What do you consider a material change to a design, to make it unique enough that it's no longer a copy?

[AllAboardTheBlingTrain]

Just an academic discussion

I've seen - I've also started discussions - on "inspired by" vs "reproduction" designs, but I don't think there's ever been any real discussion on what constitutes a material change (or if it has, it predates my time on PS and I wasn't able to find it with a search!)

Does just changing the metal colour (e.g. taking a design made in WG and getting it in YG instead) count as a material change?

Changing the colour of the stone? E.g. getting a ring with a sapphire centre copied exactly, but replacing the sapphire with an emerald?

Changing the size of the stone/stones? E.g. - true story, my mom has a piece of jewelry that has multiple shapes of diamonds in it, made by one jeweler, and she saw it for sale at another jeweler's, exactly the same except that the sizes of the stones were different (some bigger, some smaller, compared to hers). She always thinks of it as the second jeweler ripping off the first, but I don't agree with her because imo if the sizes are different, the piece looks different. And tbh they could've independently come up with the same design.

Or do you think you need to change multiple elements?

What about for something relatively "generic" or simple, like an eternity band? Is that so generic that even an exact "copy" is permissible, because it's so simple no one jeweler can own the design?

Would love to hear your thoughts!

 

[marymm]

I approach my custom/semi-custom jewelry projects differently -- my norm is to:

1. find an antique piece created before 1923 (in which case any copyright protection would have lapsed by now) -- OR

2. find 2-4 inspo pieces and pull different elements from each of them (i.e., basket from one, shank or shoulders from another, prongs or metal/finish or carving from another) -- OR

3. find a current design that is produced very similarly by several reputable jewelers/vendors/Stuller, in which case I feel fine making my own similar version.

 

[Rfisher]

If you are talking about non antique, non out of production, contemporary designs-

I don’t think there’s a magic percentage number that all/most shall agree upon, and past many years of history threads here of hurt feelings and disagreements show there’s much more facets of the whole phenomenon to it than just being a percentage ‘enough’ changed of the design.

 

[Ionysis]

People seem to have very different opinions on this. For some even having a different number of stones on the piece still counts as “the same”. For others even a change in angle of the setting is enough. Personally I think no bench is able to make an exact copy of another bench’s work and every design has been made a hundred times over a hundred years. So unless you’re trying to pass something off as exactly the same (ie stamping it with a brand logo) it’s fine.

 

[MamaBee]

I had a huge boo boo happen to me. I saw a ring on Lang’s website that was sold. I thought it was an antique. I had it made but changed a round diamond to a small princess cut in the center. I was all about princess cuts at the time. There were other minute changes but I can see now that it would be instantly recognizable. I only found out later that it wasn’t an antique. It was out of production because the place had stopped producing for a while. Anyway…I would never show it on here. It was pricey to make..and very pretty. I just feel bad about the whole thing. When I did my 18k yellow gold reset for my cushion..I made sure the design was definitely from an antique. I actually saved the photo so if anyone said it was someone’s design I could prove it. That’s how paranoid I became about it.

 

[AllAboardTheBlingTrain]

I approach my custom/semi-custom jewelry projects differently -- my norm is to:

1. find an antique piece created before 1923 (in which case any copyright protection would have lapsed by now) -- OR

2. find 2-4 inspo pieces and pull different elements from each of them (i.e., basket from one, shank or shoulders from another, prongs or metal/finish or carving from another) -- OR

3. find a current design that is produced very similarly by several reputable jewelers/vendors/Stuller, in which case I feel fine making my own similar version.

I basically end up doing a mix of 2 and 3 for myself usually, so I get you! Currently I’m designing a pair of “personal high jewelry” CS earrings (not actually crazy expensive, but inspired by high jewelry pieces and designers) which will be entirely one of a kind; and I’ve been going to town with the inspiration pics I will be using one picture kind of like the base of the design, but will be adding in my own changes so it doesn’t look like an outright copy.

If you are talking about non antique, non out of production, contemporary designs-

I don’t think there’s a magic percentage number that all/most shall agree upon, and past many years of history threads here of hurt feelings and disagreements show there’s much more facets of the whole phenomenon to it than just being a percentage ‘enough’ changed of the design.

