What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing designs?

[distracts]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

I think an exact copy is wrong, but I'm not sure what amount of things needs for it to be changed to no longer be an exact copy. I also agree with Gypsy that some designs are so generic that they aren't really exclusive to anyone. But once you start getting into more unique designs - yes, I think you should make the effort to use the original designer or change elements of the item for your design.

This is something I have wondered about occasionally as I really like a particular design that I have not seen anywhere else but the jeweler does not set outside stones and does not carry stones of the quality I would want for my own piece. (To make matters somewhat more confusing, this designer is local to me, so it would be so easy for the ring to be designed for my stone! Not even any shipping! I haven't actually spoken to the designer personally but I've spoken to employees at the store.) What do I do in that case? Seems a shame for the designer to lose out on business AND for me to not get the ring.

With that said, with most of my rings, the designs are either super generic (cathedral solitaire, basic three-stone, even my engagement ring of three stone with half-moons and pave, etc) or things I legitimately couldn't find anywhere else (my trillion ring because there are barely any nice trillion settings, my recent pear spinel halo from The Gemstone Project, which was based on one of Elle's designs but changed a decent amount to suit my vision). If there is something that I like how it is or fairly close, I will usually just try to get it from that designer because I'm lazy. It seems like too much effort and risk of error to have it copied by another jeweler. I'd rather save up for longer with less risk of not ending up with what I want.

(Also, re: the ring in question... isn't this setting... not terribly expensive? I've been quoted by CVB before and her prices seemed pretty reasonable for the quality offered. Not dirt cheap but not stratospherically high either. The difference between the two rings is enough that I would have just wanted to save the extra $1k or whatever to have the original.)

 

[VRBeauty]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

Long-time lurker here. I only recently created an account, in part due to the horrible treatment of the poster who copied the antique ring and got grief for it in her own engagement thread. (And then had her thread deleted, IIRC) .

So it's disconcerting for me to see it come up again because it had left such a bad taste in my mouth.

I have been guilty of the horrible sin of accidentally copying a a custom jeweler's design. When I married, I could only afford a small gold band. Paid for it myself. Thirty years and a nasty divorce later, I decided to buy myself a wonderful diamond for my right hand. I trolled the web and found two unattributed photos of a ring I liked. There was no site attached to the photos... They were on an anonymous image hosting site (tiny pic). Had a bench make the ring for me.

Years later, I discover to my chagrin that the original is an MWM design... One he doesn't have on his site. It's not the style he's famous for so I never realized it was one of his.

So what would those of you who are stickers have me do? Throw my ring away because it was inadvertently a copy?

shaggy - please remember that many if not most posters came to the defense of the poster whose ring was based on the antique ring.

And as for your inadvertent copy, I think this is a case where ignorance is bliss!

But that does raise an interesting question. With the reverse image searches that are available today, would an ethical jeweler be compelled to do an image search to see whether he's being asked to copy a copyrighted design?

BTW I think us "sticklers" are merely thinking about the crafts people who make a living in part on the creativity of their designs. Think of it this way - would it be OK for a large company like GabrielNY to copy one of CVB's designs wholesale and market it as one of their own? In theory, they have scaled production facilities that would allow them to make that design for less than the handmade originals - heck, they might even have the copies manufactured in China. And by undercutting the original on price, they could steal business from CVB. If enough jewelers copied and undercut enough of CVB's designs, it might even make it impossible for her to continue in the jewelry business. The question is an economical one as much as it is one of "copying" or intellectual property. And as Gypsy pointed out - the question really doesn't apply to PT's using SG's antique ring as a jumping-off point for her own engagement ring.

 

[Niel]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

I always wonder if the person buying the repro is really taking money out of the pocket of the original designer.

For example. That DK setting I can bet you cost a full half the cost of that CVB ring. Now there are reasons hers are more expensive, sure, but nevertheless. If the purchaser of the copied ring couldn't get that ring copied, would she have bought the original?

Some for a designer that won't set outside stones. Take James Meyer for example. I have an antique diamond I want to set in his ring. He refuses. Then I am forced to go elsewhere when I was willing to spend the money.

I love a Leon mege ring but I've heard he's an aashole. I've seen him hold for ransom diamonds from someone I consider a dear friend. I would never ever give lm my money. If I copy his designs elsewhere am I taking the money out of his pocket?

Did he steal her design? Absolutely. I don't support it. It's just not a clear line, in my mind, to theft of intellectual property and the loss of money from the first party.

Im also wondering why she is taking such actions now, as ive asked her about direct repicas ive found on eBay and she says someone is stealing her designs. This thought is neither here nor there im hair curious what was the turning point.

 

[distracts]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

I also what portion of the blame should be assigned to the consumer rather than the jeweler making the ripoff - I know plenty of people irl who have knockoffs of more unique designer settings that they had made at their local jeweler, often for even less money than the cheapest PS-recommended vendor. If the jeweler was undertaking these copies entirely on their own and then selling them, that seems to place more of the blame on them, versus if they are making something that a customer asks them to make. It seems to me that if a jeweler refused to make anything that is a copy, and people started posting about it, there would be plenty of people up in arms that the jeweler was refusing to do the asked work. I also imagine that the consumer would just go to another jeweler and get it done by them. No, it may not be a PS jeweler, so we wouldn't hear about it, but I bet there are TONS of knockoffs of PS-darling rings that we never see or hear about.

 

[rainwood]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

This has been a fascinating question for years around here, with some old threads having been referenced or linked. I was around for that original thread and even posted, and I have a somewhat different take on the issue.

