HOF settings copyrighted?

[llamadoch]

Hi everyone,

I've been reading your forums for a while now and I have to say that this has been an extremely helpful resource. Although I don't think I'm quite ready to make a commitment to a ring/rock yet, I've become a far more informed consumer due to this website, and I thank you all for it!

My question is (and I did try to do a search for this but couldn't find anything conclusive), are HOF settings copyrighted?

I've found myself in the situation where one of the rings in my top two is the HOF Vivacious/Lady Di Delight ring (as attached). Unfortunately, the original HOF ring is far too big for me in diamond diameter (it's gorgeous, but I don't feel comfortable wearing something that big in everyday life--I'm generally not much for jewelry), I don't really feel like paying the premium for HOF stones and I'd like to modify the ring to sit more comfortably with a wedding band.

I'd like to try and find an independent jeweler and ask him to reproduce a smaller version for me with the above caveats in mind, but is this something that they would be willing to do, or does the HOF legal team routinely grind into dust people who attempt this?

Thanks!

(Edit: I guess the question is less "are they copyrighted" since I realize they are, but more "is it possible to circumvent the copyright if the ring is not an exact replica, and do people do it?")

 

[JulieN]

Yes, you can. And the first thing I would do is ditch that illusion metalwork.

 

[neatfreak]

It is copyrighted, and a design needs to be changed 20% in order to "replicate" it without breaking the copyright.

 

[llamadoch]

JulieN, it looks a lot better in person than "in picture" but yeah, that's one of the things I'd like to change. I think that the only reason they have the illusion metalwork is so that they can use the same setting for both this ring and their "delight lady di" ring which looks exactly the same but with a bigger diamond in the middle (you can see it here ). I think a bigger diamond in the middle makes it look like a snowflake, so pretty.

Neatfreak, how exactly is "20%" determined when it comes to something as not readily quantifiable as a ring design?

 

[neatfreak]

Date: 12/11/2008 6:43:33 PM
Author: llamadoch
JulieN, it looks a lot better in person than ''in picture'' but yeah, that''s one of the things I''d like to change. I think that the only reason they have the illusion metalwork is so that they can use the same setting for both this ring and their ''delight lady di'' ring which looks exactly the same but with a bigger diamond in the middle (you can see it at http://www.heartsonfire.com/index.php?item=DelDLDC&type=8#/us/en-us/diamond-collection/view-details.php?item_id=3160&item_name=Delight%20Lady%20Di%20Solitaire&style_name=DelLD&type_id=1&type_name=Rings&subtype_id=1&subtype_name=Engagement%20Rings&type=1 ). I think a bigger diamond in the middle makes it look like a snowflake, so pretty.


Neatfreak, how exactly is ''20%'' determined when it comes to something as not readily quantifiable as a ring design?

I personally don''t know, but that is what all the custom ring designers/benchmen will tell you! I think it just means that you need to make a fairly significant change of some kind, somewhere so that it is identifiable by people in the know as "not the real thing". But the benchperson will tell you if it''s "enough" or not.

 

[strmrdr]

considering that basic design has been around for 100+ years if not longer I would like to see them try and sue someone over it.

 

[MichelleCarmen]

Date: 12/11/2008 6:58:13 PM
Author: strmrdr
considering that basic design has been around for 100+ years if not longer I would like to see them try and sue someone over it.

Exactly. A jeweler I found made an exact duplicate of a Tiffany pendant I liked. The chain on mine is different (guess that would be the 20% change), but had I asked him to use the exact chain, he would have. He never discussed that it was copyrighted.

 

[llamadoch]

Well that''s good news! Thanks a lot, glad to hear at least that won''t be an issue.

 

[arjunajane]

Date: 12/11/2008 6:58:13 PM
Author: strmrdr
considering that basic design has been around for 100+ years if not longer I would like to see them try and sue someone over it.

and even if they could, how would they ever know you had the ring made in the first place?

I respect copyright and a firm''s integrity and all, but it seems almost impossible to enforce, right?

 

[neatfreak]

Date: 12/11/2008 8:33:54 PM
Author: arjunajane

Date: 12/11/2008 6:58:13 PM

Author: strmrdr

considering that basic design has been around for 100+ years if not longer I would like to see them try and sue someone over it.

and even if they could, how would they ever know you had the ring made in the first place?


I respect copyright and a firm''s integrity and all, but it seems almost impossible to enforce, right?

I would think it has to do more with finding a benchperson willing to break the copyright.

 

[arjunajane]

Date: 12/11/2008 8:34:46 PM
Author: neatfreak

Date: 12/11/2008 8:33:54 PM
Author: arjunajane

Date: 12/11/2008 6:58:13 PM

Author: strmrdr

considering that basic design has been around for 100+ years if not longer I would like to see them try and sue someone over it.

and even if they could, how would they ever know you had the ring made in the first place?


I respect copyright and a firm''s integrity and all, but it seems almost impossible to enforce, right?

I would think it has to do more with finding a benchperson willing to break the copyright.

I understand, but such as MC''s example above, perhaps its not that hard..?