Online since 2002. Over 3300 puzzles, 2600 worldwide members, and 270,000 messages.

TwistyPuzzles.com Forum

It is currently Fri Jul 25, 2014 7:03 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 66 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Tony Fisher's CUBIE CHAOS 2 auction
PostPosted: Wed Dec 20, 2006 1:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm
A new ten day auction starts today (14.00 PST / 22.00 GMT 20th Dec) for one of my remaining Cubie Chaos 2 puzzles. This is the harder of the two.
It is the first ever signed Cubie Chaos 2.


Attachments:
13 low cc2.jpg
13 low cc2.jpg [ 107.57 KiB | Viewed 8241 times ]
11 low cc2.jpg
11 low cc2.jpg [ 111.1 KiB | Viewed 8241 times ]
12 low cc2.jpg
12 low cc2.jpg [ 98.88 KiB | Viewed 8240 times ]
low 6 cc2.jpg
low 6 cc2.jpg [ 110.38 KiB | Viewed 8241 times ]
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 20, 2006 3:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2006 10:05 am
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
Is there a video coming? Just curious. I always drool when I see your masterpeices in action Tony.

_________________
Fridrich
3x3 PB 22.63
3x3 Av 30.57

25, Male
Started cubing Oct 15 '05

Out of the game, but not completely.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 20, 2006 5:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm
AUCTION


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 20, 2006 5:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm
I was expecting and hoping this auction would also have hidden bidders. For some reason this is not the case. I also looked into a private listing but couldn't figure it out despite my recent link to how you do it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2006 8:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 10:20 am
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Once again I have taken time to try to make out the mechanism on the chaous puzzle...

This time I am very unsertain though...


Attachments:
Cubie Chaos 2 copy.jpg
Cubie Chaos 2 copy.jpg [ 127.36 KiB | Viewed 8123 times ]
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 5:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm
The link is written in very large, very blue writing!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 11:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 3:54 am
Location: Italy
Haara wrote:
Once again I have taken time to try to make out the mechanism on the chaous puzzle...

This time I am very unsertain though...


I tried to use this scheme to build the CC2, but seems that doesn't work right... :( :(
I think that it's not the correct scheme....as soon as I'll find the correct scheme I'll let you know :P


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 11:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm
How about coming up with a new scheme?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 7:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 3:54 am
Location: Italy
Tony Fisher wrote:
How about coming up with a new scheme?

I think in next days I'll find how to build correctly the CubieChaos2, but I think that you are one of the greatest puzzlemods in the world :D so you could make a great Christmas gift to all puzzlefans and attach the correct scheme of cubiechaos2... :P :roll: :lol: Is this possible?
Tony, don't worry :P , trust me, I'm a your great fan!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 8:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2006 10:05 am
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery?

_________________
Fridrich
3x3 PB 22.63
3x3 Av 30.57

25, Male
Started cubing Oct 15 '05

Out of the game, but not completely.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 8:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 3:54 am
Location: Italy
xcool wrote:
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery?

I have a great admiration for Tony Fisher and for all the great puzzlemods all over the world, and in my collection, so as in mostly of rubik's fans collection, there are many imitations of puzzles created by some other guys, I think that's not a problem, we don't speak about Microsoft software or millions Euro :lol: :roll: :D I think we are all puzzlefriends :P !!
If I had so much money to buy a Fisher puzzle I'd purchase it, so I prefer to create my Fisher ( and others...) puzzles by myself, I'm not a serial killer, but as many other guys in this forum a Rubik's fan and collector!!
about imitation... :twisted: if I remember well the italian Antonio Meucci invented the telephone, and Bell copyed it!! :x That was a really crime!! :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm
When Anthony Greenhill told me about the Golden Cube he had made I was very flattered. He did not however sell it on eBay using my name and copied text. I remember a thread sometime ago on this forum where the question of copying puzzles was discussed. If I recall a number of things were agreed. Now it seems that absolutely anything goes.
I wanted to copy a puzzle made by one of the forum members about a year ago to sell. Out of respect I asked permission to make it. After some initial misunderstanding it was clear that the person did not wish me to produce the puzzle. I reluctantly (and belatedly) decided not to make copies to sell.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 8:31 pm
Location: Arvada, CO
Italrubik wrote:
if I remember well the italian Antonio Meucci invented the telephone, and Bell copyed it!! :x That was a really crime!! :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:


I'd think you'd be more upset with Benito Mussolini than someone who was trying to help deaf people communicate.

_________________
"It's like an alarm clock, WOO WOO" -Bubb Rubb


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 2:48 pm
Location: Capital of Culture 2010
I think there is a big difference of someone making a puzzle for himself, or to sell it.

I am not able to purchase a Golden Cube for instance.
If I would be able to reproduce it, I would do. To own one and to play with it.
But I would never reproduce it, just for money earning purposes, becuase that seems unfair.



Q


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 1:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2006 10:05 am
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
I also think Italrubik has no intention of recreating the puzzle to sell. I think he's just doing it for the joy of building and puzzling.


Also, Tony, are you refering to the overlapping cube that sold on eBay not to long ago? If that's the case, I understand your frustration. It was not made by you, but the layout and description were cut and paste from you I believe. I understand completely that that must have agrivated you, and I agree that that was across the line.

And Finally: Tony, may I ask what was the puzzle you made that was a forum member's original design?

_________________
Fridrich
3x3 PB 22.63
3x3 Av 30.57

25, Male
Started cubing Oct 15 '05

Out of the game, but not completely.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 2:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 7:29 am
Location: San Diego, California
kind of wierd though about making puzzles to sell because didnt Tony make an article about cuboids and look how many of those have been made and sold. I know that I make puzzles specifically to sell and some to keep. I would never make a Golen Cube to sell but I might make one to keep.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 3:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2006 6:02 pm
If I was going to make a puzzle, I think I'd want to make something similar to this, it looks so normal, but then when you see it mixed, it blows you away!

_________________
3x3: PB 9.64
http://www.xanga.com/j_ey


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 5:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm
The auction I was referring to was Italrubik's Cubie Chaos 1 auction. I think it has now been removed. I didn't ask for him to do that but thanks anyway. I felt that for this particular auction things were pushed just a bit too far. I certainly won't be getting grumpy every time a copy of one of my puzzles shows up on eBay. It just seems a shame that people who are able to make puzzles aren't spending their time making their own creations (there are still so many that haven't been made). I don't think I can claim to have any special rights over things like cuboids or regular polyhedral transformations. I may have been the first to produce a 2x3x4 or Icosahedral Skewb but how can I really claim they are mine? I am sure loads of other people considered those possibilities also. Puzzles like the Cubie Chaos 1+2, Golden Cube etc are different however since their designs are almost certainly uniquely mine. Hopefully these puzzles will inspire people to go on and make better things, not simply to copy them for profit. I know the issue of copying is a complex one and usually I have a relaxed attitude about it but this time I felt I had to speak out.
OK that's my rant over and I hold no bad feelings towards Italrubik or anyone else.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 6:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:31 am
Location: Greece, Australia, Thailand, India, Singapore.
Tony Fisher wrote:
Hopefully these puzzles will inspire people to go on and make better things, not simply to copy them for profit.