Copyright law is whatever it is, and you've infringed on a copyright or you haven't. Though I'm a lawyer, that's not the part that interests me. I'm more interested in the emotional/creative side of the question and was when this first came up so long ago. In the original thread, early on, here's part of what I wrote at the time:

I can see both sides of this issue. I understand someone admiring a ring and wanting one like it. I can also understand someone buying an antique ring (one that many people on PS have admired and said they''ve never seen one like it) being dismayed that someone copied it. Yes, posting photographs on PS make it easy for someone to copy a particular piece, but most women post their engagement rings in a cloud of excitement and don’t stop to think that they've given someone a roadmap to do so. So I understand both PT''s excitement and SG's dismay, and condemn neither.​

My comment was ignored, partly because I wasn't a regular poster and partly because the prevailing thought (before it turned into a wolf pack piling on the person who was upset) was:

- Because it's not a copyrighted design, it's legal to copy it so what's your problem?
- It's an antique ring and you didn't have any part in the design of it so you have nothing to 'protect'
- The copy is different enough that it wouldn't be infringement even if the design was copyrighted
- You posted a lot of pictures on PS which is the same as telling everyone it's okay to copy it and you're an idiot if you didn't realize that; and
- You should be flattered, not upset. What's wrong with you?

The first two really can't be argued because they are probably an accurate statement of the law. I didn't really look at the third issue because I didn't care about how much the design differed. It was the last two parts I was trying to address and find more interesting.

I think the ship has sailed on whether posting photos is the same as telling people they can copy it, and it would be naive to think people won't. I'll admit, I was surprised that so many people on PS at that time thought posting photos was carte blanche permission to copy. I never would have thought that, but that's me and it was 7 years ago, before Pinterest and Instagram and everyone sharing everything. It's different for vendors and designers, of course, where posting photos of their work doesn't change whether they have copyright protection for their designs.

When the issue came up and I posted, I'd been thinking about posting photos of my new wedding set. It was a custom design by Mark Morell, a very hot designer on PS at the time, and he and I had put a lot of thought and effort into the design. I'd gone custom because I hadn't found anything like what I pictured in my head. After reading that original thread, I decided not to post any photos of my rings. Why?

Because I didn't want anyone to copy them. I wouldn't have been flattered, I would have been upset and it doesn't bother me to admit it. I put a lot of myself into that design and those rings were very personal to me. I wouldn't have wanted someone else to copy them, the same way I wouldn't be thrilled if someone decided to dress exactly the same as me. I don't have a copyright on the clothes I wear, but the combination is personal to me. And I wouldn't be happier if they said, but I changed the scarf or I wore different shoes. I don't think that's being a dog in the manger. It's trying to preserve one's sense of uniqueness and personality in a world full of lookalikes and sameness and mass production. I think that's why the original issue came up. Like me, she didn't see it as flattery, she saw it as someone chipping away at something she thought of as special to her, and having it be a fellow PS'er made it seem like a betrayal. And like me, I doubt she knew how she felt about it until it happened. That was the part people didn't realize or appreciate in all the talk of copyright and posting photos on the internet.

Now that I know how I feel, I would never post photos of something I had custom designed for me. I'd like to because I've learned so much from PS and would love to share my joy, but I also know now that I'm handing someone a road map to copy something I went to the trouble of being custom designed to express who I am. If others would feel flattered in that situation, that's great, more power to them, but that's not the only way to feel and it wouldn't be right to dismiss those who fall into a different camp of thinking.

Just thought I'd offer a view than hasn't been expressed so far.

 

[Resonance.Of.Life]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

"What is copyright infringement?

Copyright infringement happens whenever someone makes copies or commercially exploits a work without the copyright owner's permission. The second work must actually be copied from the first work—if you just happen to create a very similar work independently, that is not infringement. The problems arise when one artist uses another artist's work as reference. To be infringing, the second artist's works need not be identical. The standard for infringement is whether the second work is “substantially similar” to the original work. (Contrary to popular belief, there is no “20 percent rule,” i.e., you cannot escape infringement by changing something by 20 percent. Infringement is not a mathematical calculation.) "

The x% of change rule is a myth.

 

[dollyanjuli]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

Wow! I went to take the baby out to lunch and came back to tons of replies. Thanks to everyone who has taken the time to express their thoughts.

I do not want to dredge up past bad feelings so to help steer this thread moving forward, I would like to focus on the idea of a person who covets a certain design but cannot afford it ( be it Harry Winston or CVB or anyone in between) asking a jeweler to reproduce the work as closely as they can. Who is wrong: the person asking? The jeweler for agreeing? Who is supposed to do the due diligence? Is it more ok because they can only afford X and it's their dream setting and they aren't trying to be nefarious in their actions? Or is it just wrong no matter what?

As I mentioned before and I think a few others have, because of Instagram and Pinterest it's not just people on Pricescope seeing something they like and then asking for something that looks the same; a few people mentioned that they found it flattering when someone ( either on PS or another avenue) said in advance that they admired their piece and wanted to make their own version. While this is great, there are a million people out there just randomly typing into Pinterest " Vintage Inspired Ring".
Maybe a CVB design pops up. This person has no idea who/ what CVB but knows they like the picture, so they go to get it made. Does their ignorance make it more acceptable?

This is such a grey area for me and that's why I am so fascinated hearing everyone's remarks, especially around copyright infringement. I am also extremely happy that this thread is Informative and not going into the territory some of those older threads did. Makes it easier for newbies and half-newbies like me to focus on the ideas at hand. I'm looking forward to hearing more perspectives

 

[lovedogs]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

Wow! I went to take the baby out to lunch and came back to tons of replies. Thanks to everyone who has taken the time to express their thoughts.

