me that's just so obviously the decent thing to do! In any case I think (hope!) it's a non-issue now, since now that it's a stock piece it has all the anti-copy rights and whatever else, right? (Clearly I am no student of law!)
 
Most people who have things copied do so because it's cheaper. That's why they don't go to the original source. I don't own a real Mona Lisa but I have a version of it in my home. There are very few things in life that are one of a kind, originals.

So, it doesn't bother me if someone copies something, it's really not that important. I bought a knock off Birkin from Hong Kong for $100 because I loved the look of the purse and the pretty pink leather. No one in my town even knows what a Birkin is, so I bought it just solely for my pleasure. I LOVED that purse and wore that sucker out.

There are too many real things to worry about .
 
Since you worked closely with the vendor, your reaction is understandable, but it's really up to him to be upset or not. You may shake your head & growl & after that, relax, forget it, & simply love your ring. If it's a problem for the vendor, he'll deal with it. Presumably he's a big boy. Possibly the less expensive (we suppose) version isn't as good quality as the original anyhow. If it is -- if the 2nd maker can deliver the same workmanship cheaper, the original guy may re-think his cost structures. Of all the unfairness in life, this strikes me as way under the radar.

You have a ring that makes your heart sing -- enjoy that. Resentment over something you can't change & have no responsiblity for will lessen your joy in it.

--- Laurie
 
I don't think there is anything ethically wrong with it unless the design is copyrighted. Most of us look at pictures or actual rings to get ideas of what we want, and let's face it, there isn't much that is truly original out there. Almost all the pieces we see on here are copies of something. We currently are seeing Leon, SK, and Victor C making the same popular designs. I don't see anything wrong with it, personally.
 
I think it really depends in the piece, and I don't know what piece you're talking about. If it's the bracelet you got recently, honestly I don't see anything wrong with another vendor making that for a customer. If it's something more intricate and unique then I could see where you're coming from. (Not that your bracelet isn't unique, it's just made of very common elements that are uniquely placed.)

I don't think it's realistic or fair to expect a vendor to turn away a client because they want something another vendor made that isn't copyrighted. At that point I think the onus is on the customer, and if they don't see anything wrong with going with a different vendor because they're cheaper or have a previous relationship with them, oh well.

Eta excuse the typos, on my phone and too lazy to try to fix them! :cheeky:
 
Hmm I'm having mixed feelings about this.

On one hand I know that I would be peeved if a competing jeweler were to pretty much rip off 'my' design and make it their own but then on the other hand the competing jeweler only made the design (down to the last detail) because it was requested by someone who had seen the ring here and the only reason that they were able to copy it down to the last detail was due to the many detailed photos that were posted.... it would still annoy the heck out of me though! :cheeky:

I'm thinking that if the original creators wanted to protect the design then it should have been made copyright before it was released and you can't really blame another company for making their own when the details of the design were so readily available, they were asked to make it and legally they are allowed to. It wouldn't be good business to turn down the opportunity to do so.
 
You know, on the one hand, I'm thinking that if one posts photos on the internet one ultimately "allows" others to copy one's design.

But I see that's only a small part of what's happening here. You don't mind the fact that R has a copy of your ring, you just mind that the vendor who made hers made an exact copy of your ring. And that irks me too.

I remember how many different versions and changes you went through before you were 100% satisfied with your ring so yes, I do get it.

R's vendor should just have referred her to your vendor. That would have been the right thing to do.
 
First I would feel honored that another PSer wanted to copy your exact ring!! (I think many of us do!!) but I do get what you are saying--- the fact that another vendor did the copying for this person and took that exact design. My only other thought though is that the PSer sought out that vendor out of preference and possibly even price and bei g that your design wasn't copyrighted with your vendor they saw no issue with making the same ring.


Ps maybe you are not referring to your ring--/ I just made that assumption.
 
I agree that referring the interested person onto the original designer would have ethically been theright thing to do, but of course,so much more plays into it.
 