This is not only a remarkable point for puzzles, but for life as well. Money is not everything, happy is! :)


Regarding the puzzles, I would never take some other's *active* or inactive idea and then place it on ebay or for trade. That is against the unwritten rules of fair play. No creator can be happy if his idea is used without permission. For personal use though, that is a completely different story.

Plus, in this forum, from what I have seen, everybody respects everybody, so from time to time, we just need to redirect some people (including me!) to those unwritten rules and everything will be fine again! ;)



Pantazis

_________________

Educational R&D, Gravity, 4D Symmetry, Puzzle Ninja, Matrix Mech, Alien Technology.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 8:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2002 2:19 pm
Location: Yaroslavl, Russia and Maryland, USA
I am a little divided on this issue. Don't take me wrong - I do agree that such original designs as Tony Fisher's Golden Cube and Cubie Chaos, or Aleh's Kite Cube should probably not be reproduced for sale on eBay. At least I understand the reasoning behind it. On the other hand, 90% of people here are unable to make these or many other puzzles themselves, and the authors of the designs are simply not able to satisfy the demand physically, and moreover they are more interested in producing new designs. So what options are left to those willing to have these puzzles?

If I were to be able to make all those puzzles, would a publicly known offer to make the puzzle at a privately agreed upon cost be more appropriate than putting an already made puzzle on eBay?

I do have a feeling that given the circumstances we should not prohibit others to reproduce and sell the puzzles. Provided that they give the credit where necessary. That would allow more people have and play with these wonderful creations. The puzzles will still hold the names of the authors as nobody can take that away.

_________________
Aleksey


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 9:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm
I do understand what you are saying Aleksey. The puzzle I wanted to produce last year has never been made in great quantities and at the time I felt there was room for both of us to make it. However the puzzle would probably never have existed without that one person coming up with the idea. To me that at least gives them the right to be consulted.
BTW the thing that set me off was not so much the copying but the way it was being sold. The copying issue then had to be included.
I don't want to go on about it anymore since every one of my posts sounds as if I am attacking Italrubik even more and I don't want to do that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2000 2:51 am
Location: New Ulm, Minnesota, USA
xcool wrote:
And Finally: Tony, may I ask what was the puzzle you made that was a forum member's original design?


Would it happen to be the container? I think it mite be unless I'm wrong about this. I'm also very curious on what the puzzle is.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2006 3:36 pm
Location: Boston, MA
What about the octaminx? I know several people here have built those. :?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 1:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 8:31 pm
Location: Arvada, CO
I wanted to give Mr. Brandt credit in the Draken auction, but I didn't want to confuse bidders into thinking I was he or that it was an original Brandt puzzle. I just wanted one for myself and I figured someone else would too. Ebay seems like the most fair market for sellers and buyers alike.

I'm very curious what everyone else thinks also. This could be a great time to try to reach a consensus on an "ethical rule of thumb". I would be very sorry to offend someone in this way.

_________________
"It's like an alarm clock, WOO WOO" -Bubb Rubb


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 7:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 3:54 am
Location: Italy
skeneegee wrote:
Italrubik wrote:
if I remember well the italian Antonio Meucci invented the telephone, and Bell copyed it!! :x That was a really crime!! :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:


I'd think you'd be more upset with Benito Mussolini than someone who was trying to help deaf people communicate.

Do you know the ITALIAN CRISTOFORO COLOMBO who discovered America in 1492?... :lol: :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 7:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 3:54 am
Location: Italy
I saw many auctions on ebay about many different puzzles...many identical puzzles are sold by different sellers....so I built my CubieChaos1 and I put it in auction on ebay....I cannot reaaly see what's the problem!! :shock:
Some time ago I auctioned a yellow Maze cube on ebay, then I saw after 2 weeks an other auction about a yellow Maze cube by another ebay seller...but I never thought to contact him because he copied my auction!!
I saw overlapping cubes auction by lh Corea on ebay, and so many similar auction! I am a puzzle fan and collector, and if I'm able to produce some puzzles I do it, and because I also purchase some puzzles on ebay I am happy to get some money for new purchaising :P
I think that there are so many problems in the world...so guys don't cry for a puzzle... :D Don't worry, be happy!! :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 7:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm
It wasn't the Container. I don't want to reveal the puzzle since the whole thing was a private matter which isn't relevant to this discussion.
With Jurgen Brandt's puzzles I think things become more complicated. Some of his creations such as the icosahedral transformation of the Megaminx are ideas that many people have had (including myself). In addition he is not and probably won't be making extras to sell. I believe several of his puzzles are kind of "unowned" ideas in the same that cuboids and other basic regular polyhedral transformations should be. I think if it was me I'd ask permission to make the Draken as it has a slightly more unusual design. The problem is though that it is unlikely you would get a reply from him. I think there are many grey areas. On one end of the scale we have Aleh's Kite Cube which should never be copied to sell without permission and on the other end we have a 2x2x3 which I think is OK for anyone to make. In between things are far less clear.
Ryan, I was making and selling the Octaminx many years ago.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 7:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:31 am
Location: Greece, Australia, Thailand, India, Singapore.
skeneegee wrote:
This could be a great time to try to reach a consensus on an "ethical rule of thumb".


That would be nice.
And anyone new who joins, could be pointed to it. :)


So summarising.... what is needed regarding the reconstruction of custom ideas:


(1) Private builds are ok, but when presented in public (this forum, personal website etc), the author should*** be acknowledged. The acknowledgement could be as simple as the creators name on part of the an image name.
*** that would require some knowledge by the builders part. A buyer need not necessarily know about this, as the creator should have been already credited about this previously.
(2) For sale or trade, permission of the creator is needed. If the creator is inactive/unable to communicate and produce, then full credit is needed. :)
More complex trade collaborations could be reached between builders and creators in private or in public, as long as the creator agrees with all the terms.




Of course, regarding already marketed products that are not produced anymore, it is a completely different story, and sometimes companies don't care. Anyone entering this area is on his/her own. ;)




The above are just some first attempt. I am neither an expert in law nor anyone who speaks for all, I am just starting to make a framework and with some calibration, I hope everyone will agree with the final "ethical rule of thumb"! :)


Pantazis


PS Ooops... I just remembered I built a magic zero using Mike's idea and template... and didn't place any credit yet!!! Sorry!!! :oops: :oops: :oops:

_________________

Educational R&D, Gravity, 4D Symmetry, Puzzle Ninja, Matrix Mech, Alien Technology.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 12:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 8:31 pm
Location: Arvada, CO
kastellorizo wrote:
PS Ooops... I just remembered I built a magic zero using Mike's idea and template... and didn't place any credit yet!!! Sorry!!! :oops: :oops: :oops:


This is another case, I posted the patterns on this forum hoping that people would build it for themselves. I would not care if someone started selling them on ebay.