I do not want to dredge up past bad feelings so to help steer this thread moving forward, I would like to focus on the idea of a person who covets a certain design but cannot afford it ( be it Harry Winston or CVB or anyone in between) asking a jeweler to reproduce the work as closely as they can. Who is wrong: the person asking? The jeweler for agreeing? Who is supposed to do the due diligence? Is it more ok because they can only afford X and it's their dream setting and they aren't trying to be nefarious in their actions? Or is it just wrong no matter what?

As I mentioned before and I think a few others have, because of Instagram and Pinterest it's not just people on Pricescope seeing something they like and then asking for something that looks the same; a few people mentioned that they found it flattering when someone ( either on PS or another avenue) said in advance that they admired their piece and wanted to make their own version. While this is great, there are a million people out there just randomly typing into Pinterest " Vintage Inspired Ring".
Maybe a CVB design pops up. This person has no idea who/ what CVB but knows they like the picture, so they go to get it made. Does their ignorance make it more acceptable?

This is such a grey area for me and that's why I am so fascinated hearing everyone's remarks, especially around copyright infringement. I am also extremely happy that this thread is Informative and not going into the territory some of those older threads did. Makes it easier for newbies and half-newbies like me to focus on the ideas at hand. I'm looking forward to hearing more perspectives

I think I'm still inclined to stand by the idea that it's not "wrong" per say, but something that means the person asking should be aware that their setting (something being designed based on a design their jeweler didn't come up with, and may or may not be able to "replicate" with similar quality) may or may not end up living up to their expectations of the original. I tend to think that nothing can truly be copied 100%, and that the original designers will continue to have business from those who can afford high quality and want the best of the best. And I agree with Neil that I think for some people, even if the option to get a design replicated didnt exist they still wouldn't be able (or willing) to pay for the original. So it's not as though the money is being "taken" from CVB (for example) and given to someone else exactly--for some people CVB wouldn't' ever have been an option, regardless of the "copying" issue.

 

[Gypsy]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

"What is copyright infringement?

Copyright infringement happens whenever someone makes copies or commercially exploits a work without the copyright owner's permission. The second work must actually be copied from the first work—if you just happen to create a very similar work independently, that is not infringement. The problems arise when one artist uses another artist's work as reference. To be infringing, the second artist's works need not be identical. The standard for infringement is whether the second work is “substantially similar” to the original work. (Contrary to popular belief, there is no “20 percent rule,” i.e., you cannot escape infringement by changing something by 20 percent. Infringement is not a mathematical calculation.) "

The x% of change rule is a myth.

Great post! It's been years (many, many, many, many) years since I've looked into the body of law around this issue.

I am happy you corrected me!

I love this:
"There is a famous quote from Judge Learned Hand that goes "'no plagiarist can excuse the wrong by showing how much of his work he did not pirate.'"
From: https://graphicartistsguild.org/tools_resources/trademark-copyright-and-related-legalities#sthash.oNrtpyzW.dpuf


COOL.

Well that complicates things. "Substantially similar" appears to be the standard and that is a slippery one that depends largely on the viewer.

I can see the differences, in the example of the CVB setting posted, between the original and the copy. But they are substantially similar, there's no getting around that. The question becomes is the original design unique enough to be protected. I think so.

It's a hard thing. That's why, as I said it my earlier post, it's a moral issue as well as a legal one. For me, morally, I would not copy that setting. I would either go for the original or something very different.

Do I think the customer commissioning the work is to blame? Yes. Do I think the jeweler is to blame? Yes. Yssie, I have always agreed with you about certain designers who rip of other's work. I have, unfortunately, started to recommend one of these jewelers myself (our of desperation for a lower cost custom bench), BUT only in instances where the design being commissioned isn't a copy. Is it a fine line? Anorexic. I cede that. And it DOES prick my conscience. And it is also the reason I personally do not use that jeweler. I feel that the outright rip offs are morally wrong. And I HAVE found an alternative (IDJ) and will be recommending them more in the future.

In the Leon example... I personally feel very few of Leon's actual DESIGNS are unique. Most of them (like the three stone example) are public domain and (as someone pointed out) the execution is what sets them apart. That's why Steven Kirsch has a successful business and hasn't been shut down. As his work is 'substantially similar' to Leons (and I've seen their work side by side).


Rainwood, I understand and appreciate your post, and I am sorry you can't share your ring on here, truly. I do think (as Pinterest will attest) that if you post something on the net these days you better be prepared to be copied. Now, do I think it's right? No, definitely not. But right or wrong, it is reality. So I think it's a matter of common sense. If you don't want something copied don't post it because you can't control what others do. And you can't (realistically) enforce your rights (or MWM's rights).


Dolly, I am glad you posted this thread. And like you, I am THRILLED, it has not devolved into a 'wolf pack'.

 

[rainwood]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

I always wonder if the person buying the repro is really taking money out of the pocket of the original designer.

For example. That DK setting I can bet you cost a full half the cost of that CVB ring. Now there are reasons hers are more expensive, sure, but nevertheless. If the purchaser of the copied ring couldn't get that ring copied, would she have bought the original?

Some for a designer that won't set outside stones. Take James Meyer for example. I have an antique diamond I want to set in his ring. He refuses. Then I am forced to go elsewhere when I was willing to spend the money.

I love a Leon mege ring but I've heard he's an aashole. I've seen him hold for ransom diamonds from someone I consider a dear friend. I would never ever give lm my money. If I copy his designs elsewhere am I taking the money out of his pocket?

Did he steal her design? Absolutely. I don't support it. It's just not a clear line, in my mind, to theft of intellectual property and the loss of money from the first party.

