Stolen designs

Jewelry Discussion
41

Dear Suzanne Wade, Thank you for such a detailed and accurate post
about copyright. Although I’m in Australia with different statutory
authorities, the generalities of what you have posted are pretty much
the same. Certainly, the core issue is exactly the same - and it’s all
about that highly subjective phrase, “substantially similar”.

This is obviously a much hotter issue among American jewellers
compared to their Australian counterparts. Perhaps there are several
reasons for this. The jewellery industry in America is much bigger
than Australia’s, so I guess there is a lot more competition. I also
wonder if there isn’t a much more pronounced culture of litigation in
America? While we have our fair share of juicy court cases, they
certainly wouldn’t command a locally made “Judge Judy”-type television
series. Your lawyers are obviously laughing all the way to the bank. I
just hope they’re spending some of your money on jewellery.

Kind regards,
Rex from Oz.

42

Depending upon your willingness to pursue the matter, you can contact
the Jewelers’ Vigilance Committee, the American Gem Trade
Association, the Federal Trade Commission, etc. A call to the local
Chamber of Commerce often will yield results. What it comes down to
is a willingness to rock the boat. Faced with this situation I have
started by speaking with the jeweler/manufacturer directly. Other
times, after seeing deliberately misleading/false statements in
catalogues, I send a letter to the house which issued it. The entire
situation reminds me of a Laurel & Hardy routine where they’re in a
lifeboat which is partially full of water. Stan reaches into his
carpet bag, pulls out a brace and bit, and proceeds to drill a hole
at his end of the boat to “let the water out”. Ollie smacks him and
hollers “What do you think you’re doing?!?” Stan explains that he’s
letting the water out, and in any event, he did it at his end of the
boat. It’s our boat folks, we’re responsible.

Jim Small, SMALL WONDERS

43

My Nickel, If those that deceive the public are to be spanked then I
vote for DeBeers.At the apex of our industry stands a master of
deception.Deceiving the public with a 50+ year add campaign that is
unprecedented anywhere on the planet.Leading women and couples into
believing that they MUST have the rare and elusive diamond.Funding
Hollywood’s need.Square shaped or pear shaped these rocks don’t lose
their shapeBuilding a beautiful facade while behind the scenes
subjugating their miners and squashing competitors.Lets be honest if
you work with diamonds and pretend like you don’t know that then you
are being deceptive.No amount of jewelry police are going to be able
to stop the type of deception you saw in AZ.Its been around since
before the beginning Where do you draw the line.Just at blatant
deception like that or the shoe salesman who tells the lady that just
squeezed her size 7’s into size 5’s that they look great while he is
thinking they look like two sausages.I agree that guy and others
should not deceive the public but Iam against more overseers in my
space.Educate the public.Now that I have spent my nickel let the
arrows fly!J MorleyCoyote Ridge Studio

44

Hi, I have been reading with great interest about stolen designs.

I am very new in the fabrication world, I am learning to produce my
own pieces locally here in Tucson.

My questions are the following.

I want to start a certain line of jewelry that has dragons in it, the
chinese styled type. Another line that I would like to develop is
snakes. These two types of jewelry have always facinated me. I have
many pieces of this type of jewelry that was made overseas in various
places like Nepal. I have no plans of coping these works, although it
would be realatively easy since most could be cast (which I have not
learned to do yet). I guess my question is the following, I have a
lovely armband that is a coiled snake, it wraps around the arm and
hooks its head into its looped tail. I have seen this style in many
books, ancient mostly. Why would a person not be able to copy this?
Would it be wrong? I really doubt that it is a design made by any
person that has been alive in the last 100 years or more. I am just
curious, and again I state I have no plans to copy this item or any
other item I have. I just want to know what are the “real” laws and
rules that we as a group follow.

