Plagiarism, a discussion? [Archive] - Sawmill Creek Woodworking Community

Toney Robertson

06-05-2011, 10:59 AM

I agree with (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/member.php?18967-David-DeCristoforo) David DeCristoforo that a new thread was needed for a discussion on plagiarism in the context of woodworking in general and specifically woodturning.

So where is the line crossed in your opinion?

Is it merely that the person needs to give the original artist credit for their inspiration?

Or is it more how exact is the copy to the original?

Is Mr. Keeton's new piece different enough to the original that it would not be considered plagiarism even without reference to Ms. Drozda?

If I am correct, (and I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong - LOL) in the world of business, I can modify a product and be able to obtain a patent. Does that translate at ALL to the world of art and turning?

When you put your product out there in the form of books, DVD's or teaching, all of which is purchased, does that negate any of the original artist's rights or copyrights?

What say you?

David DeCristoforo

06-05-2011, 11:13 AM

I will move my last comment here. If the mods would like to delete this from the other thread, please do so:

"I used to write articles for magazines (remember magazines?) describing how to build pieces of furniture I designed. I was fully aware of the fact that there would be people who would build (or "copy") the pieces. And yes, the intent was to "pass along" the knowledge, to teach the techniques and to encourage others to stretch their abilities and learn to create objects of beauty that would enhance their lives and give them a feeling of satisfaction.

One of these pieces later appeared on the web site of another "well known" woodworker. This was such a unique design and such an exact copy that the "plagiarism" was impossible to miss. It was presented as his own design and offered for sale. This was not the intent of either myself or the publishers of the magazine.

I am sure you can see the difference between these two scenarios. I am not attempting to pass judgement on Mr. Costelle whose work I greatly admire or to defend Ms Drozda's position. I'm simply saying that when an artist shows his or her work in any venue, it does not constitute de facto permission for anyone to copy, claim authorship of or profit from that work.

"Influence" is a whole different thing. Much of what we see in the world today is the result of people building on the work of others who preceded them. There is a natural process of evolution that depends on not having to continually "reinvent the wheel". It would be absurd to claim that anyone who showed a hollow form turning was "copying" David Ellsworth. But most of us are happy to give Mr Ellsworth credit for pioneering the form. Keith Burns, Andy Di Petro, "our own" Mr Schlumpf, are among many who have taken this form to new heights, developing an unmistakable and instantly recognizable style. But none of them have ever, to my knowledge, offered an exact copy of an Ellsworth piece as their own. John Keeton began this thread by stating that he was, in effect, copying a Drozda piece. He did not post this as his own inspiration and claim authorship. The fact that he offered a piece that in every way surpasses the original is testament to the point I am trying to make here."

There is a gray area here, no doubt. But it comes down to a question of ethics. I think it would have been unethical, for example, for John to post his most recent piece without stating that it was an attempt to duplicate the work of another, claiming, or at least implying, that this was his own concept. John never suggested that. In fact he went to great lengths to specifically give credit to Ms Drozda.

The difference between "legal" and "ethical" can also be a gray area. Someone can usurp the work of another for profit or personal gain and do it "legally" by changing some small detail or the color or whatever. But is it "ethical" to do so? I guess each person has to decide that for themselves.

Michael James

06-05-2011, 11:53 AM

"When you put your product out there in the form of books, DVD's or teaching, all of
which is purchased, does that negate any of the original artist's rights or copyrights?"

No because all the rights and restrictions and fair use terms are included with the purchase, although none of us read them.
My point to John was that he gave Drozda credit for her influence and is not claming this as a gift of his muse (unless Cindy is....). ;)
I grew up playing rock an roll and with the plethora of lawsuits around "compositions" I was waiting for some one to step up and sue everyone, declaring they had invented the 3 chord, I-IV-V change. ZZ top would be a contender and have made a fine career out of that, but it was already there for them to pick up and run with, and run they did.
I wholeheartedly agree with David D, that when one blatantly reproduces the work of another and markets that as his/her own that is deception and not legal. I leave it to the legal minded among us to clarify why and how that is protected.

Alan Trout

06-05-2011, 12:14 PM

I think David pretty well summed up my thoughts on this subject. In my pieces I try to do my own creative thought and design. For example I am not going to do an Amphora on a stick like David does. For me that is his signature piece. Not saying I may not employ some of my casting techniques in a Amphora vessel as I like the shape which is a classic shape from antiquity. But it will not be put on a stick.

Bowl and hollow vessel turning is an interesting art form. Ideas are shared so freely that plagiarism is easily accomplished as there is such a free exchange of techniques, design ideas, and equipment. I have seen many pieces that are complete knockoffs of others work and never a mention of the inspiration of the work. I think we as turners need to be mindful of this. When I attend a demonstration I don't so much try to copy the artist but try to pick up on techniques or areas that I can improve what I am already doing. This helps me grow my knowledge base, skill set along with some inspiration.

Alan

Nate Davey

06-05-2011, 12:28 PM

Too take this one step further, in writing, when you use someone else's work you site them in the text and bibliography. John and others, have "sited" their inspirations or source. As mentioned, there is nothing new under the sun and to claim intellectual property on a design, style or technique would kill the art...IMHO

Reed Gray

06-05-2011, 1:04 PM

I don't think I could duplicate some one else's work if I tried. I have too many idiotsyncracies to be able to exactly copy some thing. It isn't always that I just can't do it the same as others, but that things just don't seem to work out as I intend. One of the biggest compliments I can give some one is that they were an inspiration to me. As some one who teaches, I love to know that I have serves as an inspiration, or have enlightened some one. To do inspired work without thanking those who have done the inspiration is just plain bad form. Some times there are just too many inspirations to acknowledge all of them individually.

robo hippy

David E Keller

06-05-2011, 1:19 PM

I love discussions like this... I think they make for some interesting reading at times.