Im also wondering why she is taking such actions now, as ive asked her about direct repicas ive found on eBay and she says someone is stealing her designs. This thought is neither here nor there im hair curious what was the turning point.

I don't think that losing the sale of the customer wanting the repro is the harm they're trying to protect against. The harm is that if you see a bunch of lower-cost copies around, the original loses its exclusivity and brand appeal which leads to a loss of future customers who could have afforded to pay the higher price of the original. For example, the Hermes Birkin bag is popular partly because it's so expensive and somewhat hard to get. If cheap knockoffs flood the market and are bought by people who never could have afforded an original Birkin, the bag loses its specialness and cachet for the people who could afford to buy one and now choose not to because they see it everywhere. I believe that's the argument the original creators are making, not that thy would have gotten the sale from the customer who wants the knockoff.

 

[Gypsy]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

Long-time lurker here. I only recently created an account, in part due to the horrible treatment of the poster who copied the antique ring and got grief for it in her own engagement thread. (And then had her thread deleted, IIRC) .

So it's disconcerting for me to see it come up again because it had left such a bad taste in my mouth.

I have been guilty of the horrible sin of accidentally copying a a custom jeweler's design. When I married, I could only afford a small gold band. Paid for it myself. Thirty years and a nasty divorce later, I decided to buy myself a wonderful diamond for my right hand. I trolled the web and found two unattributed photos of a ring I liked. There was no site attached to the photos... They were on an anonymous image hosting site (tiny pic). Had a bench make the ring for me.

Years later, I discover to my chagrin that the original is an MWM design... One he doesn't have on his site. It's not the style he's famous for so I never realized it was one of his.

So what would those of you who are stickers have me do? Throw my ring away because it was inadvertently a copy?

Shaggy, I wanted first to thank you so much for signing on and posting so much. I have noticed your thoughtful posts on RT and am so happy you are helping out on there. Please continue to do so and I, personally, really value your contribution.

Regarding the MWM, in your case it doesn't to me sound like you intentionally ripped off a design of his. I don't even know HOW to do a reverse image search (someone teach me please). And your motives, to me, matter. So enjoy your ring. And please, post it here. I'd love it see it.

 

[rainwood]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

Wow! I went to take the baby out to lunch and came back to tons of replies. Thanks to everyone who has taken the time to express their thoughts.

I do not want to dredge up past bad feelings so to help steer this thread moving forward, I would like to focus on the idea of a person who covets a certain design but cannot afford it ( be it Harry Winston or CVB or anyone in between) asking a jeweler to reproduce the work as closely as they can. Who is wrong: the person asking? The jeweler for agreeing? Who is supposed to do the due diligence? Is it more ok because they can only afford X and it's their dream setting and they aren't trying to be nefarious in their actions? Or is it just wrong no matter what?

As I mentioned before and I think a few others have, because of Instagram and Pinterest it's not just people on Pricescope seeing something they like and then asking for something that looks the same; a few people mentioned that they found it flattering when someone ( either on PS or another avenue) said in advance that they admired their piece and wanted to make their own version. While this is great, there are a million people out there just randomly typing into Pinterest " Vintage Inspired Ring".
Maybe a CVB design pops up. This person has no idea who/ what CVB but knows they like the picture, so they go to get it made. Does their ignorance make it more acceptable?

This is such a grey area for me and that's why I am so fascinated hearing everyone's remarks, especially around copyright infringement. I am also extremely happy that this thread is Informative and not going into the territory some of those older threads did. Makes it easier for newbies and half-newbies like me to focus on the ideas at hand. I'm looking forward to hearing more perspectives

Much of what you're asking is legal, and I'll leave that to a copyright expert. Based on what I've read on PS about people's experiences, most reputable bench jewelers are uncomfortable copying someone's else work exactly. How close to a copy of someone else's work they're willing to go is where it starts to get murky.

And I can guarantee that if you were otherwise guilty of copyright infringement, demonstrating that you or your customers couldn't afford to buy the original would not be an adequate legal defense. If that were true, all those fake LV bags sold on Canal Street would be legal. I don't know if knowingly buying a knockoff of a copyrighted design is illegal. Selling one is. I don't know if knowingly commissioning someone to make a knockoff of a copyrighted item (like certain jewelry pieces) is illegal but my guess is that it is. Someone who actually knows the answers should feel free to weigh in.

 

[shaggy1]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

Shaggy, I wanted first to thank you so much for signing on and posting so much. I have noticed your thoughtful posts on RT and am so happy you are helping out on there. Please continue to do so and I, personally, really value your contribution.

Regarding the MWM, in your case it doesn't to me sound like you intentionally ripped off a design of his. I don't even know HOW to do a reverse image search (someone teach me please). And your motives, to me, matter. So enjoy your ring.

Thanks, Gypsy. Coming from a poster like you, whose contributions I've valued over the years, I'm flattered.

I actually DID try to reverse lookup the images I'd found, and I could never find a match.

Had I known, I would have asked MWM if he'd make it for me.

 

[yssie]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

lovedogs
I don't consider your ring, or another poster C[...]'s (which IDJ made) to be intentional copies of mine in any way. I don't imagine anyone else does either! Because it's a fundamentally simple design, and so the differences are going to be in the nuances, in the choices for fabrication, in the execution, etc. Heck, even VC and DBL made "substantially different" versions for me from the exact same sketch!