Thanks! I hope this makes this interesting! Laura

45

Hello all - Good dialogue here. I like Ive’s approach - she seems to
have kept humor in the equation. Once again - my apologies for the
wordy reply here, but I was motivated to jump in. Having designs ripped
off is a “knock the wind out of you” experience. Cerebrally - the
flattery angle comes in. But it is a real blow to recover from -
especially when it affects the pocketbook. I know where the wire
designs that I introduced 5 years ago evolved from - a study I had
done of ancient South American metalwork - 20 years prior. I would be
the first to share that with the customer and give credit to the
metalsmiths of old. Some of my original designs that evolved from that
study were stolen and multiplied. The person who ripped off my
designs - studied the pieces in my booth - never even commented that
she liked them. (This individual did not go to the library and do
research and sketch and experiment - as I had done for an art history
assignment years before.) I “happened” upon this person’s new “line"
of jewelry in a local dept. store - thinking someone on the mainland
had the same inspiration as mine - a total possibility. Then - looking
closer - realized it was this woman who had been in my booth. Yuk - it
was hard to breathe! I had worked very hard to bring this work to
fruition and when a friend said, “Cynthia, the public is going to
think you copied this person” (the other person had been very prolific
in the public for 8 years already - and I was “new” in the public) - I
decided to do something. I dealt with my copyright infringement
(direct plagiarism issue) - through a juried organization that we both
belong to - and sent a cc of the letter to a lawyer (that didn’t cost
me anything - but added clout). Still the designs were proliferated
and now, they are actually very common. This experience was within
the first year of f i n a l l y creating my own saleable body of
work. It did tell me that I was “in the ball park” and not “out in
left field” - when I entered the business world. I am no longer naive
on this topic. I think a lot of “crafters” feel that what they see is
"public domain”. So, I agree with some suggestions in this string
that creating something technically more difficult does help.

“The Crafts Report” magazine came out with 3 articles on copyright
during the time of my experience. Very helpful - fall '95. The more
you bring up the subject - the more common you learn of the problem -
very disheartening. Personally, I think only the lawyers benefit. I
love sharing - especially with others in the field - so, I am healing.
But let me tell you - it is not a fun one. It just keeps me moving
to make something different. However, I do intend to continue to
create and sell the pieces that were copied.

Learning technique and learning and observing from the past are indeed
part of what our work is -making it our own is the challenge. It has
been delightful to learn techniques like fold-forming and scoring and
bending (thank you to Charles Lewton-Brain) and other new
"discoveries" very generously shared with the jewelry community. . .
and then do our own exploring. That is the difference. On occasion, I
have been asked to duplicate the lost side of an individual’s
"favorite" pair of earrings. They may be very old pieces or even from
other countries - but I do it only when the artist is not known or
unable to be contacted. If able to - will do so as a service to this
customer and certainly not add it to my product line. Hope I didn’t get
too carried away here. Cynthia btw - a friend who has studied Picasso
tells me that in the quote mentioned in this string “great artists
steal” - Picasso was referring to looking back in history - not
stealing from your contemporaries. (I’m not knowledgeable about
Picasso.)

46

Suzanne, I read your post about copyright infringement and admire your
righteous stance. Nonetheless, I am afraid that the Supreme Court
yesterday may have taken the wind out of your sails. In a unanimous
decision the court announced that it is okay to “knock off” as long
as you don’t violate the Trademark rights of the designer or original
producer. The case was Walmart vs. Samara Bros. Inc. Lengthy articles
about the decision were published today in the Los Angeles Times and
the Washington Post. Oddly enough, our local paper this morning
contained a related article describing how a local businessman’s
trademark application was being challenged by none other than
Nabisco. It seems that he is marketing a horse snack ( ! ) under the
name of Treatwells Jokers Treats. Nabisco contends that the horse
treat creates confusion in the mind of the purchaser inasmuch as it (
Nabisco ) markets a line of snacks for humans under the name of
SnackWells. This latter instance of frivolous corporate idiocy
suggests that small entrepreneurs can be eaten alive by insensitive
and amoral corporate behemoths! I firmly believe that copyright is a
total waste of time for jewelers. I wonder if any of you have ever
recovered a cent from a copyright infringement suit ? There isn’t any
doubt in my mind that knocking off is alive and well and will
continue unabated in the future. Our friends in Taxco, Mexico are not
the only ones doing it; it is being done all over the world. When I
consulted in Zambia at a major silversmithing factory I noted that
nearly every craftperson had tattered old copies of European and
American Jewelry catalogs and were regularly knocking off designs. (
You could do a good business abroad just by selling those catalogs !
) If you feel that you have a gift for design and execution of fine
jewelry you should concentrate on putting that gift to maximum use.
Don’t waste time charging at windwills. Worse yet, don’t piss away
your limited capital on subsidizing Mercedes for leach lawyers !
Ron at Mills Gem, Los Osos, CA

47

Some one copies one of my husbands designs once but they sure did a
lousy job of it just did not have the talent I guess. Anybody
could have seen the difference.