I would like to add a couple of thoughts. I find it fairly interesting that any person can claim a particular turning as their own, exclusive design given that woodturning has been around for centuries. The human mind is an amazing entity, and there are certainly bits and images stored there that serve as inspiration for all of us. I think credit should be given when the inspiration is known... That's just good manners. I do believe that it's possible for two or more people to arrive at similar pieces without one's knowledge of the other. I think it's a bit presumptive and narcissistic to assume that a piece one has turned is the inspiration for someone else's work.

I turned a piece last year that was inspired by something that Curt Fuller had turned. It turned out that Curt's piece had been inspired by another turner's work... That pretty much defines the world of wood turning for me. We all have the ability to draw inspiration from one another in an effort to express whatever emotion or vision we possess. If someone starts urinating(figuratively speaking) on pieces to mark them as their own, I find the turning and the turner less appealing.

Sean Hughto

06-05-2011, 1:23 PM

I'm with you, Reed. I doubt I could make a second bowl like a first I myself made. Then again, I might be able to fuss and fuss and create a counterfeit, but it wouldn't be fun, it would be a caliper riding drag.

David DeCristoforo

06-05-2011, 2:08 PM

"... it's possible for two or more people to arrive at similar pieces without one's knowledge of the other..."

Absolutely. It's a well documented phenomenon. It's called "synchronicity".

"...I am not going to do an Amphora on a stick like David does. For me that is his signature piece..."

I am by no means the first person to put a form of any kind on a pedestal. And "amphora" is a word I had never even heard until Jeff Nichol gave it to me. My turning began with my looking at the work of others. At first I attempted to emulate that pieces that appealed to me. Quite poorly I might add! So in that sense, there is really little about my current work that could be called "original". At the same time I have attempted to find my own path and express myself in some way rather than to focus on imitating others. When I posted my "parfait" piece, it never occurred to me to claim this concept as my own. So many had done that particular form so well that it has almost become a "classic" and is a part of the repertoire of many turners. I simply wanted to try my hand at it. I doubt that anyone could define an actual source for the "original idea".

"If someone starts urinating(figuratively speaking) on pieces to mark them as their own, I find the turning and the turner less appealing..."

This gets into another "sticky wicket". I see so many unappealing works of art that are "original" or "unique". But they are so by virtue of an attempt by the artist to accomplish just that. The idea of creating an object of beauty is lost in the need to be different. It's really very difficult to find ones own voice and still "be able to sing with the choir".

charlie knighton

06-05-2011, 2:43 PM

if you attend symposium or club demostrations, you can not help but be influenced, in fact, that is why we pay our money and attend, and the demostrators are chosen because of the knowledge they have that we want

Deane Allinson

06-05-2011, 2:59 PM

nihil (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/nihil#Latin) sub (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/sub#Latin) sōle (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/sol#Latin) novum (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/novus#Latin). There is nothing new under the sun. I am usually inspired by what i see as "that is almost a great piece, If they had only......." Turning wood, designing furniture, painting, sculpture. All ideas are a response to a stimulus. 1912 "Nude Desending a Staircase" Marcel DuChamp,

Deane

Malcolm Tibbetts

06-05-2011, 3:23 PM

David, as you wrote, there are so many “grey” areas - I’m sensitive to the issue. In the early ‘90’s, some of my segmented work was compared to that of Ray Allen. Back then almost everyone who produced a SW style of segmented work was compared to the work of Ray. It was almost as if Ray had taken ownership of the SW segmented form. Right or wrong, so strong was Ray influence, that was the reality.

Because of my book and numerous DVDs, I now see many “copies” of my own work and I’m perfectly okay with that - it’s a compliment. Although there have been a few that have “crossed the line”. An example would be producing a direct copy and presenting it for sale as their own. An extreme example: learning a technique from my book and from me and then producing a “how to” tutorial on a website without any mention of the source of inspiration – that’s really “over the line”.

For me, it’s pretty simple: copying to learn is more than okay, unconsciously being influenced is certainly acceptable and understandable, copying to “sell” without mention of inspiration is over the line, blatantly ripping off someone else for profit and/or for personal reputation building should be considered criminal. A term that I picked up years ago from segmenter Mike Shuler is “spring boarding” – taking another’s technique or style and adding your own tweak. Much advancement in woodturning has resulted from spring boarding.

This is a subject that does not get enough attention. Many turners simply don’t know that there is “a line”. A few years ago, back when I was on the AAW board, the journal published an essay of the subject by David Ellsworth. The journal was actually criticized by some members for “wasting space” on such a non-turning related subject. I applaud you for posting this thread.

Michelle Rich

06-05-2011, 3:50 PM

I'm glad I ran across this post. About a year ago i posted a piece on another site . It was an original idea. The next day a fella copied it almost 100%. After seeing it and mulling over my response, I asked the forum members for their view..should we copy others work?? and is it kosher, so to speak? The response was GET OVER IT..YOU PUT IT ON THE INTERNET you should have expected it to be copied!! No kidding about 75 people had their say & 65+ had that view. I was quite surprised, but I guess I should not have been. Is it kosher? I do not beleive so. I believe we must give credit where due, and then try very hard to just springboard off that idea..NOT COPY! I believe John gave Cindy credit , and that was correct. He changed parts he did not like and put in his own replacements. When I first made my neg. space designs I gave credit to the men who influenced me. When I went beyond their ideas I gave credit to myself.

Fred Perreault

06-05-2011, 4:08 PM

I have enjoyed the thread on woodworking/woodturning "plagiarism".

pat·ent

1. the exclusive right granted by a government to an inventor to manufacture, use, or sell an invention for a certain number of years.