There's also the fact that... Well, intent matters to me, a lot!! I blew up when I saw HeWhoCopies' remake of my ring - largely because HeWhoCopies is a repeat offender who is notorious for copying other vendors' custom work as closely as possible. I recall you had several CAD iterations wherein the shape and gallery changed substantially, and the interleaving ended up looking like mine. And I recall C[...] had several requests of her own for IDJ when she had her fivestone made. That is to say - in both cases the vendors' intent was never to make as close a copy as possible, and the customers' intent was never to solicit a clone.


Several years ago I asked WF to make earrings for me with a specific weaving prong design. They refused, stating that the design was too close to one of Vatche's for them to be comfortable making, and offered to have Vatche quote the project. Since that would take far longer and be exponentially more pricey than what I could spend I decided to go with a different design - and WF did a lovely job.

That experience is why I do NOT feel consumers should be held responsible for navigating the legality or morality of copying/copyright concerns... Sometimes the most well-meaning consumer won't realise that her vision is just too similar to her inspiration! It's the vendor's responsibility IMO, as an ethical professional, to set and uphold certain standards for what is and is not "too close to the original".


Gypsy I hear you.
I've been sending people to Grace and IDJ - I'm very hopeful those vendors' benches will continue improving and that we'll see the bulk of HeWhoCopies' PS consumer base redirected to them and possibly others in the months to come!

 

[yssie]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

Shaggy
I hope you're still reading this thread!

Intent matters. Add me as another who believes this wholeheartedly. You did your best to find the original with the resources you knew about - that matters! And honestly, in any case, I truly DON'T believe that it's any of your responsibility, as the customer, unless you ignored or actively avoided seeking info you knew to be available (which you obviously didn't). IMO Responsibility for these sorts of considerations ultimately lies with the vendor, not the consumer.

So please enjoy your ring!!

I don't think that losing the sale of the customer wanting the repro is the harm they're trying to protect against. The harm is that if you see a bunch of lower-cost copies around, the original loses its exclusivity and brand appeal which leads to a loss of future customers who could have afforded to pay the higher price of the original. For example, the Hermes Birkin bag is popular partly because it's so expensive and somewhat hard to get. If cheap knockoffs flood the market and are bought by people who never could have afforded an original Birkin, the bag loses its specialness and cachet for the people who could afford to buy one and now choose not to because they see it everywhere. I believe that's the argument the original creators are making, not that thy would have gotten the sale from the customer who wants the knockoff.

This, exactly.

I'll add another reason these copies are so damaging when the victim is a smaller operation that is not (yet) well-known to a mass audience - people who see the copies might not even *know* that the copy is not the original!!

The creator, who has invested time, effort, and money into his design, loses both monetary profit and reputation as a talented designer. Reputation - the thing many artists hold nearest and dearest, the thing that can catapult an artist to fame...

 

[Gypsy]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

Shaggy, I wanted first to thank you so much for signing on and posting so much. I have noticed your thoughtful posts on RT and am so happy you are helping out on there. Please continue to do so and I, personally, really value your contribution.

Regarding the MWM, in your case it doesn't to me sound like you intentionally ripped off a design of his. I don't even know HOW to do a reverse image search (someone teach me please). And your motives, to me, matter. So enjoy your ring.

Thanks, Gypsy. Coming from a poster like you, whose contributions I've values over the years, I'm flattered.

I actually DID try to reverse lookup the images I'd found, and I could never find a match.

Had I known, I would have asked MWM if he'd make it for me.

Exactly! Intent matters. For me there is no moral issue.



I am flattered as well. I really have enjoyed your posts. Please keep posting!

 

[MollyMalone]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

* * * And I can guarantee that if you were otherwise guilty of copyright infringement, demonstrating that you or your customers couldn't afford to buy the original would not be an adequate legal defense. If that were true, all those fake LV bags sold on Canal Street would be legal. I don't know if knowingly buying a knockoff of a copyrighted design is illegal. Selling one is. I don't know if knowingly commissioning someone to make a knockoff of a copyrighted item (like certain jewelry pieces) is illegal but my guess is that it is. Someone who actually knows the answers should feel free to weigh in.

General fyi: Handbag designs actually do not enjoy any copyright protection; through the years, there have been bills introduced that would expand copyright protection to such "useful articles", but none has gotten through Congress. Good, not inordinately long, explanation here (albeit outdated, doesn't include discussion of most recent Congressional proposals):
http://copyright.gov/docs/regstat072706.html

What is subject to both civil litigation and criminal prosecution is the manufacture, distribution, and sale of items bearing counterfeit trademarks, like those fake LV-emblazoned bags peddled in NYC's Chinatown, e.g., New York Penal Law §§ 165.70 et seq:
http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article165.htm#p165.70
JFK Airport & the NYC area shipping ports are frequent sites of seizures of crates of knock-off designer handbags, watches, and the like; the NYPD, the local FBI & Homeland Security offices, and a couple of the DA's Offices in NYC have special units devoted to ferreting out & prosecuting these crimes. It is not a crime, in NY, to buy such bogus merchandise (unless you're a dealer), although a couple of New York City Council members have tried (without success to date) to make the purchase by even tourists a local crime.

Nor is it a crime under Federal law for a consumer to purchase an item that represents an infringement of someone else's copyright; it's basically substantial, for-profit trafficking in infringing items/works that can give rise to criminal prosecution under Federal law for copyright offenses. For anyone who's hankering to "wade into the weeds" of such Federal crimes, here's a copy of the U.S. Department of Justice's 2013 handbook for US Attorney's Offices on Prosecuting Intellectual Property Crimes:
https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/criminal-ccips/legacy/2015/03/26/prosecuting_ip_crimes_manual_2013.pdf

 

[Marquise_Madness]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

I had a ring made from a photo. It was a vintage design but the engraving was different and I had the pave changed.

