Imitation Is the Sincerest Form of Flattery --- Scottie Piersel Copies on Ebay
- Thread starter georged
- Start date
SmokingPipes.com Updates
Watch for Updates Twice a Week
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
Site Sponsors
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
- Status
:
I forgot about that thread somehow. The perfection of that set will bring a tear to your eye. So. Gorgeous.
I think I have seen Scotto pipes on ebay for at least 2 years. I have been wondering who made them. They seemed to be inspired or copied of others popular shapes and styles. But they were always stamped Scotto.
You're right George. My mistake. So that's a signature design that Scottie can claim. So I ask, should she be sensitive on the subject of copying signature designs, any more than creators of the hawkbill or reverse calabash, etc.? Like the thread title states, it's more flattery than plagiarism.
For sure, ryeguy. This whole controversy could have been avoided if, as Zack said, "Scotto" had the courtesy to, in some way, credit "Scottie" 's work as his inspiration. (I strains one's credulity to suggest that it was not.)
The issue was appropriating the design AND happening to have a name very close to Scotties that could create confusion- it's not considered polite to make money off someone else's branding.I've seen this happen to Hector Wiebe with the Radiator Pipe and Chris Morgan with the Briar Cigar (I think there were actually patent issues involved with one of those) Everyone adapts designs, but give credit where it is due- for example- here's one of my pipes that I adapted from an early 1952 Lady Dunhill design- I mentioned at the time I made it that it was based on an early Dunhill design and think I even mentioned that it used a carbon fiber tenon- which I typically give credit to either Eltang or Joao Reis for that idea. I will say that I don't know the guy in question- it could really be he just doesn't realize what he did was in bad form...
For the record, the pipe maker in question is Juan Pablo Scotto from Bethlehem, Pa. While not a prolific maker he has been making pipes for a while.
https://inkphy.com/scotto_pipe
https://inkphy.com/scotto_pipe
That's just silly. Of course this guy is paying homage, by the name, and his use of her name obviously shows he isn't trying to be a dick. But to give Scottie all rights to pencil shanks with the stainless steel tubing is pure Bolderdash. If he has only been doing it for several years, I have a four year old Regina Scarlatta that is made that way and a Papalia that is a pencil thin with the stainless. I also have 2 pencil thin stainless supported pipes by Road Town, and one by Jesse Jones.
Skip at The Briary who has been peddling pipes since '72 tells me that the stainless support shaft pencil thin shanks was innovated by Eltang. I respect the heck out of Scottie, and so far I've yet to see her claim to have been the innovator. I really need one of hers, as Pencil thins with stainless are the main portion of my collection.
Maybe there are just pipemakers out there that have been doing this that you may not have encountered?
Skip at The Briary who has been peddling pipes since '72 tells me that the stainless support shaft pencil thin shanks was innovated by Eltang. I respect the heck out of Scottie, and so far I've yet to see her claim to have been the innovator. I really need one of hers, as Pencil thins with stainless are the main portion of my collection.
Maybe there are just pipemakers out there that have been doing this that you may not have encountered?
Sorry, my use of "Bolderdash" was meant to be in jest. However, the rest of my post was sort of serious. Or, were you guys joking about her innovating the pencil thin and stainless? If so, I am the one that really looks stoopid. Ha ha.
It seems to me there are two distinct questions.
1) The issue of attribution. Is it the equivalent of plagiarism to copy someone else's style without clear attribution? Does a pipemaker need to make it clear who he has taken inspiration from, and to make sure the pioneer of the style gets credit for inventing it? I don't know enough about the culture of artisan pipe making to know what the convention is; and of course sometimes conventions in an field change (Have you run across the controversy surrounding Led Zepplin ripping off other artists? Quite interesting stuff. Were they doing what everyone in music had always done prior to the pop music industry taking off when they copied other artists note-for-note without attribution, or were they pirates who got rich and famous stealing other people's work?).
2) The issue of fraud or deception. Is it something like fraud to copy someone's style, and then market it under a name that happens to be close to the original artist's name? I think it has been established that Scotto is the guy's name, that he has used it consistently for some years to brand his pipes, and that he has used it in the past to market pipes that bear no particular resemblance to Scottie pipes. There are really two issues here: confusing buyers (who think they are getting the real deal) and, second, cutting into the original pipemaker's sales (because of this confusion). I really doubt Scottie Piersel will lose a sale because of this pipe that Scotto is selling--I suspect they are totally different markets and that no one in the market for a Scottie will be confused by a Scotto, but again, what do I know). But I also see why looking just at this one pipe it would look like he is a huckster, and thus I think it would have been smart of him to clarify that Scotto is not Scottie in the listing, in order to make obvious that he is not trying to scam anyone. In other words, it might not be so much about not confusing buyers, as it would be about making sure everyone knows you aren't just doing a bad job trying to confuse buyers.
If someone wanted to be generous and give the him the benefit of the doubt, he might drop Scotto a note to point out the possibility of the listing being taken as a scam so he can add such a note and avoid tarnishing his brand.
Just my 2 cents, for what they are worth.