2. an invention or process protected by this right.

cop·y·right

http://sp.dictionary.com/dictstatic/g/d/speaker.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/audio.html/lunaWAV/C08/C0836300)/ˈkɒphttp://sp.dictionary.com/dictstatic/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngiˌraɪt/ http://sp.dictionary.com/dictstatic/g/d/dictionary_questionbutton_default.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/IPA_pron_key.html) Show Spelled the exclusive right (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/right) to make copies (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/copy), license, and otherwise exploit a literary, musical, or artistic work, whether printed, audio, video (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/video), etc.: works granted such right (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/right) by law on or after January 1, 1978, are protected for the (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/the) lifetime of the author or creator and for a period of 50 years after his or her death.

pla·gia·rism

1. the unauthorized use or close imitation of the (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/the) language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work.

2. something used and represented in this manner.

Copyright was intended to foster innovation... it has not. Patents were intended to protect original work... it has not(the defenition of "obviousness" has been a moving target). The US Patent Office has had to backpedal on thousands of loosely allowed grants. Copyright lawsuits has become a cottage industry. What could one patent or copyright about a simple, or artistic work from a lathe? Plagiarism might be the duplication (to what extent, and by what parameters?) of an item. Some things seem pretty cut and dried, but it seems that this area of plagiarism is full of grey. If someone produces an artistic (where does artistic start and utility end?) piece of walnut, and someone is inspired to attempt to duplicate that piece but of box elder, and 3" taller, has that person plagiarised? It seems that ethics has a big part here.... certainly attribution would be a polite way to handle it, but was so-and-so the originator of said duplicated item? Must we research whether so-and-so was the original artist and not a "plagiarist'? That's how I view this today. I'll see what tomorrow brings. :) :)

Scott Hackler

06-05-2011, 9:54 PM

This is a really interesting topic. I do agree that if a person creates aparticular style, form or design AND someone else tries to pass if off as theirown... well that is wrong on several levels. Now that same person (the creator)shouldn't get all worked up IF they constantly give demos and create DVD's andbooks on HOW TO make their particular items. They want us to buy the HOW TO DVDbut get mad if we make the items.....

There are so few very unique styles out there that fellow turners will copyeach other. As I sit here I think of the turners that I could ID their work ifit was sitting in front of me. Cindy D for her finial star, Keith Burns for theexclamation point finial topped HFs, Terry Scott for the manta ray styledpots.....J Paul Fennel for the coolest carved and pierced HF's....so on and soforth. I mentally credit each of them with those particular styles. As turnerswe tend to copy what we see. After a few copies, most of us will develop theirown special touch to a particular form.

I guess where I am going with this is that unless you are one of thecreators of the pieces that are so unique that no one else has ever doneanything like it, don't get upset when someone copies or emulates your forms.Along with this, you should strive to become one of these type of turners anddevelop your own uniqueness. Something that people will associate with YOU andyou alone.

I haven't found my particular "form" yet. I try to"copy" everyone who creates work that appeals to me. Some processes Ilike and some are scratched off the list. I have made darn near every type ofform and some appeal more to me, both visually and in the amount of effort theytake to make. Personally, I, get frustrated because I haven't (in my mind)developed my own recognizable style....yet. I know I will get there but thereare an awful lot of Drozda, Burns, Tibbetts, Keaton and others' types of formsthat will be created on my way to MY style. I envy those of you who alreadyhave a style and are completely comfortable with the style you've created.

My nature sculpture/turning scenes are about the closest to semi-original,but I know (even though I haven't seen others...because I am a relative newbie)there are likely a lot of people who have made things like this in the past.And while I enjoy making them, the time involved is a reason I don’t make oneright after the other and go about turning….something else.

Just my insight.... :)

Marty Eargle

06-05-2011, 10:17 PM

It is a general courtesy to give credit for inspirations when you are able. Specifically on a form, design, or technique that is near matched from someone else. Sometimes, it is just not possible to cite where an idea came from and some may yell "plagiarism". We live in a time where endless amounts of information are at our fingertips and it is impossible to know where every image left stuck in your head came from. Every day, I browse this forum, other forums, personal artist sites, and etc to see what is going on in the world of wood turning...and yes to look for inspiration.

If I see an interesting piece of work, there is a chance I'll go down into my shop and see if I can't make something in the similar style. It isn't because I know something is deemed "good" and I want to take a shortcut to adoration. It is because my creative mind and skills with wood are ever evolving...and if I don't push myself to learn how to move my tools to make a form I see in my head, how will my work evolve?

I don't see this as the type of community where "homage" doesn't way out "copying" greatly. But sometimes there are bad eggs and sometimes honest coincidences happen.

BILL DONAHUE

06-05-2011, 10:18 PM

When I first made my neg. space designs I gave credit to the men who influenced me. When I went beyond their ideas I gave credit to myself.

Michelle, Very well stated! A few months ago I attended a demo by Molly Winton who went into great detail about her techniques and then discussed plagarism. She was aware that she was teaching the group how to duplicate what she had done and then encouraged everyone to take that info and develop their own "signature style." She said that she felt ready to sell her work when it could easily be identified by others as hers because of her "signature style." She felt that plagarism occured when a copied or "inspired" piece was sold.

Last March I took David Ellsworth and his wife, Wendy, on a tour of Pensacola on my boat and afterwards had dinner and discussed many things including plagarism. David and Wendy have some very strong feelings about plagarism because for many years he has been the victim of it. (If I had not been offshore in the Gulf Of Mexico today catching fish I'd go into greater detail on what was said. I'm whipped!) The bottom line was kind of like this - imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but if you sell that imitation, it's plagarism.