Oh, sure, I agree. That’s part of why I made this thread, to see what people think and what their opinions are and how much they differ.

People seem to have very different opinions on this. For some even having a different number of stones on the piece still counts as “the same”. For others even a change in angle of the setting is enough. Personally I think no bench is able to make an exact copy of another bench’s work and every design has been made a hundred times over a hundred years. So unless you’re trying to pass something off as exactly the same (ie stamping it with a brand logo) it’s fine.

I agree with you for the most part! I don’t personally like the idea of making an outright copy of anything so I do like to tweak whatever piece I see. But sometimes I wonder if my tweaks would be considered different “enough” by others, for example, what if I just tweak the basket design but keep everything else the same? It wouldn’t stop me from doing it, but I was curious all the same.

I had a huge boo boo happen to me. I saw a ring on Lang’s website that was sold. I thought it was an antique. I had it made but changed a round diamond to a small princess cut in the center. I was all about princess cuts at the time. There were other minute changes but I can see now that it would be instantly recognizable. I only found out later that it wasn’t an antique. It was out of production because the place had stopped producing for a while. Anyway…I would never show it on here. It was pricey to make..and very pretty. I just feel bad about the whole thing. When I did my 18k yellow gold reset for my cushion..I made sure the design was definitely from an antique. I actually saved the photo so if anyone said it was someone’s design I could prove it. That’s how paranoid I became about it.

Imo changing from round to princess makes it pretty different and I think you’re fine. But that’s how I see it.

 

[Karl_K]

Are we talking about just another halo or more of an art design?
If art then the art should be changed to be different.
That is not a legal opinion, consult an attorney blah blah blah.

 

[Bron357]

I remember once saying “it’s impossible to write an original song because all the notes have been used before”.
I think the same applies to jewellery, it’s been made since man first decided to adorn himself/ herself with a pretty that may or may not have had a meaning or function.
Design elements have been used and reused time and time again.
Can Tiffany “own” a claw style or shank style? Are they the first company to ever use them?
Like a musician who writes a song, can a jewellery designer be sure that their original creation hasn’t been shaped or inspired by their prior exposure to others works, perhaps even unconsciously?
It is definitely wrong to create a replica especially when the purpose is to pass it off as being ”the original” but can’t a consumer like the delicate claw like prongs that another designer uses or a knife edge shank or a combination of two metals or the inclusion of milgrain or floral emblems? Other designers might be using these design elements but they aren’t “original, never used by anyone else before”.
Take the Van Clef Clover motif. This is actually an eons old traditional Irish shape based on the Shamrock. Is any piece is jewellery using a similar shape infringing on their design?
So that is the dilemma, when does liking a design element that is currently associated with another designer become inappropriate or “theft of design idea”?

 

[AllAboardTheBlingTrain]

Are we talking about just another halo or more of an art design?
If art then the art should be changed to be different.
That is not a legal opinion, consult an attorney blah blah blah.

it’s an academic discussion, but I’d meant to talk about either! Both are covered in the scope of conversation

Re: art designs, how different is different enough?

I’ll post a pic of one Anna Hu pair that I’ve been obsessed with, for discussion’s sake.

What if I change the size and shape of the big Ruby/rubellite/spinel (I’m not sure what the stone is) and then get the earrings made exactly the same way? Is that different enough?

Or if I change the placement or colour of the flowers and butterflies and pearls? Or add more of the elements?

Or should I steer clear of the entire concept of dangling butterflies/flowers and stones?

Ofc this is just an opinion im seeking, not legal advice

 

[AllAboardTheBlingTrain]

I remember once saying “it’s impossible to write an original song because all the notes have been used before”.
I think the same applies to jewellery, it’s been made since man first decided to adorn himself/ herself with a pretty that may or may not have had a meaning or function.
Design elements have been used and reused time and time again.
Can Tiffany “own” a claw style or shank style? Are they the first company to ever use them?
Like a musician who writes a song, can a jewellery designer be sure that their original creation hasn’t been shaped or inspired by their prior exposure to others works, perhaps even unconsciously?
It is definitely wrong to create a replica especially when the purpose is to pass it off as being ”the original” but can’t a consumer like the delicate claw like prongs that another designer uses or a knife edge shank or a combination of two metals or the inclusion of milgrain or floral emblems? Other designers might be using these design elements but they aren’t “original, never used by anyone else before”.
Take the Van Clef Clover motif. This is actually an eons old traditional Irish shape based on the Shamrock. Is any piece is jewellery using a similar shape infringing on their design?
So that is the dilemma, when does liking a design element that is currently associated with another designer become inappropriate or “theft of design idea”?