Inspiration

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rainwood]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

Thanks, MollyMalone! I knew someone would know more about it than I did!

 

[arkieb1]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

I think there should be more of a balance, I mean, he who shall not be named, has knocked off more P/S rings over the years than I can count, all he has to do is say to the customer when they give him a photo I am going to change this a little bit. Victor does that, I've given him three photos of three different things, asked him to look at them and then make his own interpretation of it, that is what he does, he refuses to intentionally copy anything because the thing is he is a vendor that has integrity.

I see both sides of the argument, no, not everyone can afford to get a $4000 to $6500 setting made by one of these guys, and yeah putting a $200 topaz into something that costs thousands when you can get he who shall not be named to rip off a ring that costs many thousands for a fraction of the original price is tempting, even for me. But having been on the receiving end of having a ring made by Victor copied, (and no, we are not talking about a common Tiffany ring or a halo that has been repeated a zillion times) I can honestly say since it was an exact copy, it was offensive mainly to Victor and to me, if the jeweller in question (not the person who asked for the exact copy of my ring) said I can make that but I am going to change it just a little so it's not a copyright infringement then the bottom line is it would sit a lot better with everyone.

So I guess my version of this would be if it's a age old piece that is a common setting like a basic halo or Tiffany replica you can't help have copies, if it's something fairly unique that has been made by someone then if the jeweller in question has any integrity when they get given a photo and asked to copy it, they look at it, recognise it's something unique or they ask where it came from, identify it as being unique and then offer to make the ring changing enough of it so that it then becomes their own design.

 

[Gypsy]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

Great post Molly.

MM, yours is, to me, a classic, perfectly executed "inspired by" there is no pave on the shank, and while I can see elements of the original, to me it is it's own thing. Lookingagain has a different version of the same ring as well, hers is a much closer copy.

The ring, I believe is a vintage piece. It's not available for sale anymore at Tiffany. Like Rainwood, I am not a copyright expert. But I feel that many vintage designs (not being created anymore) probably are pubic domain (due to age) or in the case of inspired by settings like yours ... fall under 'fair use." I could be wrong. And please, anyone with subject matter expertise, correct me if I am wrong.

And maybe it is because it IS Tiffany, but the copying of this one doesn't bother me.

I do know that when I was looking into halos I specifically didn't chose distinctive designs like the Legacy, or the inspired bys. I wanted the ring to be unique to me and I didn't want someone looking at my ring and thinking "replica." It was important to me. And generally, that's how I feel about most of my personal jewelry. I like it to be uniquely designed for me.

Again not an expert. But I want to clarity one of my statements above regarding fair use. I mentioned the fact that since the ring is a vintage piece and no longer a design that is sold or produced by Tiffany made using it as an inspiration for a new ring more morally okay for me. Why is that? Well, one of the factors of "fair use" is: "(4) Whether the new use affects the potential market for the original work." - See more at: https://graphicartistsguild.org/tools_resources/fair-use-or-infringement#sthash.UwOoS8rI.dpuf"""" There is no market, except a secondary market for resale, for the original item. Tiffany is not losing anything, any sale, from you are Lookingagain's use of the design. That for me is a big factor.

 

[mrs-b]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

This comment isn't necessarily germane to the conversation about intent but just to add....

The thing that annoys me the MOST about jewelers copying designs is not one jeweler copying another. I work in an area that demands copyright for intellectual property and I know that one simply has to take a lot of it on the chin.

However, what bugs me the most is when I go to some effort to design a piece of jewelry (and I DO go to effort), I tell the jeweler what I want - down to the 1/10th of a mm - and when it's done, it's on their site as 'their design'. Bull shit. It's MY design. Do I want to take someone to court? 'Course not. Do I want it never to be copied? I'm not so naive. But it sure would be nice if JUST ONCE a jeweler said "this is Mrs_Blop's design, which we executed for her." At that point, if it's copied, I don't care. If I DID care so much, I'd go down the copyright path. Since I haven't, though, then good luck to anyone else who copies what comes out of my head.

The only jeweler who has EVER done anything like that - acknowledged that my design was my design and not a complete stroke of his or her own genius - is David Klass. I've spoken to DK Jewelry at length on this issue, and their position is that it's all opinion until it comes to the letter of the law - to which they adhere. As someone who, as I said, works in a field where intellectual property is a HUGE issue - I agree with this utterly and know that it's the most one in the design business can hope for. The law is the law for a reason. And yes, my designs are my livelihood.

And - this will be a super unpopular comment, but...

If someone's originality can be copied exactly on the basis of a few photos, one has to ask how unique the design really is. I'm sorry - but - seriously, ever seen someone try to copy a Rembrandt? I've stood in galleries around the world and watched people try to reproduce the works of the masters when the original was right in front of them - and not ONCE would one of these copies have been confused with what was on the wall. The real problem is not in someone trying to reproduce it. It's in someone reproducing it and saying it belongs to the original designer. ALL art is derivative. Anyone who works in the creative sphere knows this. The offense, in my opinion, is not someone copying my work; it's in making a knock off and saying it's MY work.

I always think it's way easy to hammer on down on a small company, and I read the comments on this thread that said how Tiffany designs can be copied because they've been around so long in the public domain. But what about the Tiffany Soleste? Not around for nearly as long, yet people are copying it hand over fist. So it begs the question - is it ok when it happens to a large company but not a small? And if so - why? And does anyone - without looking - actually know if the Soleste is trademarked? Do people bother to look?