Don't worry Peter, I didn't invent 4 tile magic, I just made a variation. No credit is necessary.

I hope you feel better BTW.

Italrubik, I do know of Columbus, he has a holiday here in USA.

_________________
"It's like an alarm clock, WOO WOO" -Bubb Rubb


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 12:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 12:45 pm
Location: Rochester, MN
Italrubik wrote:
Do you know the ITALIAN CRISTOFORO COLOMBO who discovered America in 1492?... :lol: :lol:


Yup, after the Native Americans who lived here and the Vikings.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 12:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm
That is a good idea Kastellorizo. Perhaps we can get Sandy to have a pinned post on the forum. It could be called something like "puzzle making etiquette". I think it would have to be carefully worded though. I personally dislike rules on forums especially where people aren't actually breaking any laws.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 12:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2002 2:19 pm
Location: Yaroslavl, Russia and Maryland, USA
Peter, there are much much less unique puzzles that would require permission to build in my opinion. In that view, rather than require puzzle builders to request permission from the puzzle creators, I would see it the other way around - it's allowed unless explicitly prohibited. It can be a simple statement at the time the puzzle is announced here.

Still, there is one simple problem here that I can see. Suppose there is a puzzle builder who builds and sells puzzles created by others. Even the puzzles that are explicitly prohibited from reproduction for sale. Do you think his puzzles would have a lesser market? In the real world they usually don't. Thats the fact of life.

I would like to come to the consensus as well. Peter, the rules you propose look like a repeat of what had been kind of agreed upon when we discussed this subject previously. Another observation is that we started having this kind of discussion more often as more builders have come to the scene. I don't think these rules are working well, whether we like that or not.

After all consideration and given the circumstances that only a handful of people creates new puzzles and only a handful of people builds or reproduces them, I tend to think that in nearly all but the exceptional cases we should not prohibit building of the puzzles by others, for sale or not. The creators are not able to satisfy the demand anyway, and most of the time simply are not interested in reproduction as compared to making something new.

It's interesting to see where we end up this time in this kind of discussion. 8-)

_________________
Aleksey


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 1:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:31 am
Location: Greece, Australia, Thailand, India, Singapore.
skeneegee wrote:
Don't worry Peter, I didn't invent 4 tile magic, I just made a variation. No credit is necessary.


Thank you Mike! :)
(it is not actually about the mechanism, but the lovely template! You did some really nice work there!)



Tony Fisher wrote:
Perhaps we can get Sandy to have a pinned post on the forum. It could be called something like "puzzle making etiquette". I think it would have to be carefully worded though. I personally dislike rules on forums especially where people aren't actually breaking any laws.


Agreed to all this. The wording can definitely be made much more succinct. :)




Aleksey wrote:
Peter, there are much much less unique puzzles that would require permission to build in my opinion. In that view, rather than require puzzle builders to request permission from the puzzle creators, I would see it the other way around - it's allowed unless explicitly prohibited. It can be a simple statement at the time the puzzle is announced here.


Interesting to see things from this point of view too. :)
Unfortunately today (during to not much marketing, demand etc), new puzzle creators don't have much protection, and for some, even getting a patent could be more difficult than making the puzzle.
As you said correctly, not many of them are active, and the last thing I would want to do, is to discourage those creators from making more puzzles. So I would rather help in making regulatutions that appreciate their work, which may attract more creators in the future.

All this can be made less confusing, if for every specific custom puzzle in the twisty database it is stated what you can and what you can't do with it.


Aleksey wrote:
Still, there is one simple problem here that I can see. Suppose there is a puzzle builder who builds and sells puzzles created by others. Even the puzzles that are explicitly prohibited from reproduction for sale. Do you think his puzzles would have a lesser market? In the real world they usually don't. Thats the fact of life.


But of course. The world is not perfect. And it is communities like this forum where collectors and enthusiasts really appreciate the work of a creator. The prices of some puzzles can sometimes be prohibited for most of us, but that only underlines the quality behind them. Replicas in this case could be ok as long as they don't create confusion. And I am pretty sure most of the creators would agree for other people to make them. Being polite and asking for permission, will not only ensure things are clear and keep relationships strong, but will also bring a smile to the creator's mouth. :)




Aleksey wrote:
I would like to come to the consensus as well. Peter, the rules you propose look like a repeat of what had been kind of agreed upon when we discussed this subject previously. Another observation is that we started having this kind of discussion more often as more builders have come to the scene. I don't think these rules are working well, whether we like that or not.


Maybe we should get more organised then! :)
(We should also try to restart submitting new puzzles in the database too)


Aleksey wrote:
After all consideration and given the circumstances that only a handful of people creates new puzzles and only a handful of people builds or reproduces them, I tend to think that in nearly all but the exceptional cases we should not prohibit building of the puzzles by others, for sale or not. The creators are not able to satisfy the demand anyway, and most of the time simply are not interested in reproduction as compared to making something new.


I just hope one day there will be only a handful of people who don't create new puzzle ideas! LOL
In other words, we all treat the creators as honorable members, and we need to find a way to show this appreciation. By making some rules that protect their creations, it will be the least we can do in my opinion.
Of course, there will be cases where people outside this forum will replicate. But hopefully in the future we may find a way to even fight this type of phenomena.


Aleksey wrote:
It's interesting to see where we end up this time in this kind of discussion. 8-)


Please let me know what you think, your views are very interesting and you seem to have the experience from previous discussions (that I don't have!) :)



Pantazis

_________________

Educational R&D, Gravity, 4D Symmetry, Puzzle Ninja, Matrix Mech, Alien Technology.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 1:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 7:29 am
Location: San Diego, California
I for one like to build something challenging. sometimes that requires me to learn a new technique that will help me in future builds. after i am done with that puzzle it no longer is challenging to build. case in point a 2x2x1. there is nothing hard to build on that puzzle but the fun aspect is gone now because i overcame the learning of how to make that puzzle. part of building is to see the outcome of the puzzle when complete, if i do the same puzzle more and more that puzzle becomes a bore. so i perfer other to copy my puzzle in the same hopes that they have to figure out how i built that puzzle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: copy puzzles
PostPosted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 6:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 9:46 am
Location: france
Well, I must say I begin to feel guilty with all that discussion !
Actually, I was used to build some rare magics last few months and sell a few of them on ebay or swap with collectors. And that makes them happy I think (right Darren ?), and I hope.
Now, I begin to build some custom cubes because I do like to create and build pieces for my collection. And another reason is that, like many other collectors, I would like to have more money to buy some very precious cubes, like the ones from Tony, and I did that the first time with a container on last DCD. So I need to get some extra money to continue my passion and collection growing up.
When you have reached a certain point in your collection , you need some different ways to keep it growing. And the best way I've found yet is to sell on ebay some very interesting pieces with the max interest for other passioned people or to swap some very rare pieces you may have build.