Agreed with all of it! It’s definitely difficult to know where to draw the line, but that’s why I think the conversation is important.

I also think, and I feel like we agree here, that it’s a much trickier question when you talk about a specific design element that is strongly associated with a specific designer, like the Alhambra motif. I now feel like I would steer clear of the motif completely, because if I were to copy it exactly I’ll be ripping off VCA and if I were to change things (eg removing the gold bead border) I’ll look like I’m trying to copy VCA and doing a bad job!

 

[seaurchin]

I make a few changes from an inspo ring and really just go by when I feel like it’s different enough, which is probably not very helpful. Maybe at least four of the six things below. But thus far, mine have all been pretty basic designs, I’d say. Then I think about if I think it’s different enough that nobody will get mad at me lol. (But personally, I’d be happy if someone liked a piece of mine to even do an exact copy).

Different centerstone- size, shape, color

Halo stones- different size, shape

Difference in prongs vs bezel, milgrain or not

Different metal color

Different band thickness, detail

Different gallery

 

[seaurchin]

Those earrings though, are pretty unique. I might do something like the two large stones in a color besides red.

Then something like half moons and stars or leaves and berries or shell and starfish instead of the butterflies and flowers. With a bit different color and arrangement.

And something besides the little white pearly things with a pink dot on each, because those are very distinctive.

To me, that would definitely be safely different but maybe more different than you want? It kind of seems to me to need more changes than a simpler design would to not seem too much like a copy but jmo.

 

[dk168]

My own example.

Inspiration ring:

My finished ring, with an EC Aquamarine (1), step cut Morganite traps (2), main stones in difference sizes (3), plain band and not a knife edge (4), a gallery with a small band of diamonds (5), in 14K White Gold and not Platinum (6):



DK

 

[AllAboardTheBlingTrain]

I make a few changes from an inspo ring and really just go by when I feel like it’s different enough, which is probably not very helpful. Maybe at least four of the six things below. But thus far, mine have all been pretty basic designs, I’d say. Then I think about if I think it’s different enough that nobody will get mad at me lol. (But personally, I’d be happy if someone liked a piece of mine to even do an exact copy).

Different centerstone- size, shape, color

Halo stones- different size, shape

Difference in prongs vs bezel, milgrain or not

Different metal color

Different band thickness, detail

Different gallery

Those earrings though, are pretty unique. I might do something like the two large stones in a color besides red.

Then something like half moons and stars or leaves and berries or shell and starfish instead of the butterflies and flowers. With a bit different color and arrangement.

And something besides the little white pearly things with a pink dot on each, because those are very distinctive.

To me, that would definitely be safely different but maybe more different than you want? It kind of seems to me to need more changes than a simpler design would to not seem too much like a copy but jmo.

I think you’re right in that a more complex design requires more changes than a simpler one. In my case, I know I want my earrings to have butterflies and flowers (we’ve done a couple of CADs with birds, which was my other idea; but I don’t like them at all, so I think we’re ditching the birds). I do plan to change the placement and number of the butterflies and flowers in my own earrings, skip the pink dots in the pearls, maybe add other beads (inspired by a different pair of earrings) and change the size and shape of the stone completely, though they’ll still be red (well, one is red, it’s a Ruby; and one is purply-red, that’s a rubellite). I might add a scallop-y element, or some leaves or something.

Anyway my post wasn’t really about these specific earrings, it was about the concept of copying in general, and I’ll agree with you that I think a few of the changes from your list, if incorporated, will make a design different “enough” that it goes from being a copy to “inspired by”.

 

[AllAboardTheBlingTrain]

My own example.