David DeCristoforo

06-05-2011, 11:50 PM

Jeff Fagen

06-06-2011, 12:08 AM

I've easily stolen enough good ideas from Jeff Nicol for him to file suit,I even profited from them.So sue Jeff,you won't get a thing! lol

Fred Perreault

06-06-2011, 8:40 AM

I am still enjoying the thread. Like beauty, I believe that plagiarism is much in the eyes of the beholder. I am somewhat troubled to think that "selling", or "profiting" might be the final word on plagiarism.
I have been a heavy equipment operator for 45 years. I took an ugly sloped/treed hillside at our town's Cape Cod Baseball League field and made terraces along the 300 ft. right field side. A great place to watch a ballgame ot local event, sitting on a blanket or in beach chairs. It has been cited, photographed and won awards in numerous major national publications including Yankee Magazine, Sports Illustrated, Baseball America, and many more. My idea (...was it original?), my work. This was in 1979, and other Cape fields have emulated the idea. I am flattered.... I love the SMC :) :)

em·u·late

http://sp.dictionary.com/dictstatic/g/d/speaker.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/audio.html/lunaWAV/E01/E0151800) /v. ˈɛmhttp://sp.dictionary.com/dictstatic/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngyəˌleɪt; adj. ˈɛmhttp://sp.dictionary.com/dictstatic/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngyəhttp://sp.dictionary.com/dictstatic/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pnglɪt/ http://sp.dictionary.com/dictstatic/g/d/dictionary_questionbutton_default.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/IPA_pron_key.html) Show Spelled 1. to try to equal or excel; imitate with effort to equal or surpass: to emulate one's father as a concert violinist.

2. to rival with some degree of success: Some smaller cities now emulate the (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/the) major capitals in their cultural offerings.

3. Computers . a. to imitate (a particular computer (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/computer) system) by using a software (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/software) system, often including a microprogram or another computer that enables it to do the same work, run the same programs, etc., as the first.

b. to replace (software) with hardware (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hardware) to perform the same task.

Jeff Nicol

06-06-2011, 10:04 AM

I've easily stolen enough good ideas from Jeff Nicol for him to file suit,I even profited from them.So sue Jeff,you won't get a thing! lol

Jeff, You crack me up!!! I give of myself and share my ideas with the hopes that somewhere down the line perfection can become a reality, not likely but one can dream! If I design a new tool here in WI and another in Austria comes up with the same thing, but months before me, but never sells it, shares it or posts a picture of it anywhere, who gets the credit? If I try and paint a copy of the Mona Lisa and peddle it as the real thing, there may be a sucker out there that would buy it for millions, but the odds are I would see the inside of a jail cell! I have hundreds of unfinished turnings that resemble many of the works that are posted here and on WOW and other woodturning sites, and many finished works that have never been posted anywhere but have dates of completion on them. So if I post one that looks so incredibly like one that Mr. Keeton finished last week, but I did 2 years ago there is no one able to complain, but if the first posted sold for $500 and the second posted for $800 should there be a suit? But if I go out and get pictures of a Bin Pho piece and I copy it right down to the last dragon fly and present it as my own, which would be virtually impossible in the turning world, I would be a loser and a usurper, banking on the artistic mastery of Bin Pho to pad my wallet, and that is a complete violation. But if I make a piece that is based on his stylings with different colors, embelishments, etc but do not say specifically who my inspiration was, most anyone who buys wood turnings and has any idea about turning will know right away that it is in the style of Bin Pho. But this is hard to to for segmented works in my opinion, there are so many ways and woods and colors and designs that can be incorporated into the style, shape, and so on. It makes it very difficult to determine if it is an exact replica of a Malcome Tibbbits piece or not, without the original right there to compare to. But then again, it all comes down to common sense and a little knowledge when one is shopping for art. Name recognition is what sells most works as the maker has a reputation garnered over years of work, where a new artist has not gained the notoriety yet, but still produced a wonderful piece of art. Emulation is a great way to show appreciation to giving the inspiration to achieve greater heights, but some will never attain it and others will surpass it.

One thing that is easy to see and that is there are only so many shapes that can be made in a hollow form, bowl etc. the thing that makes them all different is the wood itself and the finish of the piece, that is where each individuals patience and passion will show. Getting the best out of the wood and doing your best to make the piece desireable is the sign of a true artist. For when a master of painting counterfiting does a painting, they must get right down to the individual brush strokes and the smallest of subtlties to even fool the best and knowledgeable experts, but still fail as it is impossible to do the exact perfect copy. But sometimes in the turning world plain and simple works of widely used forms, will look so much alike who can tell. The only ones that can be replicated are those with embelishments, paint, carving, finals etc, that make them individual.

But here is the kicker, we would not be having this conversation without the internet and the advancement in technology, for we can see what happens in Denmark, Idaho, China, Norway and so on in a few clicks of a mouse and never leave the lazy boy. Before great works were found by collectors and sometimes shown in galleries and the artists became known over time and became sought after. These greats still are there and more will continue to arrive on the turning scene, but what took years of selling and promotion 25 years ago can be acomplished in mere months today. So do your best, work hard to be an individual and take pride in what you do and who you are, the critics will know when you have become one of the greats!

I will post some things soon for everyone to use for inspiration, it makes me feel the time spent on them was worth every minute!

Money can't buy you happiness, but it can buy you a new lathe!

