Well, the Cooke Luxury is not as expensive as others.
In the Mopane the pieces are Brown with no red in them, like a light colored Walnut.
I also like the smaller sized pieces of this set, along with that Camaratta Knight.
I use this set with a Walnut and Maple board.
@Audioq. We are talking about two sets here:
1) why don't you write to Rishi from whom you bought the set, and tell him that some ignoramus and libeller on chessdotcom has suggested that Chess Empire Chavet B210 may be an illegal copy and ask him to respond. Specifically ask him who gave him the right to manufacture a "Chavet B210" - i.e. has he had any legal council clearing the way for him (and if yes, please request a summary of the reasoning involved), and/or has he contacted Chavet for permission? Or better, ask him who owns the rights of the Chavet B210 - since he is making a reproduction he must surely know that. Please do that. You are right, one should give everyone the benefit of the doubt, so I hold back judgement and and let's clear this up with Rishi himself.
2) Please also tell us all here in black and white whether you would buy a reproduction of the FIDE World Cup set, or is the subject still too specialised and complicated, meaning, in your case (because that is how you seem to be arguing - if one is not sure whether something is legal then one can do it) that yes, you would?
(Let's take it as a given that you would really like to have one, just like you wanted the Chavet 210, for argument's sake.)
[@Audioq I asked the question regarding Chavet B210 and passed a judgement on the WC sets calling them pirated goods - I will gladly retract that if you prove that they are legal copies]
You stated "even if the Indian manufacturers breached their agreement I don't think that would make the copies illegal in the same sense as the Chavet and WC copies are". You clearly "passed a judgement" on both sets, not just the WC one. I have no ethical problem with Chess Empire reproducing this set and have no idea if it subject to IP or even capable of being subject to such rights. Either way that is a matter for discussion between CE and Chavet. Provided the item was obtained in good faith without notice by a consumer then I'm ok with it. Consumers aren't expected to perform detailed research and documentary evidence prior to purchasing an item from a well known source. Obviously you disagree and that's fine. I'm sure CE will be only too happy to discuss it with you. Please let us know the results of your investigations. I remember you posting about a CB Dubrovnik reproduction set you purchased. Obviously you would not have bought this without the appropriate legal documentation so you'll know exactly what you're looking for from CE. Good luck!
Well, the Cooke Luxury is not as expensive as others.
In the Mopane the pieces are Brown with no red in them, like a light colored Walnut.
I also like the smaller sized pieces of this set, along with that Camaratta Knight.
I use this set with a Walnut and Maple board.
That mopane looks great. I've never even heard of it before. The only question is why would you not use this for the Black side. I think it would go really well with a boxwood white. A little bit like the NOJ maple and walnut sets.
The Mopane is used for the black pieces with the white pieces being boxwood.
Looks really nice......That board shown certainly does not hurt the aesthetic.
The Mopane is used for the black pieces with the white pieces being boxwood.
https://www.houseofstaunton.com/camaratta-signature-series-cooke-luxury-chess-pieces-with-boxwood.html
Doh! You're right. Don't know why I saw that as Ebony & Mopane. I already bought a New Cooke box & ebony from HOS when they first came out but I could see myself buying a box & mopane set at some point. Seems to have a really nice uniform color. Hard to tell from the pics but it looks respectably close grained as well.
Yes, it is pretty closed grain. As I said, this set works great on my Colorado Woodworker board of American Walnut and Maple.
@Audioq the "even-if" statement was aimed at differentiating two types of "illegalities" - one IP and the other contract related. The "are" refers to the category type. Re-worded : the one is a question of breaching an agreement (or not) and the other a question of breaching IP (or not). And it does remain a strong question whether this Chavet B210 reproduction breaches IP law.
It is simple Audioq: Chavet, an existing company, are the manufacturers of the Chavet B210, so naturally possess the manufacturing rights of this set. If another company starts making copies of those sets they have to show that they have the manufacturing rights to do so. So there is every reason in this case to be suspicious (CE have no info in this regard in the set description). You obviously don't care much about IP issues because it wasn't an issue when you bought the set and even now that the question has been raised it doesn't concern you sufficiently to want to contact CE and get clarity. Don't try throw the burden of contacting CE on me, it is YOU who bought the set.
@Audioq You have not answered the 2nd question: please tell us all whether you would buy a reproduction of the FIDE World Championship set or not.
@Audioq For the record, if you really want to know, I had 5 Chess Bazaar sets and I got rid of them all, including that Dubrovnik. And anyway, Dubrovnik is not in the same category as the Chavet because it is not the product of a single company. I know many chess collectors who are scrupulous with copyright issues and who have Dubrovnik reproductions. I can only assume that there are no possible copyright infringements involved.
Just one last general word on IP - because the question was raised above by others. And this I know a bit about because it pertains to my career. When it comes to designs and artworks these gain automatic IP protection from the moment they are created. I don't have to register any artwork or design I make. All I have to do is prove that it is my design and anyone who copies it would be guilty of infringement of copyright. This would pertain to chessmen design too. No difference.