Inspiration ring:

My finished ring, with an EC Aquamarine (1), step cut Morganite traps (2), main stones in difference sizes (3), plain band and not a knife edge (4), a gallery with a small band of diamonds (5), in 14K White Gold and not Platinum (6):



DK

I think once you change the colour and size of the stones that alone makes it safely “different enough”, personally!

Also, nice ring!

 

[Rfisher]

Since you being up your earrings -
I do think that if you keep an overall look the same where someone would mistake it as the brand in question at a glance - or you have to point out the differences in defense to someone who ‘accuses’ you -
Than (imo, which of course is what is being asked) that percentage of design change isn’t enough to prevent flack thrown your way if you were to post here - or to prevent legal recourse if the brand were to be protective.
Another poster mentioned changing something….and then it just being seen as a “bad job”. I wholeheartedly agree. Because typically and historically that’s part of the complaints in all the older discussion threads about specific examples. Whether it’s the beading/milgrain, the materials, hand assembled vs hand forged, or even just the bench themselves.

That’s my PS posting member-to-member thoughts.
I do think this is more of a you do true to your clear mind type thing. Whether it’s mind clean for you and whether or not it’s a good idea to post it publicly here or anywhere is another facet. I don’t care/mind much at all what others consciously choose to do for themselves, aside from things being treated as a two way street.

I’m not 100% sure because I’m ignorant and if I’m wrong I hope someone corrects me- but Burdeens Jewelers having what I see would be viewed by the PSers view as a copy becayse it’s not changed enough, of a highly regarded and protected brand here on PS- even though that same design setup version may not be available from that brand. My view is if someone came to show that same ring as something they asked DKJ to make (if he would even) - they and DKJ would be flamed and/or mocked.
That being said and again if I’m not grossly mistaken - I wouldn’t feel that bad anymore ‘strongly inspired/copying’ a PS fave Burdeen original creation anymore if I were wanting to do so. But then getting that members blessing comes into play - imo.
So - that’s where i get into apples vs oranges and the whole ‘inspired vs copying and etiquette’ subject just isn’t linear.

 

[lovedogs]

I'll give two examples for myself that I'm considering for a potential wedding band:

I love this kataoka ring as a whole


However, I dislike rose cut stones, and wouldn't want the 2 layers. I also would likely want to customize the size of the stones and be able to have stones 3/4 around instead of the 1/2 shown. To me, if I change the cut of the stones, size of them, and how many, that is sufficient. I also dont expect the ring I get to be the same width, same prongs, etc, and certainly wouldnt pass it off as a kataoka design.


I also like this Michael B lace band.


But I would want it significantly thinner, more rounded edges, and differences in how the diamonds were placed such that when milgrain was put all around each "motif" it would have a floral shape/aesthetic.

To me, overall, if you use a piece as a springboard and then make changes such that it becomes different in fundamental ways (stone shape/size/orientation, band thickness, etc), then you've made it more of your own.

I also agree that the more unique a design is, the higher my threshold would be for how many changes I would make. As an example, I have no issue with the Vatche "tiffany" 6 prong setting, because a plain 6 prong solitaire is something thats been done a million times.

 

[AllAboardTheBlingTrain]

Since you being up your earrings -
I do think that if you keep an overall look the same where someone would mistake it as the brand in question at a glance - or you have to point out the differences in defense to someone who ‘accuses’ you -
Than (imo, which of course is what is being asked) that percentage of design change isn’t enough to prevent flack thrown your way if you were to post here - or to prevent legal recourse if the brand were to be protective.
Another poster mentioned changing something….and then it just being seen as a “bad job”. I wholeheartedly agree. Because typically and historically that’s part of the complaints in all the older discussion threads about specific examples. Whether it’s the beading/milgrain, the materials, hand assembled vs hand forged, or even just the bench themselves.

That’s my PS posting member-to-member thoughts.
I do think this is more of a you do true to your clear mind type thing. Whether it’s mind clean for you and whether or not it’s a good idea to post it publicly here or anywhere is another facet. I don’t care/mind much at all what others consciously choose to do for themselves, aside from things being treated as a two way street.