You can also get caught up in the art vs design aspect of the argument - as well as mechanics vs intellect / knowledge / education / experience. For example - if I build a table and you copy it, is that better or worse than if I design a new type of table based on years of experience and an education in engineering and quantum physics - and you bypass all of that to steal my design? Some of the argument is, surely, based on the complexity of the design. Paris Hilton once tried to trademark the words "that's hot". The judge on the case threw it out of court. But what if she'd written the Encyclopedia Britannica - a huge volume of work - yet based on all public knowledge? Or more than that - what if she'd written To Kill A Mockingbird - something she'd created completely from her own imagination? Should she be able to copyright that? (and the imagination really does boggle at the idea of Paris Hilton creating something that came solely out of her own head...) And - what about the person who discovered something completely unique, yet which was based on natural law - like...gravity...or fire? Or how about the wheel?

My point is, there's levels of difference, and design is design and art is art for a reason - despite it being almost impossible to differentiate where one meets the other. And there's almost no end to the argument, either, and personal response cannot be used as a guideline - because some people will be flattered, and some offended and some totally inflamed.

But...as a simple idea...I wonder if the 'offended party' has ever CALLED the 'offending party' (and I use those terms tongue in cheek) to discuss the matter? Sometimes we go straight to 'lawsuit' when 'phone call' would suffice.

This is a huge issue and an ongoing one, with countless personal opinions. Which is why I think the definitive guideline should be the law, not everyone's individual opinion. And this is speaking as someone who has seen her own work ripped off dozens of times, and simply made the decision to be ok about it.

Life's too short.

 

[arkieb1]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

Actually Vodermort (my new tongue in cheek name for he who shall not be named) has copied quite a few Robinson designs and a few other high end rings I could name, so if we are comparing it to a Rembrandt in the jewellery world I guess that comes pretty close.

The irony is not lost on me Mrs-Blop that you are against people/jewellers and websites ripping off our photos or more specifically would be totally against someone using a photo of one of your rings or unique pieces of jewellery on their site without your permission and yet you idolise one of the said legends of copying jewellery from here of all time. And yes I recommend him to people on a budget all the time, no I don't hate him at all..... I just wish he would change the designs a little bit so that it's not a direct copy. Most of the vendors that actually have a bit of integrity do at least attempt to make small changes, so, specifically when it's a unique design, why shouldn't it be something jewellers all think about, just to make it fair for everyone.

 

[mrs-b]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

Arkie -

I just don't think a ring which can be made in a week or less can be compared to a Sistine Chapel - or any great work of creativity. At the risk of offending someone, I think rings largely fall into the category of mechanical - there's only so much deviation which can be achieved. Yes, they can all be different - but their scope is so much smaller than what I consider to be art. So yes, someone might be the Rembrandt of jewelry but...hey...it's jewelry. There ARE certain pieces of jewelry I consider to be art and which reflect movements in culture and history. None of the people on Pricescope own any of them.

"Idolize"? A strange and inaccurate comment. I just know the man to be moral and kind. But if that equals idolization in anyone's mind - so be it.

Ditto the comment about being "totally against someone using a photo of" one of my pieces on their site. I don't care much about photos, to be honest - probably because I'm a totally crap photographer, so it's not an issue that affects me. What I don't like is someone not acknowledging my input in my own design - not because they don't say it's my design (I mean, if they say nothing one way or the other - who cares?) - but because they specifically say it's theirs. There's a big difference. And for what it's worth, I know of at least 2 pieces I designed currently being sold as stock pieces by jewelers recommended on this site. And it ain't burning me up.

And to say it again - if people have a problem with the way anyone does business, they need to make a call. Not bitch about it interminably online to every customer that comes their way. (Hyperbolic - yep, I acknowledge...)

 

[arkieb1]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

I did talk to the person involved about it. And I recommend said vendor all the time to people on a budget. Like I have stated many times I think ripping off high end jewellers designs when people fork out thousands for them, when those (and lets face it there is more than one) that do it could in theory just change it a little isn't asking too much, that's all I am saying.

I know there are people that won't post photos of their stuff on here any more specifically because of this, and that, to me, is really a sad thing.

 

[ericad]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

He began copying JbEG designs years and years ago, so I've been enduring this from him for a long time. Back in the day, Grace and I did go through the exercise and expense of copyrighting our unique designs and sent him multiple C&D letters, which were all ignored. We opted, like most jewelers would, not to pursue it further because we were small jewelers without the budget for an expensive lawsuit.

Now here we are nearly a decade later, and I wonder how many tens of thousands of dollars his replicas have cost me, and other designers, in lost business. Scrolling through his IG pics I see dozens of settings which are knock offs of someone - Erika Winters, CvB, James Meyer, etc. Are they GOOD copies? Sometimes they have enough differences that you can see what inspired it, but it's not the same design. Sometimes they are close enough that only myself, the original designers, and perhaps some PSers with a discerning eye, could tell the difference. It's a mix of both.

Just the other day a potential customer asked Caysie if he makes her settings because she sees him posting so many of her designs. THIS is a problem, AND NO HE MOST CERTAINLY DOES NOT do any iota of production for either of us. But do people now think that he does? Do people think "I'll just go to this guy and get the same setting for 30% less" because they speculate that he's doing her production? Scrolling through his feed, I don't blame this buyer for thinking that he and CvB are somehow professionally connected.

For the most part jewelers have a mutual respect and professional courtesy when it comes to this sort of thing. And a one off B&M jeweler who creates a copy for someone is not the same as a large scale LA jeweler who is competing for the same online business as that of the jewelers he's ripping off. The argument of "well you're not losing the business of the people who can't afford the original in the first place" holds no water for me because many of the designs he copies are not prohibitively expensive. He will just undercut anyone's price in order to close the sale. And even if the original is prohibitively expensive for the buyer - that is not an excuse to steal. In that case, the jeweler should offer to create a less expensive "inspired by" piece, with material changes to the design, but with enough similarity to give the buyer a choice - similar but not the same, or save up for the original designer piece. I can only imagine how many people walk into his shop and buy from him thinking that these are HIS designs. How is this ok?