I have started the cubie chaos 1 building a few days ago, then will continue with the CC2 (because I have found the right configuration I think, btw, not exactly the one shown above !), then the evil twin and the mastercuboctahedron and ...
What I mean, is that, if someday someone ask me to sell one of that puzzle, what should I decide ? Of course I would prefer to swap it with another rare puzzle but the occasions are not so often found when you have more than 400 cubes collected (Geert and Scott know what I mean ...). So the temptation to sell it thru ebay is high.

But when you analyse till the end of the thinking, you will see that making me some more money makes me able to buy some very expensive pieces that I wouldn't have had the chance to buy in another way, right ?
So somewhere I help the creators by buying them their rare products.

But, be careful, I don't want to express the right to sell the idea of someone else, I just want to try and understand what could be the pros and cons of that very tricky subject.
I think the good think is to give opportunities to more collectors to own some interesting pieces when the offer can't answer the request. The "bad" one is that you use and idea which is not your own one.
We have to balance that I think.

Well, that was an idea from a puzzle guy, not more !
Hope it may help !

Maybe the idea and text from Peter is a way to try to solve that position ?
Don't know yet. By the Way, Peter sent me one day the pattern of his famous bench magic and asked me not to use it for sell or reverse engineering, only for my collection, so I fully respected that and agreed on that, although I found that magic very cute and wanted to make some other collectors happy with it while Peter was missing tiles to build some. Now the things have changed because I think Peter sells them directly if I remember well. But it's another story (thanks a lot Peter !!)
JLM


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: copy puzzles
PostPosted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 8:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2000 2:51 am
Location: New Ulm, Minnesota, USA
rubik_fr wrote:
Well, I must say I begin to feel guilty with all that discussion !
Actually, I was used to build some rare magics last few months and sell a few of them on ebay or swap with collectors. And that makes them happy I think (right Darren ?), and I hope. JLM


Yupper I'm very happy!!!!! TYVM!!!!!!!!!!!!! Did you happen to get my package yet I hope!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 8:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:31 am
Location: Greece, Australia, Thailand, India, Singapore.
Adam Zamora wrote:
I for one like to build something challenging. sometimes that requires me to learn a new technique that will help me in future builds. after i am done with that puzzle it no longer is challenging to build. case in point a 2x2x1. there is nothing hard to build on that puzzle but the fun aspect is gone now because i overcame the learning of how to make that puzzle. part of building is to see the outcome of the puzzle when complete, if i do the same puzzle more and more that puzzle becomes a bore. so i perfer other to copy my puzzle in the same hopes that they have to figure out how i built that puzzle.


Agreed to all those points. Letting others to build puzzles whose original creators don't feel like building anymore sounds very logic. It is up to the creator.
For example, I must admit, there are some magics which I wouldn't like to build because of being repetitive. But there are some other magics which I would prefer to build one by one, to make sure they are of the best quality. :)



rubik_fr wrote:
By the Way, Peter sent me one day the pattern of his famous bench magic and asked me not to use it for sell or reverse engineering, only for my collection, so I fully respected that and agreed on that, although I found that magic very cute and wanted to make some other collectors happy with it while Peter was missing tiles to build some. Now the things have changed because I think Peter sells them directly if I remember well. But it's another story (thanks a lot Peter !!)
JLM


famous? :P (LOL I wish!)

And you are right, now I have quite a few tiles, but they are not original tiles from rubiks.com
And to be honest, if we see them from a quality point of view and set rubik's as 100/100, in my opinion the chinese tiles can be rated at around 92/100 - their differences cannot be easily seen by someone who is not familiar with magics and they still do an excellent job!





Pantazis



PS Sorry for changing (temprorarily) the talk focusing on magics LOL

_________________

Educational R&D, Gravity, 4D Symmetry, Puzzle Ninja, Matrix Mech, Alien Technology.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 9:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2002 2:19 pm
Location: Yaroslavl, Russia and Maryland, USA
It would be clarifying if we get down to the core of it. What would be the major reason for the puzzle designer to prohibit reproduction for sale or trade by a handful of puzzle builders who are up to the task?

I can think of several, but I am most interested to hear from the new puzzle designers. Like you, Peter, for instance. 8-)

Below are the reasons I can think of, and in brackets my thoughts.
1/ Money. The puzzle designer wants to profit on his creation. Producing a puzzle once in a while makes it a rarity, and so keep the price very high. Allowing others to reproduce it would inevitably lower the prices.
[In my opinion, currently even the reproductions come in so little quantities, that it makes this kind of dilution negligible].
2/ Quality. There is a fear that a reproduction will not be up to par to the standards of the puzzle designer.
[But we can ask for the approval, can't we?]
3/ Name. The name should not be lost.
[Proper credits should be stated, and it should be clearly stated that it's a reproduction]

Anything else? I'd be interested to hear from you guys.

_________________
Aleksey


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 7:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm
All three reasons are valid Aleksey. However the main and by far the most important reason in my case is the personal attachment to a particular puzzle. It can take many months to develop a design and equally as long to make it, redesign it, make it again etc. When someone copies (even for themselves), on the one hand there is a feeling of pride but on the other hand there's a slight feeling of disappointment. You kind of feel "yes, it's easy for you, you didn't spend all that time coming up with and developing the idea".
How would you feel if someone cloned your new born baby? (joke, but you get the idea).
Prolonging this even further, I still don't understand why someone who can make puzzles needs to copy anyway. If I was someone else just starting out I would be looking at all the puzzles made and then making similar ones that hadn't. If I liked the Cubie Chaos serious I would make a new version. If I liked the Golden Cube I would make something similar, from a 3x3x3 perhaps. If I liked cuboids I would make a 3x4x5, 2x2x5 or maybe a 2x3x5. Those people out to make money would soon gain their own reputation and would do well in auctions.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 8:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 12:45 pm
Location: Rochester, MN
I think since the market is so small, that the reproductions do hurt the designer a lot. Sure, there are more people who want a Golden Cube than Tony could ever produce, but not all of them are going to be able to buy one for $1000. Once the people reproducing them take all the $1000 buyers, then there's lower incentive for the original inventor to make more, because he'll be making $500 or so for each puzzle (just estimates).

I suppose the original inventor could crank out enough inventory right away to beat all the copiers, but that probably would get boring after a while. Besides, would you want Tony to be making puzzles he's already done, or creating new ones?