I’m not 100% sure because I’m ignorant and if I’m wrong I hope someone corrects me- but Burdeens Jewelers having what I see would be viewed by the PSers view as a copy becayse it’s not changed enough, of a highly regarded and protected brand here on PS- even though that same design setup version may not be available from that brand. My view is if someone came to show that same ring as something they asked DKJ to make (if he would even) - they and DKJ would be flamed and/or mocked.
That being said and again if I’m not grossly mistaken - I wouldn’t feel that bad anymore ‘strongly inspired/copying’ a PS fave Burdeen original creation anymore if I were wanting to do so. But then getting that members blessing comes into play - imo.
So - that’s where i get into apples vs oranges and the whole ‘inspired vs copying and etiquette’ subject just isn’t linear.

Oh I’m actually the one who said the thing about the bad job, where I said that at this point I wouldn’t utilise the VCA quatrefoil in any jewelry of my own even though it’s not like VCA owns the quatrefoil concept (and in fact, I think David Yurman or someone actually makes quatrefoil jewelry as well).

I’m unfamiliar with the Burdeens Jeweler piece you’re referring to, so I can’t comment on that.

For my own earrings, I didn’t get into it because it’s not really why I made this post (acrually what drove me was my conversation with my mom, where she felt her piece with the multiple shapes and sizes of diamonds was ripped off by a jeweler and I said that even though it’s a bit suss that they went with the exact same layout and shapes, the fact is that the sizes are different and there are a few more minor differences in the two designs, so you can’t call it a rip off. It’s at most “inspired by” and entirely possible that both jewelers came up with the design independently, not that one ripped off the other!)

But basically getting back to my earrings, I’m drawing inspiration from multiple designers, not just this one (Anna Hu); and I do plan to make things different enough that it doesn’t seem like a copy. I don’t think anyone can copyright including flowers and butterflies into their designs, and I do plan to mess around with the execution of the flowers and butterflies as well. It’s more just that I want to bring across this feeling of riotous colour and delicacy, that I get when I look at pieces by her (or de Grisogono, or Margot McKinney, or JAR).

 

[AllAboardTheBlingTrain]

I'll give two examples for myself that I'm considering for a potential wedding band:

I love this kataoka ring as a whole


However, I dislike rose cut stones, and wouldn't want the 2 layers. I also would likely want to customize the size of the stones and be able to have stones 3/4 around instead of the 1/2 shown. To me, if I change the cut of the stones, size of them, and how many, that is sufficient. I also dont expect the ring I get to be the same width, same prongs, etc, and certainly wouldnt pass it off as a kataoka design.


I also like this Michael B lace band.


But I would want it significantly thinner, more rounded edges, and differences in how the diamonds were placed such that when milgrain was put all around each "motif" it would have a floral shape/aesthetic.

To me, overall, if you use a piece as a springboard and then make changes such that it becomes different in fundamental ways (stone shape/size/orientation, band thickness, etc), then you've made it more of your own.

I also agree that the more unique a design is, the higher my threshold would be for how many changes I would make. As an example, I have no issue with the Vatche "tiffany" 6 prong setting, because a plain 6 prong solitaire is something thats been done a million times.

I agree with you completely, and FWIW, your proposed changes are enough that I think you can safely consider it different enough to not be considered a copy or a rip-off.

 

[oncrutchesrightnow]

You know those “CAD check” posts? Whatever types of changes people bring up in those threads must be meaningful or people would not discuss them.

My vendor is going to know better than me whether some dude named Jim living in Argentina already changed the shank by 0.1mm. Unless we cloned the stones from the inspiration ring, there will necessarily be small differences that concern details important enough to be found in CAD discussions. So short of saying “please copy this ring including the original artist’s stamp, and my friend with seven burglary convictions will deliver the stone to you,” let the vendor worry about it.

 

[AllAboardTheBlingTrain]

You know those “CAD check” posts? Whatever types of changes people bring up in those threads must be meaningful or people would not discuss them.

My vendor is going to know better than me whether some dude named Jim living in Argentina already changed the shank by 0.1mm. Unless we cloned the stones from the inspiration ring, there will necessarily be small differences that concern details important enough to be found in CAD discussions. So short of saying “please copy this ring including the original artist’s stamp, and my friend with seven burglary convictions will deliver the stone to you,” let the vendor worry about it.