Am I flattered that people love my designs enough to want to copy them? Sure. But I'd be even more flattered by getting orders from these buyers. Do I care that he is reported to be a "nice guy"? No, I sure don't. What he is doing is wrong, and it's a problem that is unique to him - I can't think of any other jeweler who is knocking off designer works with the same volume and eagerness. It's sad too, that this is what he will be known for - they guy who will make anything, even if it's unethical. When my clients walk into his shop to see print outs of MY photos of MY designs out on his desk in preparation to be copied, his intent is very clear. I'm told that he laughs openly with people about all the C&D letters he receives - it's a big joke. Perhaps if he realized that people are NOT ok with this behavior, he would stop. Perhaps people need to let him know that what he's doing will eventually hurt his bottom line, rather than help it. Until then he's just going to laugh all the way to the bank.

 

[dollyanjuli]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

Thanks Mrs. Blop and Arkie for providing two different but valid perspectives.

Erica, your work is beautiful and I love your designs, along with CVB, Erika W, etc. I do again want to steer this thread slightly away from discussing one *specific* jeweler (even though that incident is what inspired this topic) as I know when we start talking about any one jeweler in particular, that is what causes threads to become derailed. Given the interesting comments and viewpoints being shared I really want to keep this conversation going and not becoming about one person, but the broader issue at hand.

That said, I think what you said specifically about "internet vendors" is extremely interesting Erica and goes back to a common theme that I think is making this issue worse, which is again the sharing of images online and how social media is not just for sharing pictures but also truly a business tool. Taking the specific person who were you speaking of out of the equation, let's say that you as a vendor who relies a lot on word of mouth, social media, and sites like pricescope to get the word out about your designs- how do you feel when someone who sees you work on say a Pinterest goes to their family jeweler and says "hey! i saw this picture online and I love this design, could you make it for me?" Is that less upsetting? Is there a better way to protect your business as an online vendor, i.e watermarking ALL your images across so that if someone sees it for inspiration they know who the original designer is to look up? Of course this won't stop those that want to just save a few hundred dollars, but if they take it to a jeweler who sees "Copyright Erica D" all over the image maybe it will give them pause?

The other thing I have started seeing more and more from smaller jewelers to help protect the very thing you were talking about (having someone create an inferior copy to save $) is the "good better best" model. I was recently looking at a ring setting and the designer had 5 different prices for the same setting, not just based on center stone but based on gold content, mixing white sapphires in with the diamonds, using standard size stones in addition to "custom" etc. I think this is something a lot of designers may actually offer to someone who reaches out but seeing it spelled out on the website to me made me stop and think "wow! i thought they were out of budget but maybe they can figure something out for me"

 

[dollyanjuli]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

I did talk to the person involved about it. And I recommend said vendor all the time to people on a budget. Like I have stated many times I think ripping off high end jewellers designs when people fork out thousands for them, when those (and lets face it there is more than one) that do it could in theory just change it a little isn't asking too much, that's all I am saying.

I know there are people that won't post photos of their stuff on here any more specifically because of this, and that, to me, is really a sad thing.

This sucks, the whole reason I joined PS was to look at the beautiful unique pieces!

 

[ericad]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

Regarding the question of a single one time local jeweler creating a setting based on my design, yes this is far less upsetting to me, and here's why: this jeweler will create something using the underlying vendors (s)he has at her disposal. The end result is sure to look materially different than the original, simply based on aesthetic, skill set, local resources, etc. And this replica setting is unlikely to be advertised across social media, marketing it to the very same customers who follow and admire my own brand.

To me, while it's still not ok, there is not a tangible harm being done to me that impacts my business. This is very different to me than a jeweler who markets in the same circles as the designers he is copying on a fairly large volume. To me the intent is the key - when one's intent is to simply make a pretty setting for a one time client based on pics of a design you may not even recognize as being branded (which a local B&M jeweler likely would not), that's very different than having the intent of producing a volume of cheap replicas of other designer's work as one's business model, and proudly showing them off as such (or even worse, representing them as your own designs). In the latter case, the intent is to take business away from these designers by agreeing to knowingly copy their work.

Watermarking pics is a great idea, and Grace and I did that for years. It didn't help because water marks can be cropped off, unless you put a water mark across the entire ring, which will then completely ruin the photo, and pics like that can't be used on the website anyway, so there will still always be access to some pics without watermarks. There's no way around it. You can right-click protect pics, but people can still just take a screen shot. And then you have clients who post their own pics on social media and forums, which also won't have any kind of protection, and I'd never want happy clients to feel they can't post their pics.

 

[OreoRosies86]

Re: What constitutes an inspired by piece vs. stealing desig

I always find myself conflicted on this issue.

Sure designers should be able to copyright their designs. That's their livelihood. It's no guarantee however that someone can't bring a picture to their jeweler and say "I want this, but I don't want to pay $8,000 for a setting" and have a $2500 replica made. If it's not on the Internet, did it even happen

The exclusivity factor always strikes me as strange. "I paid $6,000 for a custom one of a kind platinum setting, how dare you recreate it in 14k gold!" Eh. At some point it's like get over yourself. Are you running in the same social circles? Was a person with a $1500 budget for a setting going to Leon Mege or Victor Canera or Steven Kirsch? Chances are no, and that doesn't mean they aren't deserving of beauty on a budget.