If the original creators quit making new things, then what would we have? But if people stop imitating and start innovating, then we'll have a bunch of neat new puzzles.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: copy puzzles
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 8:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 3:54 am
Location: Italy
rubik_fr wrote:
Well, I must say I begin to feel guilty with all that discussion !
Actually, I was used to build some rare magics last few months and sell a few of them on ebay or swap with collectors. And that makes them happy I think (right Darren ?), and I hope.
Now, I begin to build some custom cubes because I do like to create and build pieces for my collection. And another reason is that, like many other collectors, I would like to have more money to buy some very precious cubes, like the ones from Tony, and I did that the first time with a container on last DCD. So I need to get some extra money to continue my passion and collection growing up.
When you have reached a certain point in your collection , you need some different ways to keep it growing. And the best way I've found yet is to sell on ebay some very interesting pieces with the max interest for other passioned people or to swap some very rare pieces you may have build.

I have started the cubie chaos 1 building a few days ago, then will continue with the CC2 (because I have found the right configuration I think, btw, not exactly the one shown above !), then the evil twin and the mastercuboctahedron and ...
What I mean, is that, if someday someone ask me to sell one of that puzzle, what should I decide ? Of course I would prefer to swap it with another rare puzzle but the occasions are not so often found when you have more than 400 cubes collected (Geert and Scott know what I mean ...). So the temptation to sell it thru ebay is high.

But when you analyse till the end of the thinking, you will see that making me some more money makes me able to buy some very expensive pieces that I wouldn't have had the chance to buy in another way, right ?
So somewhere I help the creators by buying them their rare products.

But, be careful, I don't want to express the right to sell the idea of someone else, I just want to try and understand what could be the pros and cons of that very tricky subject.
I think the good think is to give opportunities to more collectors to own some interesting pieces when the offer can't answer the request. The "bad" one is that you use and idea which is not your own one.
We have to balance that I think.

Well, that was an idea from a puzzle guy, not more !
Hope it may help !

Maybe the idea and text from Peter is a way to try to solve that position ?
Don't know yet. By the Way, Peter sent me one day the pattern of his famous bench magic and asked me not to use it for sell or reverse engineering, only for my collection, so I fully respected that and agreed on that, although I found that magic very cute and wanted to make some other collectors happy with it while Peter was missing tiles to build some. Now the things have changed because I think Peter sells them directly if I remember well. But it's another story (thanks a lot Peter !!)
JLM


SIMPLY PERFECT!!! :P :P :P
I THINK THAT IF I'M ABLE TO BUILD A PUZZLE, I CAN ALSO SELL IT!!...OR IS THERE ANY COPYRIGHT?? :shock:
I sell some puzzles to sell to get some money to purchase other more expensive puzzles...I cannot spend over 1000$ for a special puzzle, so I built many by myself, and sometimes I sell some puzzle to get some money for my collection!1 Is this a crime???? :shock: :shock: :shock:
Now I'm going with my CubieChaos2...........
I think that some people should me more unpretentious.... :lol:
Happy New year to all puzzlefriends!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 8:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 3:54 am
Location: Italy
Tony Fisher wrote:
All three reasons are valid Aleksey. However the main and by far the most important reason in my case is the personal attachment to a particular puzzle. It can take many months to develop a design and equally as long to make it, redesign it, make it again etc. When someone copies (even for themselves), on the one hand there is a feeling of pride but on the other hand there's a slight feeling of disappointment. You kind of feel "yes, it's easy for you, you didn't spend all that time coming up with and developing the idea".
How would you feel if someone cloned your new born baby? (joke, but you get the idea).
Quote:
Prolonging this even further, I still don't understand why someone who can make puzzles needs to copy anyway. If I was someone else just starting out I would be looking at all the puzzles made and then making similar ones that hadn't. If I liked the Cubie Chaos serious I would make a new version. If I liked the Golden Cube I would make something similar, from a 3x3x3 perhaps. If I liked cuboids I would make a 3x4x5, 2x2x5 or maybe a 2x3x5. Those people out to make money would soon gain their own reputation and would do well in auctions.


That's right!! I agree with you and in next weeks I'll built some new cubiechaos!! Thanks again Tony! :P


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 11:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:31 am
Location: Greece, Australia, Thailand, India, Singapore.
Aleksey wrote:
It would be clarifying if we get down to the core of it. What would be the major reason for the puzzle designer to prohibit reproduction for sale or trade by a handful of puzzle builders who are up to the task?

I can think of several, but I am most interested to hear from the new puzzle designers. Like you, Peter, for instance. 8-)

Below are the reasons I can think of, and in brackets my thoughts.
1/ Money. The puzzle designer wants to profit on his creation. Producing a puzzle once in a while makes it a rarity, and so keep the price very high. Allowing others to reproduce it would inevitably lower the prices.
[In my opinion, currently even the reproductions come in so little quantities, that it makes this kind of dilution negligible].
2/ Quality. There is a fear that a reproduction will not be up to par to the standards of the puzzle designer.
[But we can ask for the approval, can't we?]
3/ Name. The name should not be lost.
[Proper credits should be stated, and it should be clearly stated that it's a reproduction]

Anything else? I'd be interested to hear from you guys.



Excellent list Aleksey! :)


1. Regarding the money, I always charge the total effort I have put on the puzzle. And sometimes the time I put is supposed to fill some other acctivities of a very busy schedule.
2. That is actually, my number 1. Quality should *always* be the outmost important feature. It is the same reason I will not mind if it takes for the olympicubes to be out in ten years!
3. Name/Fame goes together with quality. They are different, but depend on each other, especially when cheap and/or bad quality replicas are also in the market.

Allow me to add some more:

4. Inspiration. The power of new creations should also give some incentive for new or experienced builders to do more. I enjoy when I have my creations shown, in a similar way I see someone else's! I really love to inspire others, the power of the mind is so great that we will never even know if we don't put it into work. Someone among us may soon come with some revolutionary puzzle idea and he/she may not even know it...! So let those brain cells do some work! LOL
5. Experience. Building a puzzle does not just increase someone's confidence, it also affects our life in a very positive way. Problems are faced by looking to the world from another point of view, the view of someone who loves to make things interesting. It is a lesson that those who think they cannot build a puzzle, should think again. The first steps are the difficult ones, but then things become very challenging!
6. Connections. Let's be realistic. Someone who does some nice designs always gets noticed very fast. With my designs I made some amazing trades with many excellent collectors and new friends that I could never have imagined a few months ago. It is very rewarding in this way.


:)


Pantazis

_________________

Educational R&D, Gravity, 4D Symmetry, Puzzle Ninja, Matrix Mech, Alien Technology.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 6:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 10:20 am
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
kastellorizo:
That list looks very good, but still someone might come up with something too ad? (not saying it is incomplete, but there might be some retouching to be done :P)
Also, your start on the thums rules was a good initiative, now lets hope we all (or at least those of us whom it conserns in terms of builder/inventor *not me*) can agree on something good!