Jeff

Grant Wilkinson

06-06-2011, 10:05 AM

This is excellent and very informative reading. I would humbly like to add the two cents worth of someone who has been accused of taking someone's idea, copying it and selling it. About a year ago, I made a steampunk rollerball pen. I posted it on a few pen sites and subsequently sold others that I made. I'm a hobbyist and not in the mass produced business, so my sales to date have been limited to 4. Just lately, I was accused by a famous pen turner of taking his copyrighted idea and making a profit from it. He told me that it was fair to make them for my own use, but to sell them violated his copyright in the US.
My issue with him can be summed up as follows. First, I had never seen his steampunk pens before I did mine. I only found out about them when he directed me to his own website to show me that he had preceded me with this concept. Second, the pen that he directed me to looks like a one of a kind, made with antique Rolex parts, watch, painstakingly hand coated in epoxy one coat at a time, over a long period of time. Mine are made with parts bought on Ebay and cast in a pressure pot using molds. I said as much in my posts on the forums. Finally, this famous turner was not the first pen maker to craft a pen using watch parts. He may well have raised the bar on the design, but he did not invent it.
I was and am offended to have my integrity challenged. I leave it to those writing in this thread to set me straight, if that needs to be done. However, I can state with no fear at all of being found to by lying that I had never seen his design before I did mine. How, then, can I rightfully be accused and found guilty of copying it?
Thank you for reading.

Scott Lux

06-06-2011, 10:07 AM

Copying a piece of art is a centuries-old technique for learning. Walk through a museum. You will find a few people sketching copies of the masters. This is required by many art schools. The student tries to copy the look, and on the way picks up technique (good or bad technique is left to the student).

I think we should all try to copy the masters in our work too. But if we try to sell that copy as our own, or worse yet, as the original artist's work, then it becomes a forgery.

This is exacerbated by the fact woodturning is a very small part of the art world. The masters are not so well known that the forgeries are spotted.

If I went to a gallery with an impressionistic painting of water lillies, I could neither sell it as my original, or as a Monet. The forgery is obvious. But, If I walked in to a gallery with a beautiful segmented vessel with a southwestern flavor, the buyer might not know Malcolm Tibbetts or his work. I may be able to pass it off as my own.

In my personal case, it's a moot point. Because the buyer would look at something I turned and say, "Is it too late to burn that?" :D

Scott Hackler

06-06-2011, 11:03 AM

"They want us to buy the HOW TO DVD but get mad if we make the items..... "

No... they don't. They get mad if you make them and then claim that they are your own creations, post pictures of them for sale and claim authorship for blatant copies.

For the most part I agree David, but there has been a case or two of heated conversations regarding forms that resemble the "well known" turners. Robin could definitely shed light on this type of interaction. It went beyond courtesy and tip toed into super ego zone, IMO. That is where my comment came from.

Scott Hackler

06-06-2011, 11:22 AM

But, If I walked in to a gallery with a beautiful segmented vessel with a southwestern flavor, the buyer might not know Malcolm Tibbetts or his work. I may be able to pass it off as my own.

But, with all due respect and admiration to Malcolm, if you made the southwestern vessel it ISNT one of his. It might resemble his but it is your design, utimately. *

*blatent exact copies withstanding

David E Keller

06-06-2011, 11:45 AM

Grant, I'm familiar with the pen situation you described, and I don't think you've done anything wrong. The pen maker you mentioned has been described as a jerk by multiple folks who know him, and I applaud you for continuing with your pen making. He personifies the type of turner that I avoid... I won't watch him demo, and I won't buy his books and DVDs. Given the enormous history of woodturning, I find it amazing that anyone can claim to be the first to do anything. I applaud those who innovate, but I'm more impressed with those who do things well rather than just first.

David DeCristoforo

06-06-2011, 12:00 PM

"...It went beyond courtesy and tip toed into super ego zone..."

True in that particular case. And, as I said before, there is a vast "gray area". Where does "emulating" and "being influenced by" or "interpreting" leave off and "copying" or "plagiarizing" begin? Hard to say. But ethics has a lot to do with it and that can vary wildly from one person to another.

David DeCristoforo

06-06-2011, 12:03 PM

"...steampunk rollerball pen..."

OK... what the ??? is a steampunk pen?

Thom Sturgill

06-06-2011, 1:08 PM

Very good thread! I'm glad the issue of forgery came up, though I do not think that is a problem in the wood turning world for the very reason that woodturning is not that well known outside of the community. The other issue is that while copying a segmented design ring is not a good idea, there are only detailed instructions for 'specific' designs. No one has done what I would call a 'cookbook' yet. So there are some who can follow directions but feel they can't design a new pattern. I have had a book on clay pattery suggested to me as a 'source for inspiration' is it plagerism if i duplicate a clay pot in wood? What about if I take a work by an artist that works only in domestics and 'enhance' it with exotics?
I think the line comes when one duplicates intentionally and claims it as original.

Hayes Rutherford

06-06-2011, 2:47 PM

If you hollow a piece of wood you are copying David Ellsworth. He wrote the first article i ever saw about hollow forms in 1979 so everyone stop doing it right now.

Jamie Donaldson

06-06-2011, 3:03 PM

An interesting thread, and I have some considerable experience in the area of intellectual property from my years of professional photography. I spent 5 yrs. in Federal Court prosecuting 3 magazine publishers for willful infringment, and with 2 of my assistants at that time, we finally prevailed. Among artists and other individuals, the deep pockets of many organizations/corporations make it virtually impossible to contest because we don't have the resources to go to court. I was fortunate to have a top copyright attorney as a client. and he was willing to represent us on a contingency basis. I have since followed conversations such as this one, and wish that more individuals could be educated about their rights under copyright laws, as well as patent and trademark laws. I recently encountered just such a situation with the AAW American Woodturner journal when I received a copyright agreement to sign for my byline in the current issue regarding the Segmenting Symposium at Arrowmont last fall. That agreement requires that "the author grants to AAW all rights, interest, and title of the material," and any reuse requires "being granted permission in writing by AAW." Any author who would fall for this transfer of ownership of their personal "intellectual property" is doing so out of ignorance of the law, and a simple non-exclusive license to publish would be the smart and proper process. When I brought this to the attention of the AAW editor, the response was that " this is how we do it in the woodworking business," and any judge will tell you that ignorance is not a viable defense for non-compliance with the law.