48

Dear Lee, Kudos to you! Yours is the most objective and realistic
commentary that I have yet seen regarding design ! If you really love
to create why would you want to waste time scrapping with competitors
and subsidizing lawyers ? Ron at Mills Gem, Los Osos, CA.

49

Dan Woodard, I really like what you quoted, and with your permission,
would like to include it in my list of great sayings. Do you know
the author? Thanks so much. As always, thank you Hanuman, Judy

Judy M. Willingham, R.S.
Extension Associate
221 Call Hall Kansas State Univerisity
Manhattan KS 66506
(785) 532-1213 FAX (785) 532-5681

50

We should probably note that not all designs are copyrightable – the
simple settings Todd Hawkinson mentions are a good example. A design
must demonstrate originality before it can by copyrighted. (You can’t
copyright a simple square or a circle, for example.)

It’s also worth noting that copyright protections do expire. Since
1978, the term has been the lifetime of the creator plus 70 years. If
you’re considering recreating ancient jewelry, there’s certainly no
legal ramifications – and your own creative interpretation of those
ancient designs should be enough to allay moral concerns.

Copyright law leaves us a little room for common sense, happily. And
I think just about everyone here would agree there is a difference
between being artistically inspired by works and intentionally copying
them solely for financial gain.

Suzanne
Suzanne Wade
writer/editor
SuWade@ici.net
Phone/Fax 508-339-7366

51

J Morley hello!

Your post did indeed spark a reply needed. I’ll try and be brief!

I think a lot of this whole discussion boils down to two things.
Greed and laziness. Either of those two foul human traits we try to
rid ourselves of, are the root of the offenses described, in my
opinion. There are always people willing to take from others. Not all
people willing to give as I see it. If there is an easy way to get
ahead you can bet there is someone going to take that road. What we
really have exposed here is what most of us wish all people had. A
giving nature, which in turn allows you to receive. Sounds religious
I suppose, but it is more than that.

There are so many ways to make an honest profit, on your own merits!
Why do some slip into these rat like methods of operating?
Misrepresenting, overcharging, underkarating, and copying, to name a
few devious areas of behavior. It hurts our trade as a whole when we
can’t treat each other and our customers (and employers) with the
respect we expect for ourselves. I’ll step off the soapbox now!

Tim

52

Laura, I tried to look up your dragon design, the Oroboros and found
that among other things a modern day rock band has claimed this very
ancient word as its own name!

Seriously though, this is an ancient design which has been used by
many cultures worldwide, not just the Chinese. Possibly the most
famous version was the Midgard Serpent, Jormungand. Here are a few
links showing variations of the design. IMHO, not that of a lawyer but
as a common citizen who is sometimes called as a juror, you’re
probably no more derivative than most anyone else has been the past
6000 years.

This webpage has a definition of the Oroboros and an old and a new
rendition. You will notice the new design incorporates a typical
Celtic twisted wire design! http://www.dragon.org/chris/ouroboros.html

Toward the bottom of this page are two 200 year old metal buttons
with the Oroboros seen: Mrkdbts

Another link with Oroboros listed among other designs:
http://fim.informatik.uni-mannheim.de/~draconia/WHATIS/

Here is a link which lists, among other designs, an artist’s modern
interpretation of the thousand year old intertwined snakes carved in
the door of the stave church at Urnes Norway:

53

J.Morley, Lee Einer, I totally agree with both of you! DeBeers is the
shame of the jewelry world. thank god that they lose a little bit of
control every year.Maybe the next time their contracts are
renegotiated, they will control less than 50% of the market. Deception
and fraud are the reasons I no longer do benchwork for the trade. The
retail shop I worked for routinely bumped up their diamond
grades.They actually asked me if I could do knockoffs of bracelets
made by a big name designer in Denver.(I said only if he agreed in
writing,- didn’t go over so good) I suggested that they carry my own
designs and the reply was that they would if they could mark up my
wholesale price triple key and pay me net 30 after any sales.
(basically, consignment at 30/70, paid next month - said no.) They
also carried a line of opal inlay jewelry that they sold as “black
opal”. (another big name american designer) This stuff is nothing
more than fair to good crystal glued in with black epoxy. They said
that the manufacturer’s rep said that it was black opal. I informed
them it wasn’t.(and proved it) After about a year of trying to
instill some ethics into these clowns, I was fired for being “too
hard to work with”. Some people are just too ignorant to be anything
but frauds. (or maybe it’s just too lazy) later, Mark Thomas Ruby
SunSpirit Designs —

54

Well I guess I will throw my two cents into this thread also. As
much as the internet has helped small scale jewelry designers who
cannot afford to print catalogs, it has also given all the knockoff
artist overseas an untapped source for our designs. In the old days
they would have to buy a piece to copy. At least the designer got
some return for their work.