Tony Fisher wrote:
When Anthony Greenhill told me about the Golden Cube he had made I was very flattered. He did not however sell it on eBay using my name and copied text. I remember a thread sometime ago on this forum where the question of copying puzzles was discussed. If I recall a number of things were agreed. Now it seems that absolutely anything goes.
I wanted to copy a puzzle made by one of the forum members about a year ago to sell. Out of respect I asked permission to make it. After some initial misunderstanding it was clear that the person did not wish me to produce the puzzle. I reluctantly (and belatedly) decided not to make copies to sell.


Was this discussed in a particular topic here or just "common thoughts"?
I don't remember anything about a topic where this discussion was particularily stressed, but then it might have been "before my time"...

Almost to the topic, when reading everyones comments, I start to feel a bit guilty about posting my drawings of how I interpret the designs of the "Cubie Chaoses". Is that something you (Tony and Mike, I think is whos design I have tried to draw) would preffer that I stopped doing?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 10:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm
I can't seem to find the discussion now. I think it was pretty old.
Haara, Sometimes it's good to have a bit of a whinge and I'd hate anyone to take it too seriously. Please continue as if this thread never existed. Events over the last year or so have made me far more secretive about my techniques and designs so I regret that I am unlikely to help out.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 12:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2002 2:19 pm
Location: Yaroslavl, Russia and Maryland, USA
Peter, thanks for your additions to the list. However, generally they are not to the point of trying to figure out what it is that makes a puzzle designer NOT willing to allow others to build the same puzzle for sale. I started this so that I and other would better understand the motivation behind that decision, and learned to respect it. Clear understanding is the key here, I believe.

I also started this to see if we can find a way to make puzzles more available than they are now. If we can find a way to work with the puzzle designers and allow others to build and possibly sell them.

Tony, you bring up a perfect reason of personal attachment. I do understand where you're coming from. However I don't think the comparison to cloning a baby is adequate here. I think it's far reaching. Many people would only be happy to see their invention welcomed, desired, and used by other people within the community. If they wanted to market their inventions to strangers, that's a whole different matter then. By listing several reasons I tried to say that they are not (or at least should not be) the barriers for others to reproduce puzzles. We can work out solutions for all of them. Personal attachment however is mostly an emotional thing, meaning not rational, and I don't know how to work around it other than by persuasion. :roll: Other than that we can only respect it, nothing more and nothing less.

Making a puzzle, even when the design is known is highly difficult. It's not that the designer gives away the technology. In majority of cases he doesn't. That means the puzzle builder has to develop his own method of producing the puzzle when all he want if the puzzle for himself. But then, afterwards he can often use his developed method to produce more to sell. That's how it works in most cases now, I believe.

Reproductions make more people happy and make them able to truly appreciate the beauty and finesse of new puzzle designs. I'd like to believe that's the outcome that most puzzle designers really want.

Also I'd like to note that it's making puzzles than makes you think in the direction of developing your own designs. It''s like with any other craft. And when you don't have much of your own, you reproduce. If I started to make puzzles today, I would surely want to make those than I am fascinated with. Including, Tony, your Golden Cube. And if I felt I developed a consistent method of making it I would think of offering it to those unlucky who didn't have it yet. I am sorry, Tony, if that offends you. I surely don't mean it to offend. But I guess that answers your question, or at least some of it. I don't think I am alone in thinking this way.

I would also like to separate reproductions that are traded from those that are sold. While it's true that trades are often done with the monetary value in mind, many puzzles for trade are never sold otherwise.

Brian, the issue you bring up is monetary. It's on my initial list. Is there a feeling that it's mostly about money, and just a little bit of each of the rest? You tell me. I am trying to figure this out by raising all these questions. 8-)

Well it sure looks like I am for more freedom in making reproductions. 8-) I guess I am, then. :oops:

_________________
Aleksey


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 5:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:31 am
Location: Greece, Australia, Thailand, India, Singapore.
Aleksey wrote:
Peter, thanks for your additions to the list. However, generally they are not to the point of trying to figure out what it is that makes a puzzle designer NOT willing to allow others to build the same puzzle for sale. I started this so that I and other would better understand the motivation behind that decision, and learned to respect it. Clear understanding is the key here, I believe.


I believe that they *are* to the point, in the sense that if a builder (other than the creator) overbuilds a puzzle, those points will not be possible any more. And this is neither a fair nor a deserved consequence for the creator. It *is* part of the motivation, at least for me. ;)




Aleksey wrote:
I also started this to see if we can find a way to make puzzles more available than they are now. If we can find a way to work with the puzzle designers and allow others to build and possibly sell them.


Collaboration! In my opinion the only way for all to be happy. 8-)




Aleksey wrote:
Tony, you bring up a perfect reason of personal attachment. I do understand where you're coming from. However I don't think the comparison to cloning a baby is adequate here. I think it's far reaching. Many people would only be happy to see their invention welcomed, desired, and used by other people within the community. If they wanted to market their inventions to strangers, that's a whole different matter then. By listing several reasons I tried to say that they are not (or at least should not be) the barriers for others to reproduce puzzles. We can work out solutions for all of them. Personal attachment however is mostly an emotional thing, meaning not rational, and I don't know how to work around it other than by persuasion. :roll: Other than that we can only respect it, nothing more and nothing less.


I will just mention that emotion is essential for someone to be a creator. People must think out of the norm, be a bit irrational, and then an irrational but magnificent idea will see the light of the day. But never ever disturb the emotions of a creator, as I have seen many times those emotions being spent trying to stop the disturbances rather than continuing making new creations. It has to be understood here (and we have to be extremely careful), that the line between a creator working for years and giving up within a few seconds, is a very fine line...




Aleksey wrote:
Making a puzzle, even when the design is known is highly difficult. It's not that the designer gives away the technology. In majority of cases he doesn't. That means the puzzle builder has to develop his own method of producing the puzzle when all he want if the puzzle for himself. But then, afterwards he can often use his developed method to produce more to sell. That's how it works in most cases now, I believe.


It is the idea, not the design (even though they can be closely connected). After someone goes through some dark paths of thoughts, after someone spends a lot of time thinking, after someone puts together a string of amazing thoughts, then yes, after that, the idea may *seem* simple. The technology can be difficult or easy (that is irrelevant in my opinion), but I would be really hurt if someone copies me without consent. I would feel that the idea was stolen in open daylight. And I would at least expect to be acknowldeged, something that never happens by people whose only concern is to fulfill their own personal goals.

Some time ago, I even placed the nice (real) story in my puzzle link for the "Columbus Egg", where Chistopher Columbus blasted the Royal Court for not acknowledging his discoveries:

"Once you have been shown the way, it is always easy for others to follow, but the first to make the discovery should be honored and respected.".
(unfortunately, in today's world, only money is respected)

So there *are* reasons why big companies and lawyers make so many laws regarding patents, trademarks etc (although I do not agree 100% with all of them LOL), because simply, there *is* an effort by someone that has to be acknowledged, and in today's world (where everyone tries to take advantage of everyone), there was a need to build up some sort of protection.