Wally Dickerman

06-06-2011, 3:22 PM

Quite a few years ago Fine Woodworking magazine ran an article on a gallery in Seattle who had been selling my work. The front cover of the magazine showed a photo of the interior of the store. In the background were several turnings and I could identify two of them as mine. The form was one that I had been doing for some time, and in fact, still am. What really surprised me was that several friends also identified them as mine and jokingly congratulated me on making the front cover of the magazine.

That form is used by a lot of turners today. I certainly don't claim to be the owner of the form but I was doing it as far back as the middle 80's. As far as I can remember, the form just evolved as I was feeling my way. It has sold well in galleries so I've continued with it.

I don't feel that there is a form that can be claimed by anyone. What is done with that form however, is another matter. Many of us can identify the maker of a piece by the enhancements. J Paul Fennell, David Nittman, Bihn Pho, Molly Winton, John Jordan, Bill Luce and many others take a simple form and put their signature work on it.

Jacob Reverb

06-06-2011, 3:23 PM

Some things you can patent or copyright, and some things you can't.

Plagairism is a rather specific offense relating to the written word.

Then there are the issues of fair use and so on.

As a full-time professional writer for the past 25 years, I don't think the example cited by the OP qualifies as "plagairism."

Distasteful? Probably. Unfair or unethical? Maybe. Actionable? Not likely, IMHO.

Unfortunate? Definitely.

Don Alexander

06-06-2011, 3:39 PM

the example cited by the OP

just to clarify are you talking about '''the "what if" the original artist had not been referenced ''' example?

David DeCristoforo

06-06-2011, 4:08 PM

David E Keller

06-06-2011, 4:41 PM

"If you hollow a piece of wood you are copying David Ellsworth..."

It's not black and white, Hayes. If you want to take it to that extreme, the same thing applies to bowls. No one knows who the first person to make a wooden bowl was but by your reasoning, anyone since that time who makes a wooden bowl is "copying". You can make a hollow form and everyone knows that Ellsworth is the "godfather" of this form. But you don't have to copy Ellsworth's forms. Lots of people have used David's hollowing technique to create forms that are distinctly their own. There are many people who make "classic" forms but do not claim to be the originator of that form. They don't claim it as their own "personal signature style" unless they have hit upon an original variation that sets their pieces apart. It's pretty east to differentiate, for example, between a form made by Keith Burns and the one recently posted by Joe Landon.

I think Hayes had his tongue firmly planted in his cheek with that statement.

If you put one of Keith's finials on Joe's piece, would it still be easy to tell who made it?

One of the distinctions that I think is often lost in the world of turning is the difference between the person who invented something and the person(s) who popularized something. The latter scenario is a matter of circumstance, marketing, luck, and a number of other factors. I don't intend to belittle those who have made forms or techniques popular, but I believe there is a tremendous difference between that and creating something.

Alan Zenreich

06-06-2011, 4:42 PM

Jamie,

I was a commercial photographer for many years. As you know, the ONLY thing that we were selling was the right to reproduce (copy) our work.
We limited the rights according to what the buyer was willing to pay. You want all rights? No problem... here's the price. That's too high (or you simply don't need all rights)? Ok, how about limiting the rights to a 6 month print campaign in North America? Less money... less rights to reproduce.

Under no circumstances would I "accidentally" give away all rights... especially when companies tried to sneak it in by putting "Work for hire" in the PO or worse, on the back of the payment check.

Copyright is created automatically and infinitely divisible by the author.

I remember one photographer who sold NASA "intergalactic rights" to one of his photos that was included in the Voyager probe. If I recall correctly, he charged $1 for the photo, and NASA could reproduce it anywhere in the galaxy, EXCEPT on planet earth.

I used to belong to a professional photographic organization who absolutely refused to pay photographers who contributed to their magazine... not even paying a dollar for a cover photo. This idea of professional organizations not understanding the nature of what they are publishing persists. I'm saddened and surprised to hear that AAW's agreement uses such archaic terms.

Grant Wilkinson

06-06-2011, 5:04 PM

David Keller: Thanks much. I didn't believe it was appropriate to name names, but you're right. His rep is out there. I understand that he even went after another pen maker who did a tutorial on how he sanded his pens. It seems that "famous penmaker" took offence because the tutorial suggested using the same sandpaper and did not give him credit for the original idea.

David DeC: A steampunk pen is make by attaching watch parts to pen tubes, then casting it all in resin and turning it to size. Here is my example.

197066

Tony G

06-06-2011, 6:01 PM

How long should a person acknowledge his or her influences? If there's a distinct technique used then those pieces will always resemble that of his or her influences. At what point can one call a style his or her own?

charlie knighton

06-06-2011, 6:02 PM

does death make any differance??????????/

Alan Zenreich

06-06-2011, 6:10 PM

The current statues say that copyright endures for the life of the author plus 70 years. This goes for both published and unpublished works.
However, if the author dies, he/she cannot continue to produce new works <vbg>

Tony G

06-06-2011, 6:22 PM

So then, every artist alive today should be still giving credit to their influences if it's apparent? Continually with every piece they do? This applies to those considered "pro" as well as "amateur"?

Curt Fuller

06-06-2011, 9:56 PM

One of the things that has held my attention in woodturning is the fact that no two things I have ever turned seem to turn out the same. There are so many variables even when I'm trying to duplicate something that I find it almost impossible to turn two identical objects freehand. So when I see something that someone else has turned and I fall in love with it to the point that I want to "copy" it, I know that my piece might copy the concept but will never be an exact copy of the original. So take something like David D.'s long stemmed amphora series, is that concept now locked up and out of reach of anyone that has seen it? Or, is it just a variation of a small natural edged hollow form on a slender pedestal (and a very beautiful variation at that), which we've seen hundreds of variations. I think that if I had to tippy toe around every thing I decided to turn for fear that I might be be "plagiarizing" someone else's work, I'd sell my lathes. On the other hand, for me there is no greater compliment than to see someone else be positively influenced by something I've done. But I've never seen anyone that was able to copy my work without adding their own creativity to it and ending up with something different, something that is now their work. To me, that's just how this whole influence thing works.