1) The issue of attribution. Is it the equivalent of plagiarism to copy someone else's style without clear attribution? Does a pipemaker need to make it clear who he has taken inspiration from, and to make sure the pioneer of the style gets credit for inventing it? I don't know enough about the culture of artisan pipe making to know what the convention is; and of course sometimes conventions in an field change (Have you run across the controversy surrounding Led Zepplin ripping off other artists? Quite interesting stuff. Were they doing what everyone in music had always done prior to the pop music industry taking off when they copied other artists note-for-note without attribution, or were they pirates who got rich and famous stealing other people's work?).
2) The issue of fraud or deception. Is it something like fraud to copy someone's style, and then market it under a name that happens to be close to the original artist's name? I think it has been established that Scotto is the guy's name, that he has used it consistently for some years to brand his pipes, and that he has used it in the past to market pipes that bear no particular resemblance to Scottie pipes. There are really two issues here: confusing buyers (who think they are getting the real deal) and, second, cutting into the original pipemaker's sales (because of this confusion). I really doubt Scottie Piersel will lose a sale because of this pipe that Scotto is selling--I suspect they are totally different markets and that no one in the market for a Scottie will be confused by a Scotto, but again, what do I know). But I also see why looking just at this one pipe it would look like he is a huckster, and thus I think it would have been smart of him to clarify that Scotto is not Scottie in the listing, in order to make obvious that he is not trying to scam anyone. In other words, it might not be so much about not confusing buyers, as it would be about making sure everyone knows you aren't just doing a bad job trying to confuse buyers.
If someone wanted to be generous and give the him the benefit of the doubt, he might drop Scotto a note to point out the possibility of the listing being taken as a scam so he can add such a note and avoid tarnishing his brand.
Just my 2 cents, for what they are worth.
It's very subtle, but I think this was all entirely in jest? Obviously, Eltang was putting stainless into pencil thin shanks for much longer than Scottie. I think this was all just some back slapping on Scottie's behalf. I don't know Scottie, but I need to check out his pipes.
Whoever told you that is ill informed.
I've repaired many dozens of Eltang's pencil-shanks precisely because he never sleeved them. They're as snappy as a glass rod.
In fact, it's likely that whoever thinks Tom did it was unknowingly looking at one of my repairs. (Now THAT would be funny! :rofl: )
The traditional rule is that a person generally has the right to do business under their own name. However, when a name becomes known as a source of goods or services, trademark rights can arise in that name in the geographic areas where that name has become known.
Common-law trademark rights arise from use of a name in connection with goods or services in a specific geographic area. It is entirely possible for different people or entities to develop common-law rights in the same or confusingly similar names in different regions. In such a case, infringement only occurs when one entity enters a market in which the second and said he already has common-law trademark rights.
In the case of a person's name, "secondary meaning" or "acquired distinctiveness" will need to be shown in order to show trademark rights. Typically, this will require at least five years of continuous, substantially exclusive use of the name in connection with the goods or services. In some instances, more evidence of secondary meaning may be required.
The US Patent and Trademark Office will not register a trademark that is primarily a surname on the Principal Register unless secondary meaning can be shown. A name can be registered on the Supplemental Register, preventing registration of confusingly similar names, until secondary meaning is shown. If, however, the trademark becomes registered on the Principal Register, then that registration carries the presumption of the exclusive right to use the trademark throughout the entire United States.
If a name becomes a famous trademark, then others having the same name could be found liable for punitive damages for doing business under that name even if it is their own name. For example, if your name is McDonald, you should not open a restaurant selling hamburgers under that name.
The sticky part is that while the two names are similar, they are not spelled the same. That and the fact that Scotto is the carver's last name gives him the right to use his last name. Another question to ask would be if Scotti Piersal filed the paperwork for either a patent on the design or a trademark on the name.
This whole discussion could also be rendered mute, if Scotto included a note that the design was similar to or based on the design of a Scottie.
Common-law trademark rights arise from use of a name in connection with goods or services in a specific geographic area. It is entirely possible for different people or entities to develop common-law rights in the same or confusingly similar names in different regions. In such a case, infringement only occurs when one entity enters a market in which the second and said he already has common-law trademark rights.
In the case of a person's name, "secondary meaning" or "acquired distinctiveness" will need to be shown in order to show trademark rights. Typically, this will require at least five years of continuous, substantially exclusive use of the name in connection with the goods or services. In some instances, more evidence of secondary meaning may be required.
The US Patent and Trademark Office will not register a trademark that is primarily a surname on the Principal Register unless secondary meaning can be shown. A name can be registered on the Supplemental Register, preventing registration of confusingly similar names, until secondary meaning is shown. If, however, the trademark becomes registered on the Principal Register, then that registration carries the presumption of the exclusive right to use the trademark throughout the entire United States.
If a name becomes a famous trademark, then others having the same name could be found liable for punitive damages for doing business under that name even if it is their own name. For example, if your name is McDonald, you should not open a restaurant selling hamburgers under that name.
The sticky part is that while the two names are similar, they are not spelled the same. That and the fact that Scotto is the carver's last name gives him the right to use his last name. Another question to ask would be if Scotti Piersal filed the paperwork for either a patent on the design or a trademark on the name.
This whole discussion could also be rendered mute, if Scotto included a note that the design was similar to or based on the design of a Scottie.
- Status