Sorry, Yssie.
I didn't read with an open eyeballs, and played tapes in my head - always a mistake. :((
 
Okay now I know what we're talking about (had to wait for more hints since I'm too lazy to do research for these beat around the bush threads! :cheeky: ) and I still don't see anything wrong with vendor #2 making a relatively simple design that vendor #1 made previously. I know it's special and unique to you since you obsessed over it for hours to make it just right, and I'm not trying to discount that at all.

If it was something like say, another vendor making Gypsy's super detailed snowflake-esque necklace, then yeah, that's over the line. But a ring made up of many common elements? Nope, don't have a problem with that.

Are you positive you're not the tiniest bit annoyed someone else "copied" the ring design you worked hard on? It would only be human.
 
If I were a vendor, I would certainly feel awkward if I copied another vendor's design. But...maybe this is standard for the industry? There are a lot of copies of the Tiffany design. I feel I could not do it, but I'm not in the industry and it may just be standard for them?
 
thing2of2|1314017318|2996435 said:
I think it really depends in the piece, and I don't know what piece you're talking about. If it's the bracelet you got recently, honestly I don't see anything wrong with another vendor making that for a customer. If it's something more intricate and unique then I could see where you're coming from. (Not that your bracelet isn't unique, it's just made of very common elements that are uniquely placed.)

I don't think it's realistic or fair to expect a vendor to turn away a client because they want something another vendor made that isn't copyrighted. At that point I think the onus is on the customer, and if they don't see anything wrong with going with a different vendor because they're cheaper or have a previous relationship with them, oh well.

Eta excuse the typos, on my phone and too lazy to try to fix them! :cheeky:

The bolded part is exactly how I feel.

Maybe it's the mood I'm in, I don't feel well and had a lousy night's sleep, but I just don't think I'd be bothered by this situation. Idk, once a design is out there isn't it kind of impossible to control what happens to it? (unless it's copyrighted, so in that case I suppose legal action could be taken).
 
i see an awful lot of posts on pricescope requesting where to get a copy made of something seen elsewhere.....

if its not copyrighted and is made up of commonly used designs, well, copies happen. happens a lot in the jewelry business. sometimes, though, the copy does not have the same quality of execution as the original......
 
Amys Bling|1314024519|2996508 said:
First I would feel honored that another PSer wanted to copy your exact ring!! (I think many of us do!!) but I do get what you are saying--- the fact that another vendor did the copying for this person and took that exact design. My only other thought though is that the PSer sought out that vendor out of preference and possibly even price and bei g that your design wasn't copyrighted with your vendor they saw no issue with making the same ring.


Ps maybe you are not referring to your ring--/ I just made that assumption.

Maybe it's different in the USA, but there seems to be a misconception that you need to go through some kind of registering process to copyright a design. In fact, as soon as the design exists either as a drawn design or as an actual piece it is automatically copyright.

The issue is that suing for breach of copyright is expensive and time-consuming and so unless there is a lot at stake in terms of damages most people don't pursue it. That doesn't mean that it hasn't been unethically and a definite breach of copyright law (ie illegal) for a copy to have been made.

You can register in order to have extra protection and advantages if you do end up in litigation.

I trained as a Textile Designer and we had a lot of lectures in my final year from legal experts advising us on copyright and design infringment. I've been the victim a number of times and when it is how you put food on the table you take a very dim view of companies who are unethical in this way.
 
Yssie, you're talking about the silver etsy copy of you ering, right? If it's not, please disregard this... but i wonder if the vendor agreed since WF wouldn't work w/ silver anyway, and the customer really wanted it in silver?
 
Thanks to everyone who has opined in this thread! I'll write more detailed responses later. I just want to address a few things that came up now, with a bit more detail as I think that will clarify things:


The piece in question is my beloved engagement ring, which I made w/ WF (it was a saga, my final version on SMTB now is the second iteration and the result of the nth CAD). The copy was produced by BGD weeks (maybe a couple of months?) after WF made the second iteration of my ring, I believe. I'm not sure whether BGD made it before or after WF contacted me to make it a stock piece - I know the timing was very close, though.