The bolded bit made me crack up

 

[lovedogs]

Oh, I should have added that the other way I decide about "inspiration vs copy" is whether or not the design I want is already made by someone. For example, if I wanted EXACTLY a ring that a vendor already makes, then I think going to that vendor makes sense. I have a few exceptions for vendors I refuse to work with, but those arent common. If I know that a designer already makes the ring I want, then I'll buy it from them. But if the changes I want to that piece arent something that the designer makes/has made then I dont feel badly about asking a different vendor to make me the piece I want.

As said above, exceptions exist (to me) for designs that are classic and not "personal" to the brand (e.g. tiffany 6 prong solitaire).

Another exception (for me) is when designers make it impossible to buy from them. For example, if I want a certain color scheme of the clover (alhambra) VCA bracelet that isnt already produced, it would have to be a special order. And I wouldn't be allowed to special order bc I haven't spent whatever amount they deem "enough" for me to get one. I think thats bull$*^t, so I wouldnt feel bad asking a vendor to make me a clover style bracelet, so long as I didnt make it an EXACT copy and/or get it fake stamped to make it seem like auth VCA.

 

[AllAboardTheBlingTrain]

Oh, I should have added that the other way I decide about "inspiration vs copy" is whether or not the design I want is already made by someone. For example, if I wanted EXACTLY a ring that a vendor already makes, then I think going to that vendor makes sense. I have a few exceptions for vendors I refuse to work with, but those arent common. If I know that a designer already makes the ring I want, then I'll buy it from them. But if the changes I want to that piece arent something that the designer makes/has made then I dont feel badly about asking a different vendor to make me the piece I want.

As said above, exceptions exist (to me) for designs that are classic and not "personal" to the brand (e.g. tiffany 6 prong solitaire).

Another exception (for me) is when designers make it impossible to buy from them. For example, if I want a certain color scheme of the clover (alhambra) VCA bracelet that isnt already produced, it would have to be a special order. And I wouldn't be allowed to special order bc I haven't spent whatever amount they deem "enough" for me to get one. I think thats bull$*^t, so I wouldnt feel bad asking a vendor to make me a clover style bracelet, so long as I didnt make it an EXACT copy and/or get it fake stamped to make it seem like auth VCA.

so what you said just made me think of a related question. I’m Indian and over here big bling is a part of life, I see a lot of people who spend money on big fancy earrings or necklaces etc. and sometimes I’ll see that the jewelry they wear are very heavily inspired by old high jewelry collections of famous Maisons. For example, I remember seeing an actor once wear a version of the Elizabeth Taylor Bulgari emerald and diamond necklace (very obviously not the same one, because the sizes of the stones were different) for some event or promotion or something. Even in real life I will sometimes see people wear jewelry designs I recognise as being an old HJ piece from a brand, but I know for a fact that they didn’t buy them from the brand (eg the last wedding I went to, I saw a woman wearing a pair of earrings that looked really similar to the Graff bombe earrings; but I know they were different because she had gotten it made as a jacket for her own studs, so the proportions were a tiny bit different (her studs were bigger than the Graff design, and some of the other stones used were a bit smaller); and when I complimented them and asked where she got them from she named a local jeweler.

So my question is, in your opinion, is this wrong? Let’s say it’s a case of copying the design exactly vs one with small changes; but these are pieces that those maisons don’t make anymore. Or perhaps they won’t make them with the tweaks you have in mind (eg a removable jacket instead of a full earring).

ETA: added a pic of the Graff bombe earrings and the Elizabeth Taylor necklace!