The discussion of legal/moral issues regarding reproductions has been raised in a new thread
Please post there if you wish to discuss these issues. I don't think it's appropriate to confine this discussion to a post on one particular set. Cheers.
This Chavet B210 looks a very nice set. I like the antique affect of the dark pieces.
This Chavet B210 looks a very nice set. I like the antique affect of the dark pieces.
Yes it is well done. I think it is a walnut colour. I've no idea how these sets will age obviously, but there is a nice contrast in the set as new.
@Audioq I have said everything I wanted to say on the subject, having nothing more to add, other than that it would have been nice for you to emphatically answer my second question.
My original post was about this specific set on the post - it was not off topic at all. The example of the FIDE WC was to dispel the notion that these "reproduction" companies are always stringent with copyright. They are not, which is why caution should be exercised when buying potentially problematic reproductions, like Chess Empire's Chavet B210. But while you have rejected virtually everything I have said, which you are entitled to do, you still have left us all uncertain as to your exact position with regard to the FIDE WC reproductions. I'll gladly call it a day, but for the sake of closure, would like you still to answer that question. Here, on this thread. Cheers.
@Audioq I have said everything I wanted to say on the subject, having nothing more to add, other than that it would have been nice for you to emphatically answer my second question.
My original post was about this specific set on the post - it was not off topic at all. The example of the FIDE WC was to dispel the notion that these "reproduction" companies are always stringent with copyright. They are not, which is why caution should be exercised when buying potentially problematic reproductions, like Chess Empire's Chavet B210. But while you have rejected virtually everything I have said, which you are entitled to do, you still have left us all uncertain as to your exact position with regard to the FIDE WC reproductions. I'll gladly call it a day, but for the sake of closure, would like you still to answer that question. Here, on this thread. Cheers.
It was answered in post #58. I think my position is fairly clear on this.
@Audioq. Fair enough. (One is still unclear whether you condemn companies copying sets when the original is still readily available and whether that counts as an infringement of IP in your opinion, but I won't press you further). Topic closed.
@Audioq. Fair enough. (One is still unclear whether you condemn companies copying sets when the original is still readily available and whether that counts as an infringement of IP in your opinion, but I won't press you further). Topic closed.
I'm genuinely not sure if staunton sets can be validly protected by IP and that has yet to be shown to me, other than as opinion/conjecture. If a set has a valid, enforceable right to exclusivity then I would condemn copying it. Joins us on the other thread, I'm sure your opinions will be of interest. The topic is not completely irrelevant here but it is a massive area of discussion and I don't want this to become a topic purely/mostly about IP.
I have been meaning to mention that the Chavet knight seems to be the inspiration for the DGT official 2013 World Chess Championship pieces?
Just realized that the sets used in the World Championship matches of the 90s were Chavet design, so I’m dropping a link to another forum with the pictures to show the actual pieces:
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-equipment/types-of-sets-used-in-world-championship?page=3
I have been meaning to mention that the Chavet knight seems to be the inspiration for the DGT official 2013 World Chess Championship pieces?
Yeah some people on here have commented that the think the Chavet set was OK but nothing special since it was essentially just a "German Knight" set like the DGT timeless type pieces. The WC set is also a variation on that kind of set. I've no idea which came first Chavet or some other German Knight set.
Agreed. The sets coming out of India now are as good or better than anything made before in terms of manufacturing capability/skill. I do still think there is a gap between what they might consider an attractive set and what western customers seem to prefer in terms of simplicity v complex patterns etc.
What do you mean simplicity vs complex patterns?
I suppose I'm referring to some of the more ornate and intricate carvings in the Indian designed sets (not reproductions), particularly the knights. The western style of set seems to be a lot simpler e.g. Lardy, Chavet etc. Which you prefer is obviously a matter of taste but you don't tend to see many simple sets designed in India. I could be wrong on this, just an Impression.
I get it. I am with you in terms of my preference for simpler designs. I like the knights from the Fischer-Spassky, Lardy, Chavet, and BCE. I am not sure I define the old Jaques knights as simple but they certainly are not complex. I like those too. I think the most complex knight that I like would be the knight in the HoS Craftsman, Cooke Luxury, and Sinquefield Cup. That knight is fairly detailed and I like it. I am not too much into the complex and ornate designs.
We agree completely on Knight designs.
I call that HoS Knight the Camaratta Knight, because Frank is the one to create it with that specific mane. This is where pictures of the piece on the internet do not do it justice. Those notches that are so obvious on the profile shot seem to melt into it all when looking at the piece from any higher angle. My HoS Craftsman and Cooke Luxury sets are my two favorites of the Staunton design. The Craftsman has some red in it with the Blood Rosewood while the Cooke Luxury has the Brownish color covered with the Mopane.