David DeCristoforo

06-06-2011, 10:18 PM

Tony G

06-06-2011, 11:01 PM

David, thanks for the clarification, at-least in my mind anyway. I understand the claiming a piece as an original and what-not, but I'm still slightly lost elsewhere.

Maybe I get lost in the "grey" area as far as borrowing a style. Let's just say I carve a piece using the same technique a John Jordon. Where would it separate from being a Jordon copy? Would I have to pierce it or char it or other to make it my own? At this point am I trying to hide the Jordan style? Hmmmm, maybe this is the time of self discovery in pushing a piece into a new direction, yet carrying on something you were fond of?

Rodney Walker

06-06-2011, 11:12 PM

Very interesting discussion.
As for myself, I am still very new to turning and really don't even have the skills to copy anyone's artwork or be concerned about anyone copying mine. I'm also more interested in making utilitarian pieces anyway.
I always try to give credit where credit is due when I know I am using another person's idea or method no matter what the subject matter. That said, sometimes people do come up with the same ideas independently of one another without knowledge of the other's work. The steampunk pen is a good example of that.
I do have a question: Trademarks haven't come up yet. Where do they fit in?
Rodney

Alan Trout

06-06-2011, 11:32 PM

I think there needs to be another "clarification" here. When I say "copy" what I mean is "copy". Literally. You make a copy of something as closely as you can. Not a problem until you claim the copy to be an "original". Making a similar piece would be, maybe "emulating". Or you might "interpret" a form in much the same way that musicians interpret a piece of music. But they do not claim to have authored that music as much as they may have, in some way, made it "their own". I certainly did not invent the concept of small hollow forms on stems. Or the incorperation of natural edges. But I never claimed to.

David,

I agree with you but with music if you use any part of that piece and you make money from it you pay the composer. Just ask Vanilla Ice when he sampled under pressure by Freddie Mercury and David Bowie. He lost his carrier because he sampled the intro and claimed it as his own.

To build on someones style and make it your own is one thing. I think we all strive to find our own voice. building on techniques and styles is fine and is part of the evolution or an art form and expected. I understand that exact duplication is very difficult. Minor changes does not make it different. It is still the same. If it is for your own enjoyment or a gift to a friend I have no problem with it but to sell those items or sell the ideas in teaching or authorship of ideas that are not yours is not responsible or ethical. This is a fine line and I don't have all the answers but like people to think what they are doing. If I feel strange that I am to close to another persons Idea I try to avoid that. Many times I come up with a better idea and proceed. It is kind of like the definition of pornography. We may not be able to explain it but we know it when we see it.

Alan

Alan

Jon Prouty

06-07-2011, 5:41 AM

Wow this is an interesting thread... I wonder if the TOS of SMC make mention of this topic and rights to pics, etc (it is too late or early for me to look it up -just got done feeding the baby and I am pooped). Anyway, as a new turner, I am well aware that anything I come up with has probably been done before... But does that mean I can't sell my work even if it is influenced by another? I think the lines get very blurry especially once someone borrows a design element from someone like the "famous" finial artist who sells how to DVDs... I would imagine that lawsuit being tossed like greased lightning. I would be crazy mad if someone attacked me for replicating a design taught in a DVD or even for that matter posted on the Internet.

The reference to photography does not compute with me... The rights granted buy photographers are for replication of the image for use in publications or other media, not the subject itself. You can copywrite an image of a turning that I make but you can't prohibit me from selling the piece. If I sold the picture come after me.

John Hart

06-07-2011, 5:51 AM

I've been following this with great interest. Mainly because I think there is a stark difference between woodturning and other forms of copyable medium. If Beethoven created a symphony, and a contemporary rock band integrated 10 measures of that symphony into a pop song, is it a violation of copyright if another rock band used those same 10 measures in another song?

If I write a 370 page fictional book and use the phrase, "And the tree stood still, while the world moved around it", is it a violation if someone else uses that phrase in an entirely different story?

I think not.

Credit where credit is due is a courtesy. If something is truly an "original" idea, then that originality is readily apparent, because frankly, original ideas are far and few between. What one person claims as original, could simply be the conglomeration of copies.

Take my own woodturning. People say that it is "Distinctively Hartish". What's that mean? I guarantee that my pieces are the conglomeration of all the stuff I see in other people's work, or reflections of fellow woodturner's critiques, ideas, suggestions, examples...etc.

Most of our forms date back 5000 years...then we add stuff, and it becomes our creation, inspired by dead artisans.....even if a living artisan created it yesterday, it is still 5000 years old.

For those professionals who write books and create videos....If you publish something that is "original" and someone copies it and claims it as their own for their own marketing, then I would suggest that you apply your resources to legal avenues, and allow a court to decide. If you want to use internet forums to try the case in the court of public opinion, then it's just gossip and not worthy of attention.

Exact copies are provable through litigation. Emulation is not. Inspiration is a compliment. Oh....and when someone emulates another, then thanks the original artist for the inspiration, and then does it better than the original...such as the case of Mr. Keeton, well, that's a case where the original artist should be flattered by the compliment, and given a moment to reflect how they might improve in the future.

Kenny Jacobson

06-07-2011, 10:10 AM

I agree, this is a very interesting thread. I'm going see if I might add a few more ideas to what's already be said. In doing so, I may be playing devil's advocate to conventional wisdom. I'm not sure if I agree 100% with the following points, but here are some alternatives ways to think of "copying".