Aleksey wrote:
Reproductions make more people happy and make them able to truly appreciate the beauty and finesse of new puzzle designs. I'd like to believe that's the outcome that most puzzle designers really want.


Of course they can make people happy if they cost less. But after a creator gets discouraged, the people will only be happy in the short term, as they will be no more puzzles. And I am sure they also don't want that. This is why I propose collaborations. Then everyone can be happy, as everyone will have some chunk of the pie. :)




Aleksey wrote:
Also I'd like to note that it's making puzzles than makes you think in the direction of developing your own designs. It''s like with any other craft. And when you don't have much of your own, you reproduce. If I started to make puzzles today, I would surely want to make those than I am fascinated with. Including, Tony, your Golden Cube. And if I felt I developed a consistent method of making it I would think of offering it to those unlucky who didn't have it yet. I am sorry, Tony, if that offends you. I surely don't mean it to offend. But I guess that answers your question, or at least some of it. I don't think I am alone in thinking this way.


Making a puzzle for yourself is something that no one has trouble with. Making copies to sell or trade, would hurt any creator, no question about this. This is why there should be some sort of communication between the copier and the creator. I am not saying people should never get cheap puzzles, but even a company that would mass market a product will give some respected return to the creator. You offer no return. This is not the way to go.




Aleksey wrote:
I would also like to separate reproductions that are traded from those that are sold. While it's true that trades are often done with the monetary value in mind, many puzzles for trade are never sold otherwise.


Any type of return, money or other puzzles or tonnes of strawberry cheesecakes (yummy!) is ok with me, as long as there is some sort of deal with the creator. It is a matter of doing something to acknowledge the creator and encourage him/her to continue doing what he/she can do best.




Aleksey wrote:
Well it sure looks like I am for more freedom in making reproductions. 8-) I guess I am, then. :oops:


In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with that, as long as no creators are discouraged, and I hope you can agree with me.

Finally, my post would be incomplete if I didn't come out with some suggestion. It would be easy (from a creator's point of view) to deliberately avoid collaborations and hide behind rigid decisions to defend from people copying in any way, but I don't think we should do that. I would even propose something out of the norm. How about if there are no reproductions for a number of years (say five years) of a custom puzzle? Then if there are no patents and the puzzle is not marketed (which will mean high price for the puzzle), then and only then anyone can reproduce it.
(even *that* sounds a bit unfair from a creators point of view, but I am just trying to be diplomatic and understanding LOL).






Pantazis

_________________

Educational R&D, Gravity, 4D Symmetry, Puzzle Ninja, Matrix Mech, Alien Technology.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 6:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2002 2:19 pm
Location: Yaroslavl, Russia and Maryland, USA
kastellorizo wrote:
I believe that they *are* to the point, in the sense that if a builder (other than the creator) overbuilds a puzzle, those points will not be possible any more. And this is neither a fair nor a deserved consequence for the creator. It *is* part of the motivation, at least for me. ;)

Please bear with me. Frankly, I don't quite see how the inspiration, experience, and connections - that you added to the list - make you NOT willing to let others to build a puzzle you designed, for instance. You don't lose any of that if someone else duplicates the puzzle so that there are more available. That is, unless your inspiration falls apart from a feeling that you're no longer the one and only, exclusive and unique. I guess that's part of an ego. (no pun intended!) It's very human and understandable. Is that it indeed? In the other two of your additions you don't lose in any case.

Let me stress it again: I started this part of the discussion so that I and others could better understand the reasons behind puzzle designer's decision to NOT allow other puzzle builders to make the same puzzle. I am not judging in any way (oh, I hope so!), just trying to spell out and clarify the reasons for everyone and myself.

Quote:
Collaboration! In my opinion the only way for all to be happy. 8-)

Would you elaborate, please?

Quote:
I will just mention that emotion is essential for someone to be a creator. It has to be understood here (and we have to be extremely careful), that the line between a creator working for years and giving up within a few seconds, is a very fine line...

I did not say the emotions were not important, Peter. What I did say though was that I for myself would only be happier to see more people using something I created for myself and for them. I have a feeling that you are drifting a little from the major point of this discussion. 8-)

Also, please note my comment to Brian Logan. It's important. From my experience, ultimately there is something you can't live without. You take away one thing after another and ask yourself: would I still be doing it then?

Quote:
It is the idea, not the design (even though they can be closely connected). After someone goes through some dark paths of thoughts, after someone spends a lot of time thinking, after someone puts together a string of amazing thoughts, then yes, after that, the idea may *seem* simple. The technology can be difficult or easy (that is irrelevant in my opinion), but I would be really hurt if someone copies me without consent. I would feel that the idea was stolen in open daylight. And I would at least expect to be acknowldeged, something that never happens by people whose only concern is to fulfill their own personal goals.

I feel you, Peter. Believe me. I used to feel the same way. Later on though I learned to understand that ideas are a dime a dozen. It's the execution that matters. Also, people do know when something is your idea and not of the copy master. Isn't it their respect that you're after? And I never ever said that the idea should not be acknowledged.

Quote:
So there *are* reasons why big companies and lawyers make so many laws regarding patents, trademarks etc (although I do not agree 100% with all of them LOL), because simply, there *is* an effort by someone that has to be acknowledged, and in today's world (where everyone tries to take advantage of everyone), there was a need to build up some sort of protection.

Patents are to give the inventor the right to exclusively exploit the invention for certain number of years in exchange for public disclosure of the invention. In real world however you need to protect your invention from copycats or you lose it to them.

Quote:
Of course they can make people happy if they cost less. But after a creator gets discouraged, the people will only be happy in the short term, as they will be no more puzzles. And I am sure they also don't want that. This is why I propose collaborations. Then everyone can be happy, as everyone will have some chunk of the pie. :)

Again, read my comment to Brian. 8-) Is that it? I can only say for myself - I would only be happy if my invention was used by a larger audience of puzzle lovers.

Aleksey wrote:
Making a puzzle for yourself is something that no one has trouble with. Making copies to sell or trade, would hurt any creator, no question about this. This is why there should be some sort of communication between the copier and the creator. I am not saying people should never get cheap puzzles, but even a company that would mass market a product will give some respected return to the creator. You offer no return. This is not the way to go.

I am not sure if you noticed, but I wasn't offering anything - yet. I am just trying to discuss and clarify the reasons for not allowing others to reproduce puzzles so that more people would have it. After we clarify all that, then we can start talking about solutions. 8-) Again, why exactly a puzzle creator would be hurt if someone reproduces the puzzle, makes sure it's of top quality, gives it all proper credits and says it's a copy, and sells it? Would you please spell it.