Best regards to all.
Bill Wismar

55

Suzanne, I think there is a lot of ways to look at this. I am not
trying to defend people that look for designs to copy for large scale
reproduction. That (in my opinion) is wrong. But think back to when
you started. Who taught you? Did you like something they made and
copy it? I was teaching lapidary and jewelry making for many years.
Most of my students copied things I did. I showed them how in most
cases. It was part of their learning “skills” process. Later when
their skills were better and more than a few completed projects
finished, they would start to develop style. I noticed that most of
these styles were a blending of lots of things they were exposed to.
There were very few students that did enough new work, often enough to
develop their own unique designs. Just hope that the large scale
copying doesn’t infringe on you. Don’t sweat the small stuff.
Steve Ramsdell

56

How many times have I dreamt up a wonderful application, just to have
some little old lady walk up to me at a show and say something like,
“My mother used to have a necklace very much like this.” Or I’m
reading National Geographic or Smithsonian, and there’s a piece
hundreds, if not thousands of years old, with the same type of
application I just used in a piece which I thought was a pretty unique
solution. So, here I am, about as uncultured and unsophisticated as
any hillbilly, using various techniques and designs which have been in
existence for many years.

How have my designs been influenced, subliminally or by previous
exposure? Perhaps I remember a piece of my grandmother’s necklace in
my subconscious, or some design which I ran across in some historical
text. How is it that Celtic and Anasazi designs are so similar in
nature, and yet they were isolated from each other? How is it both the
Egyptian pyramids and those of the Maya are so similar, and they were
also isolated from each other? If one of us was asked to execute a
dragon (as far as I know, a totally mythical creature), how many of us
would give it four limbs, a tail, a long nose with prominent nostrils,
ears, and a mouth with teeth?

Jewelry has been around for many years, even before there was a
written record of mankind. We use many of the same designs and
connections our predecessors have, with very little innovation in the
technical aspect, even in our technologically advanced society. What
defines originality is the perception and interpretation of the whole
by the designer. Since what shapes my ideas of my self and my world is
necessarily different from my associates, my designs will be
different. Quite often my associates and I will teach each other how
to do a specific technique in order to further our own skills. Within
a few times of using the technique and we have changed how it works
for us specifically. Our applications may look very similar in the
beginning, but as we become more comfortable with the procedure, we
use it in different ways with our own work.

If I use a concha repousse’ die, it doesn’t mean it’s going to look
like a traditional concha. It is only another design element, which is
subject to my own interpretation. That concha may be sandblasted,
diamond-cut and set with faceted stones. It winds up looking nothing
like a traditional southwestern Native American concha at all. While
we’re in that area, the southwestern Native Americans borrowed the
concha and sandcast designs from the Spanish, who used them as
ornamentations on their horses’ bridles and breast plates. The
Spanish borrowed these designs from the Muslim Moors, and who knows
where they “borrowed” them.

How many of us can say we truly have not borrowed elements or
applications in our designs from other sources, whether it’s from the
natural world or from our predecessors? Our interpretation of various
elements is what separates us as designers versus someone who just
makes jewelry. At some point, we all began with either what we knew,
what we experienced or what we were taught. This is how we learned. As
designers, we learn to go past the simple or the obvious solution. We
explore further to make the overall effect richer, more sophisticated,
more evolved. It is part of what separates an artist from just doing
something to make money. The other part is to do it for the love of
doing it, even when you know you won’t get the price of the labor out
of it. If you are doing any type of production, it is inevitable that
someone will do a knockoff sooner or later, if it’s worth selling. As
a designer, you have the ability to be constantly ingenious. Don’t
look at the glass as being half-empty. There are more important
things to be obsessed about.

OK, so you guys got a lot more than my two cents worth.