Again, I have NO problem with (and am completely flattered by!) people liking my ring enough to want it for themselves! Otherwise I wouldn't have been thrilled when WF did ask me about making it a stock piece :sun:


I've managed to sum up my issue with this whole thing overnight, I think:

The ring is not by any means uncharted territory. It is, however, a unique enough design that WF was able to get the sole rights to it without inviting a lawsuit, which is an important distinction.

The fact of the matter is, though, that BGD is in SO many ways the equivalent to WF - same business model, same manufacturing style, same strata of pricing - they really are *direct* competitors. If a client asked BGD to do what they did in this case now, BGD would NOT be able to produce the ring that they did without violating all sorts of rights.

Is BGD's ethical obligation to respect a custom design by a different client and a different vendor any different now that WF has papers proclaiming their sole ownership? Especially just *weeks* after it was created (which doesn't help, from a personal standpoint!)... My take on this is a quick and easy "no". I really feel like BGD snuck it in before WF had the time to get moving on making it theirs - and that really just feels so... oily.
 
It's the same in the U.S., Pandora. Thanks for posting to clarify that.

In my mind, yes, in general for a jeweler to make an exact copy of a recent, unique design is unethical as they are piggybacking on someone else's design work. ETA: We are talking about the "Butterflies" setting at WF? If so, I do not see this piece as unique.
 
ForteKitty|1314028668|2996578 said:
Yssie, you're talking about the silver etsy copy of you ering, right? If it's not, please disregard this... but i wonder if the vendor agreed since WF wouldn't work w/ silver anyway, and the customer really wanted it in silver?

Not Yssie- but she said the exact same metal was used as her piece is.
 
There are lots of reasons we can probably think of why someone might have a strong preference to work with vendor A rather than vendor B, even if vendor B has a design that the consumer really wants. We see it all the time with people going to SK or VC over LM, and in this case it was going to BGD over WF. BGD maaaay have known the piece was going to be stock at WF, but they may not have known -- perhaps the consumer showed your threads and said make me this!

Anyways, I can understand on a purely emotional level why you feel like you do. One some level it does not seem right. But on a purely objective and practical level, I see nothing wrong with how things went down!
 
Yssie|1314030718|2996611 said:
Thanks to everyone who has opined in this thread! I'll write more detailed responses later. I just want to address a few things that came up now, with a bit more detail as I think that will clarify things:


The piece in question is my beloved engagement ring, which I made w/ WF (it was a saga, my final version on SMTB now is the second iteration and the result of the nth CAD). The copy was produced by BGD weeks (maybe a couple of months?) after WF made the second iteration of my ring, I believe. I'm not sure whether BGD made it before or after WF contacted me to make it a stock piece - I know the timing was very close, though.

Again, I have NO problem with (and am completely flattered by!) people liking my ring enough to want it for themselves! Otherwise I wouldn't have been thrilled when WF did ask me about making it a stock piece :sun:


I've managed to sum up my issue with this whole thing overnight, I think:

The ring is not by any means uncharted territory. It is, however, a unique enough design that WF was able to get the sole rights to it without inviting a lawsuit, which is an important distinction.

The fact of the matter is, though, that BGD is in SO many ways the equivalent to WF - same business model, same manufacturing style, same strata of pricing - they really are *direct* competitors. If a client asked BGD to do what they did in this case now, BGD would NOT be able to produce the ring that they did without violating all sorts of rights.

Is BGD's ethical obligation to respect a custom design by a different client and a different vendor any different now that WF has papers proclaiming their sole ownership? Especially just *weeks* after it was created (which doesn't help, from a personal standpoint!)... My take on this is a quick and easy "no". I really feel like BGD snuck it in before WF had the time to get moving on making it theirs - and that really just feels so... oily.

It was already theirs - the registration of the design just means that they will stand a better chance of winning $$$ in a settlement if they decided to sue.
 
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Top