Quote:
Any type of return, money or other puzzles or tonnes of strawberry cheesecakes (yummy!) is ok with me, as long as there is some sort of deal with the creator. It is a matter of doing something to acknowledge the creator and encourage him/her to continue doing what he/she can do best.

That's something to talk about, sure - after we finish with the actual reasons.

Quote:
Finally, my post would be incomplete if I didn't come out with some suggestion. It would be easy (from a creator's point of view) to deliberately avoid collaborations and hide behind rigid decisions to defend from people copying in any way, but I don't think we should do that. I would even propose something out of the norm. How about if there are no reproductions for a number of years (say five years) of a custom puzzle? Then if there are no patents and the puzzle is not marketed (which will mean high price for the puzzle), then and only then anyone can reproduce it.
(even *that* sounds a bit unfair from a creators point of view, but I am just trying to be diplomatic and understanding LOL).

You're trying to reproduce the patent system - without having patents. That's a great intention. Only it wouldn't work, ultimately. Believe it or not, there is lots of puzzlers who don't take part in this forum. Also, to reproduce and sell puzzles (that is, just for the money) you don't even have to be a puzzle lover, but just proficient in crafting. That's the real world. The solution we should be looking for after we define the reasons with most clarity should work in the real world, in my opinion. Otherwise there the patent system, no need to copy it without any means to protect it against violators.

I think it would be great if more puzzle creators contributed to this thread. Tony, Aleh, Katsuhiko come to my mind as exceptional creators. 8-)

_________________
Aleksey


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 8:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:31 am
Location: Greece, Australia, Thailand, India, Singapore.
Aleksey wrote:
Please bear with me. Frankly, I don't quite see how the inspiration, experience, and connections - that you added to the list - make you NOT willing to let others to build a puzzle you designed, for instance. You don't lose any of that if someone else duplicates the puzzle so that there are more available. That is, unless your inspiration falls apart from a feeling that you're no longer the one and only, exclusive and unique. I guess that's part of an ego. (no pun intended!) It's very human and understandable. Is that it indeed? In the other two of your additions you don't lose in any case.


I will put it this way. If someone (even me) looks at the points I made in a direct way and into a short term period, then he/she will never realise the hidden reasons. Maybe I am the only one who claims that, which means maybe I am the only one who can see the connection? I don't know.
Because if those points do not work in the longterm, I would be very sad. Only the thought of losing those (in the longterm, I repeat), can hurt a creator. Now you may ask again "hurt in what way"? Well... losing touch with what you like to do, losing touch with fellow friends/collectors/builders. It is a circle that only stops when the creator decided to quit.

And I don't know about others, but disrespect can easily lead me to disappear. And disrespect can have many forms, someone's foul language, someone using my idea without asking, someone claiming negative things about myself that are not true etc etc etc. Isn't that a valid reason?
If a part of a world doesnt respect me (for example the puzzle community), what reason is there to stay? Thankfully though, this place is full of bright people (as yourself) where a really fruitful discussion can evolve nicely. :)




Aleksey wrote:
Let me stress it again: I started this part of the discussion so that I and others could better understand the reasons behind puzzle designer's decision to NOT allow other puzzle builders to make the same puzzle. I am not judging in any way (oh, I hope so!), just trying to spell out and clarify the reasons for everyone and myself.


Don't worry Aleksey, I know your intentions are same with mine: to find a solution! ;)




Aleksey wrote:
Quote:
Collaboration! In my opinion the only way for all to be happy. 8-)

Would you elaborate, please?


What I said in this case is very general. I am actually refering to deals that should be made between creators and copiers so that all are satisfied. Of course, different creators and different copiers will end up with different deals.




Aleksey wrote:
I did not say the emotions were not important, Peter. What I did say though was that I for myself would only be happier to see more people using something I created for myself and for them. I have a feeling that you are drifting a little from the major point of this discussion. 8-)


Of course you didn't mention emotions! The reason I did, was to illustrate how sensitive a creator can be with the respect to the reasons that can make him hurt. Being emotional, means someone can be affected much easier than others, so we must handle with care! :)




Aleksey wrote:
Also, please note my comment to Brian Logan. It's important. From my experience, ultimately there is something you can't live without. You take away one thing after another and ask yourself: would I still be doing it then?


I am a man who does not unerestimate money but also does not respect money. I will never be a rich man because I always do what I love to do (and not what I need to do to earn more!), and I am mostly interested in happiness. ;)

Regarding making new puzzles vs making copies, there should always be a balance. But it will be only be fair if this balance is ruled by the creator.




Aleksey wrote:
I feel you, Peter. Believe me. I used to feel the same way. Later on though I learned to understand that ideas are a dime a dozen. It's the execution that matters.


You have just hit one of the cornerstone of my values. I am sorry, but I do not simply disagree, I strongly disagree. Thankfully, my ideas (for example, when I do research) are appreciated in many ways to make me value them a lot.
And learning to understand this theory regarding ideas? Why should I ? I am way too romantic to do that anyway, and do not expect me to change at... 36! ;)
(Regarding ideas, IMHO the execution is the easiest part anyway).




Aleksey wrote:
Also, people do know when something is your idea and not of the copy master.


Do they? I have big doubts here. I have seen some puzzles here during the years, and some seem to be orphans. And this is not because they don't have a father, but because their creators had never been acknowledged. (I did not mention copying hee! ;) )




Aleksey wrote:
Isn't it their respect that you're after?


Bingo! :)




Aleksey wrote:
Again, read my comment to Brian. 8-) Is that it? I can only say for myself - I would only be happy if my invention was used by a larger audience of puzzle lovers.


There is no creator in the world who would not want this. But would you share a nice design and let other people profit from it? Is there such example from your part? Because if there is, you will be one of the people I will respect most! :)




Aleksey wrote:
Again, why exactly a puzzle creator would be hurt if someone reproduces the puzzle, makes sure it's of top quality, gives it all proper credits and says it's a copy, and sells it? Would you please spell it.


R-E-S-P-E-C-T. :)
Even if someone who repreduces a puzzle does all the above, without the consent of the creator the case can be very disappointing. (as I said it is my opinion).

By the way Aleksey, in anything I have mentioned during this discussion I do not intend to make you feel uncomfortable or insulted. I believe we are having a nice chat and I hope you feel the same way. :)




Aleksey wrote:
I think it would be great if more puzzle creators contributed to this thread. Tony, Aleh, Katsuhiko come to my mind as exceptional creators. 8-)


Agreed, I am only someone who is just one year into making magics. More feedback from more experienced builders will be crucial for this to work and make a lasting impression. Come on, please join me and Aleksey! :)




Pantazis

_________________

Educational R&D, Gravity, 4D Symmetry, Puzzle Ninja, Matrix Mech, Alien Technology.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 66 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

Forum powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group