 

[lovedogs]

so what you said just made me think of a related question. I’m Indian and over here big bling is a part of life, I see a lot of people who spend money on big fancy earrings or necklaces etc. and sometimes I’ll see that the jewelry they wear are very heavily inspired by old high jewelry collections of famous Maisons. For example, I remember seeing an actor once wear a version of the Elizabeth Taylor Bulgari emerald and diamond necklace (very obviously not the same one, because the sizes of the stones were different) for some event or promotion or something. Even in real life I will sometimes see people wear jewelry designs I recognise as being an old HJ piece from a brand, but I know for a fact that they didn’t buy them from the brand (eg the last wedding I went to, I saw a woman wearing a pair of earrings that looked really similar to the Graff bombe earrings; but I know they were different because she had gotten it made as a jacket for her own studs, so the proportions were a tiny bit different (her studs were bigger than the Graff design, and some of the other stones used were a bit smaller); and when I complimented them and asked where she got them from she named a local jeweler.
So my question is, in your opinion, is this wrong? Let’s say it’s a case of copying the design exactly vs one with small changes; but these are pieces that those maisons don’t make anymore. Or perhaps they won’t make them with the tweaks you have in mind (eg a removable jacket instead of a full earring).

ETA: added a pic of the Graff bombe earrings and the Elizabeth Taylor necklace!

Nope, not wrong to me. But I suspect I'm in the minority about that. But IMHO if a jeweler doesnt make a design anymore or wont make it w requested changes, then you arent "copying" unless you try to pass it off as an original or put the makers mark on it, etc.

 

[Lookinagain]

If a piece isn't made anymore then a close copy would be okay in my view. And if it were antique and not made for many years, a replica wouldn't bother me either. I've done that. If you can't buy it, then I don't think there is anything wrong with having it made, so long as you don't claim it is the original.

 

[Rfisher]

But IMHO if a jeweler wont make it w requested changes, then you arent "copying" unless you try to pass it off as an original or put the makers mark on it, etc.

Just a hypothetical question -
Do you think
(And everyone else too)
This would escape drama around here, historically or now,
If it were an Erika Winters or CVB design? Let’s say she didn’t want to customize one of her designs?

I would love for the answer to be that it’s seen as acceptable to take their design elsewhere and put it in a wider shank or an altered shoulder. That this is majority general consensus seen as fine and normal and acceptable. Because the original designer didn’t want to. But I just don’t think it would “fly” around here.
That a different bench’s ability in finishing or getting that level of delicacy wouldn’t be seen as another ‘change’ - it’d be seen as incompetence.

Maybe the current all over pool of active posters that would put forth this as being the general rule of thumb of etiquette has changed.? Or some of the most vocal about it have changed their past outlook and aren’t as staunch about it anymore?

 

[lovedogs]

Just a hypothetical question -
Do you think
(And everyone else too)
This would escape drama around here, historically or now,
If it were an Erika Winters or CVB design? Let’s say she didn’t want to customize one of her designs?

I would love for the answer to be that it’s seen as acceptable to take their design elsewhere and put it in a wider shank or an altered shoulder. That this is majority general consensus seen as fine and normal and acceptable. Because the original designer didn’t want to. But I just don’t think it would “fly” around here.
That a different bench’s ability in finishing or getting that level of delicacy wouldn’t be seen as another ‘change’ - it’d be seen as incompetence.

Maybe the current all over pool of active posters that would put forth this as being the general rule of thumb of etiquette has changed.? Or some of the most vocal about it have changed their past outlook and aren’t as staunch about it anymore?

That's a good question, and honestly I dont know. To me its completely acceptable given your hypothetical, but I suspect some more stringent folks would disagree with me.

 

[Lookinagain]

It seems to me that if the original designer won't make changes that someone wants, then they should be able to go to another jeweler to get a piece that is what they want. If the change is something that the original designer feels changes the asesthetic too much, then doesn't that by definition, make it a material change?

 

[molecule]

It seems to me that if the original designer won't make changes that someone wants, then they should be able to go to another jeweler to get a piece that is what they want. If the change is something that the original designer feels changes the asesthetic too much, then doesn't that by definition, make it a material change?

I second this, however in the case of too thin of a shank being requested or another structurally unsound request being asked that the vendor (wisely) refuses to accommodate, is this still true?

 

[Lookinagain]

I second this, however in the case of too thin of a shank being requested or another structurally unsound request being asked that the vendor (wisely) refuses to accommodate, is this still true?

Good question. I guess my initial response would be that if the vendor explains why the change would make the piece unsound, and the customer wants to go forward anyway and take their chances, then that is on the client (and the vendor should get a written waiver of any kind of warranty or liability). If the vendor still refuses (wisely), then I think it's fair for the client to go somewhere else, knowing the risks.