K.P. in WY

57

Thanks so much for the I am totally entranced by this
dicussion of what is legal and not, but even with so many people who
seem to know the rules it seems like a very hard thing to deal with. I
imagine within time a pereson can come up with the same design as
someone else. They both would be the originator of the design, but
probably would think that the other has copied it! The world seems to
be getting smaller and smaller all the time!

I will check out all the links you sent me!

Thank you so much

Laura

58 
 It's also worth noting that copyright protections *do* expire.
Since 1978, the term has been the lifetime of the creator plus 70
years

the law reads:

for works originally created on or after january 1, 1978, copyright
protection automatically attaches from the moment of its creation and
is ordinarily given for a term enduring for the author’s life plus an
additional 50 years after the author’s death.

ive

59

Aloha Ive, As time goes on, the significance of a piece in the market
place has diminished as the result of the Internet and computer age,
I even protect my digital (read points in space). There
is little an affluent person, let alone a lone craftsman trying to
make a living can do, to fight against cheap imported and stolen
works other than keep ahead (or spend your time and resources on
litigation). My legals read as follows and with that and $3.50, I can
buy an Iced Latte at Starbucks’: The following is a Legal Agreement.
If you have not read this agreement, please do so now.

LICENSE AGREEMENT

THIS IS A LEGAL AGREEMENT (“License Agreement”) between you and
Precision Modelmaking Technologies. (“Company”). If you use any of
the files of Images, Solids or three-dimensional digital coordinates
(the “Models”), you thereby signify that you have agreed to all of
the terms and conditions set forth below. Each of the Models is a set
of digital, three-dimensional coordinates, Solids or Images created
by Company of a particular object. Company gives no rights or
warranties with regard to the use of any objects, names, trademarks,
or works of authorship depicted in any Model and you must satisfy
yourself that all necessary rights or consents that may be required
for your particular use thereof are obtained. The Models are
protected by United States copyright laws, international treaty
provisions, and other laws. You may not use, copy, display, modify or
distribute the Models except in strict accordance with this License
Agreement. Company hereby grants to you the following perpetual,
worldwide, non-exclusive, nontransferable, non-sublicensable license
with respect to its rights in the Models: You may copy the Models
onto a storage device in an unlimited number of computers; provided
that all such computers are physically located at your place of
business located at a single specific street address (or its
equivalent). You may use and access the Models on such computers only
at that one location and only as follows: You may use, copy and
modify the Models in the creation and presentation of animations and
renderings which may require runtime access to the Models; provided
that you may neither: (a) separately publish, market, distribute,
transfer, sell or sublicense any Model or any part thereof; nor (b)
publish, market, distribute, transfer, sell or sublicense solids,
renderings, animations or any other product from which any Model or
any part thereof can separately be exported, extracted, or decompiled
into any redistributable form or format. Subject to the foregoing
limitations, and the rights, if any, of third parties in or to the
objects represented by the Models, you may copy and distribute your
animations and renderings incorporating the Models. All other rights
with respect to the Models and their use are reserved to Company.