1. "Copying" has the possibility of exposing more people to the beauty of wood turning, thus increasing its popularity as an art form. This in turn, may then increase the number of potential buyers. In this scenario, both the copier and the originator benefit from the increase in potential buyers.

1.5. Price points. This goes along with #1. Not everyone can or will spend $10K-$20K on an Ellsworth original, but might be willing to spend a couple hundred on something that looks similar. This is NOT a "lost sale" for David Ellsworth. That buyer never would buy it in the first place. But again, the cheaper copy still increases the visibility of wood turning as an art, thus increasing the potential buying public, including those who can and will spend more money for an "original".

2. In the past few decades (or maybe century) we've become convinced that a person with an "idea" should be recompensed over and over and over again throughout their life and beyond. That somehow "ideas" are better than actual work. But ideas are really a dime a dozen, it's the execution of ideas that's important. If the idea person is working their lathe and producing quality work, they are recompensed through sales, partly for their idea and mostly for their work. If the "copier" is also working their lathe, producing quality work, shouldn't they be recompensed at least for working? What if the "copier" produces the same quality for cheaper? Does that signal to us that the original was overpriced? What if the copier improves on the design? Is it right to deprive the world of a superior product?

3. The threat of copying forces artists to continue to innovate, explore, and grow. If you, as an artist, know that months after your next show, imitators are going to be knocking you off, it keeps you on your toes, continuing to explore new possibilities.

I realize this is a very sensitive subject, and I don't wish to offend anyone. These are just some things to think about.

And so you know (so I can be honest and give credit, where credit is due), these ideas came mostly from my reading Mike Masnick at techdirt.com (http://www.techdirt.com)

Toney Robertson

06-07-2011, 1:03 PM

Well, I dont have much to say on this discussion, I try to stay off of topics like this because they usually end being a heated debate. Topics like this kinda remind me of another forum that most of know, which I visit very rarely because of off subject topics such as this. I say lets stick to turning, sharing, and critiques, not personal opinions, debates, and persuasion; this is how stuff gets out of hand. Anyways, my thought on the above threads: If I make a finial lid, does that mean Im copying somebody?????????????

Cory, that is an interesting assessment. I see no heated debate in this thread. I see people discussing a very pertinent subject to the turning worl, since I believe many of us try to sell the pieces we make.

How are we to know what is over the line without discussing where that line is. No, this discussion will not draw that line definitively and with perfect clarity but it has served to bring, at least to me, a new understanding of the issues involved.

Hilel Salomon

06-07-2011, 4:42 PM

Plagiarism is plagiarism. If you copy too much of an article or book, even if you attach footnotes and attribute the article or piece of writing, it is plagiarism. In writing, one should enclose attributed pieces with footnotes, obviously impossible with works of art. I've only made one turning in my life that was truly original, and I posted it on this forum. In my case, I have no problem with someone "lifting" the design, because I know that it will be improved upon. Artists who sell their work, however, are in another category. I have attended demonstrations where the demonstrator said that he/she had no problems with people using a particular design, but I've also attended those where the demonstrator specifically asked the audience not to lift the design, explaining that he/she was showing technique and not providing a copyable piece.
As for death, it doesn't end the fact that copying without permission is plagiarism. That's certainly the case with literary and scholarly works.

Hilel

Jeff Nicol

06-07-2011, 6:10 PM

1. Every Shape we can turn, without carving, color or embelishment has been done one time or another by someone in one media or another. (Greek vases, Native American pottery, South American Pottery, African pottery etc.) So we are not the first by any means

2. A shape is a shape is a shape, no one can copyright a circle, square, oval and so one, they belong to everyone in their simple forms.

3. Music, Photography, Writings, Paintings, and other things that are signed, contributed to through family or other provenance are not woodturnings of normal everyday works of every turner. If a turner copyrights each and every piece they turned.......well that could never happen, makes no sense.

4. A spindle is a spindle, finials, stems, bases, bulbs, bodies, lids and so on are parts of the whole of many pieces of woodturned art. We all can use them as we like as they will all be a little different unless you use a CNC machine to reproduce them each time.

5. It is wrong on many levels to copy down to the last brushstroke or carved feather etc. of an existing piece of art that has been turned and embelished with magnificance by a well known or new turner, and then take credit as the original creator to benefit in any way. This is blantant theft, but I am not sure what would be done if it was reproduced once or 100 times, 1 time is dumb, and dishonest but 100 is arrogant, self agrandizing and for monetary gain. This would be the time to go to court to recover any money garnered from the blantant disregard for the original maker.

6. Like mentioned already, if it is going to be a battle to claim every little thing that is done in the turning world, what kind of people have we become? Where is the fun, relaxation, joy and sense of accomplishment we all get from finishing a piece, no matter what or how spectacular it is? This form of artistic exspression like all others should not become a competition of wills or greed. Like I said in my first post, there is no way that we can ever know about every single turning that exists in the world. The amount of things that are sold or posted on websites for all to see may never be seen by all so we won't know if things are copied and put in a personal collection of the turner or a friend or family member of the turner.

7. Those who fuss and fume over what was written on a blog, tweet, facebook and on and on, once it is on the web it will be used by others no matter how hard you try to not let it happen. No one can look at every website in the world to see if something has been posted there without any credit given to the original. This is the worst part of techology, it makes it too easy to be a crook, thief, whiner, or whatever you want to be, because most can stay hidden and anonymous and feel invinceable sitting in their dark room in the glow of a computer screen, no one but anyone.

Keep it simple, be a good person and be proud of who you are and don't envy those who may have a little more skil or imagination, it will just make you miserable.

Spin some wood and smile,

Jeff