INFRINGEMENT WARRANTY. Company warrants to you that, to the best of
its knowledge, the digital data comprising the Models do not infringe
the rights, including patent, copyright and trade secret rights, of
any third party; provided, however, that Company makes no
representation or warranty with respect to infringement of any third
party’s rights in any image, trade marks, works of authorship or
object depicted by such digital data. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY AND
WARRANTIES. YOU ASSUME THE ENTIRE COST OF ANY DAMAGE, LOSSES OR
EXPENSE RESULTING FROM YOUR USE OR EXPLOITATION OF THE MODELS. YOU
ASSUME ALL RESPONSIBILITIES FOR SELECTION OF THE MODELS TO ACHIEVE
YOUR INTENDED RESULTS, AND FOR THE INSTALLATION OF, USE OF, AND
RESULTS OBTAINED FROM THE MODELS. TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY
APPLICABLE LAW, COMPANY HEREBY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS AND
IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY, NONINFRINGEMENT, AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
PURPOSE WITH RESPECT TO THE MODELS AND ANY ACCOMPANYING SOFTWARE OR
MATERIALS. Some States do not allow limitations on implied
warranties, so the above limitation may not apply to you. NO
LIABILITY FOR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES. TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED
BY APPLICABLE LAW, IN NO EVENT SHALL COMPANY BE LIABLE FOR ANY
SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, (INCLUDING, WITHOUT
LIMITATION, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF BUSINESS PROFITS, BUSINESS
INTERRUPTION, LOSS OF BUSINESS INFORMATION, OR THIRD PARTY CLAIMS)
ARISING OUT OF THIS LICENSE AGREEMENT OR THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE
THE MODELS OR FOR ANY OTHER REASON, EVEN IF COMPANY HAS BEEN ADVISED
OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. IN NO EVENT SHALL COMPANY’S TOTAL
LIABILITY TO YOU FOR ALL DAMAGES IN ANY ONE OR MORE CAUSES OF ACTION
EXCEED THE AMOUNT, IF ANY, PAID BY YOU FOR THE MODELS. Because some
States do not allow the exclusion or limitation of liability for
consequential or incidental damages, the above limitation may not
apply to you. THIS LICENSE AGREEMENT IS GOVERNED BY THE LAWS OF THE
STATE OF HAWAII, WITHOUT REGARD TO THAT STATE’S CHOICE OF LAW
PROVISIONS. This License Agreement is the entire agreement between
you and Company with respect to the Models and supersedes any other
communications or advertising, whether written or oral, with respect
thereto. This License Agreement may not be modified or expanded
except in a writing signed by an authorized representative of
Company. If any provision of this License Agreement is held invalid
or unenforceable, the remainder shall continue in full force and
effect, provided that, if any limitation on the grant to you of any
right herein is held invalid or unenforceable, such right shall
immediately terminate. Should you have any questions concerning this
License Agreement, or should you desire to contact Company for any
reason, please contact: Attn: Legal Affairs Precision Modelmaking
Technologies. P.O. Box 136 Kunia, Hawaii 96759-0136 © COPYRIGHT
1999 Precision Modelmaking Technologies.

Give me a break, It will not deter a thief, someone in a third world
country or a person making one or two “borrowed” pieces. The only
thing is keep ahead and don’t look back, Life is TOO Short. (By the
way this Legal is copyrighted, get your own lawyer, LOL!!!)

Best Regards,
Christian Grunewald
Precision Modelmaking Technologies
Hawaii
(808) 622-9005

60

Hello everybody, I think this is a very interesting discussion going
on here and I feel inspired to give my input. As I see it, the problem
lies much deeper than on the intellectual property level. It lies in
the human nature itself and it�s called EGO and GREED! First to the
EGO part: The problem is that almost everybody thinks he is an island,
that we are separate, which we are not! Yes, we are individuals but
not separate. Our consciousness is interconnected. It happened many
times to me, and I am sure to everyone of you as well, that I got an
idea for a design, didn�t get to it and some time later see it
popping up somewhere in a magazine or in a store. What I am saying
here is, our minds are not the breeding places for ideas. They
functions more like radio receivers. And it�s even in the language.
We say: I got an idea! From where did we get it? The mind is an
instrument capable of perceiving, memorizing and rearranging
basically. It is not made to come up with something entirely new! The
minds content is old! How can you make something new from old stuff?
It is merely rearranging what we are doing. However ones in a while we
are able to perceive something really new. All the great inventions
where perceived. (And all the small ones too) Albert Einstein was
reported to have said: that within a week or so several other
scientists would have come up with �his� theory of relativity. He was
just the first (to perceive it). Now the GREED part comes in. The fact
that we are capable to perceive ideas with our small brains does not
mean we own them! After perception of an idea we claim it. We try to
own it. We say �it�s my idea�. If we are clever enough we get a
copyright or a patent to exclude others from exploiting the same
(�my�) idea. Why are we doing that? Money and fame! Don�t get me
wrong, I am not saying this is right or wrong. But that�s what we are
doing. Let�s face it. Our motives are not purely artistic.We want to
make a living. Van Gogh, for example, never got a single penny for his
paintings. He lived on his brothers donations. Guess not everybody
has a brother like he did. So, to sum it up, I agree with what some of
you said already. Be a little more humble and aware that we are part
of a long line of artists and crafters. May be you make your designs
more complicated, because simple designs are easy to copy. Or find a
niche in the market that is unattractive for bigger companies. If you
are a creative person, don�t worry, you will be always ahead with
some new design. Aloha from Hawaii to everybody, Thomas

Pratima Design LLC
e-mail:@pratima