Reproduction and Real Jaques of London Chess Set

Alright, but I distinctly remember the "nice" chess set market in the US before Frank started HoS was pretty mcuh nonexistent.  I remember back in 1998 buying my Collector Series and then Players Series sets from Frank.  And when I brought the Players Series set, there were no others like it.  Sure, Legend and Your Moves Games and Chess came in a bit after, but Frank was pretty much the first in the states for the common Chess player.

Also, and this is a known fact, Frank was the one that introduced having the 2 extra queens included with the set.

we started in 1991 ......and Im certain the smart ones here will see exactly how nstrumental you have been in your insinuations and accusations..even in this post your most recent, you are accusing me of copying, when I have proven to you we launched our set first, EVERYONE on here who has followed this thread knows this already, but not you?! 

again, its not someone elses work, it is a set which is one of many offered to us by one of ours and HOS top manufacturers,,is this clear to you?

I am being defensive somewhat because I am being accused by you and your friends at HOS...and im sure before this is thru there may well be others whom want to mud sling, but thats fine because i do it too, we all do!! 

I think Frank has done many great things in the chess World, and that has to be applauded. When I et with him london 2007 i think, a great guy, and we have almost always got on. 

at the end of the day, there is no legal rights to this design, I think Alan touched on that earlier? but for you and Josh to go on claiming I have copied etc is just a low blow attempt 

so anyhow - I think I have more than explained how the industry works. 

can anyone here please explain how it is our 1851 reproduction set launched way back last year, and we are being accused of copying it from HOS when they have only just launched their version of the same ( very similar) set? 

chicken egg??

this 1851 design came about after the CB 1849, whre i asked Amritsar Ivory Works to reproduce an 1849, They did and that set was also liked by collectors, shortly after I was offered the 1851, the original offer was not to my liking and so i requested a few minor changes, the result is below

our 1851 

Carl, take it easy.  No one has accused you of copying this specific set.  You have accused HoS of basically copying yours when they have produced evidence that their 1849 set is an original based off of a set they had commissioned.  And whether you received a supply of that set or not, really is insignificant because the sets have different aspects to them including the weighting system and a couple of other things.

Carl, you have admitted that you sell duplicates of HoS sets that were designed before your sets were produced or offered.  Well, that is copying whether you like it or not.  And I'm not saying that copying is a bad thing per se.

However, the evidence HoS has provided about their set does make it different than the one you have pictured above.  And that is even though the sets look the same.  There can be a difference in quality of wood, the weights and other things like the lozenges, for example.

You apparently are angry with me for disagreeing with you.  I am sorry for that, but I do not yield to misinformation or things that aren't true.

I do wish you well in your business.

this part is what i do not concede to, perhaps you have misread? 

you state: 

Carl, you have admitted that you sell duplicates of HoS sets that were designed before your sets were produced or offered.

this is not correct. I explaied that we are not selling duplicates of HOS?? what i said was we are offered the same designs by the manufacturer, these sets are NEVER HOS sets?, they are the designs of the manufacturer or the main carvers creations such as Bhupinder Singh of MR Pal.....

can you not understand that HOS are a mddle man and NOT a manufacturer? they themselves will ask the manufacturer to copy a design, or they will sell a design that is someone elses under coyright, such as the examples i have posted about? 

so whilst you have this warped idea that HOS are originators of chess designs you are blinded by that nonsense! in reality Frank in the past may have tweaked a design or created a knight such as the imperial knight, hower in most cases the sets are pre exsisting, and the manufacturer meets with the distributor to market those new set designs-  and I know from experience HOS always demand Exclusivity of those designs, this doesnt make the design theirs? the manufacturers have little option but to look up to the big HOS giant and accept their terms so they dont lose the business. But the manufacturr will ultimately offer HIS/THEIR desings to other distributors....the distributor cannot be held repsonsible can they? 

Also, ask HOS to  prove ownership of all those design they lay claim to? they cant, you know why? .....because they are not the originators of those designs, simple as that. 

regarding the 1851 set, you say your an eye specialist ? are you sure of that ? :)

i have to also add here that in the past I have asked manufactures if they would supply me with sets I have seen for sale on the HOS website, sometimes they do freely supply us however in some they refuse..I have still got those emails where I have been refused....

so you see, its just what goes on in this industry. One thing for sure is my honesty on here about this you will not see admited by HOS.....even though all of us in this business know they do just the same and in some cases much worse! ...at least we ALWAYS pay our suppliers!!!! 

and on that bomshell, Ciao! 

Carl, I guess I should use the word duplicate instead of copy.  You are selling sets that are duplicates of the sets sold by HoS.  Is that better?

You still have not acknowledged that Frank has a patent pending on a new weighting system that, in theory, reduces to eliminates cracking in the wood.  Do the sets you sell have the same weighting system that they mentioned.

Also, by my obvious ignorance to some of the nuances of the sets and business, you should be convinced that I am not an employee or otherwise paid lackey of HoS or anyone else in Chess.

So, you are telling me that Frank did not commission their Collector Series set to be made first?  Remember that was the first set he had made.  Yes, he had the manufacturers duplicate or copy older Jaques designs, but he was the first to have them manufactured as duplicates, anew.  Or are you goung to tell me that you actually were selling the set that Frank called his Collector Series set before 1996?

And Carl, after re-reading your posts in this thread lately, I have decided that I no longer care to be insulted or attacked personally as you have.  Note that I only talked about what you have done and produced from your company.  I never denigrated or insulted you personally.

So, I am done "talking" with you on this topic.  I do wish you well in your business.

"1851 design came about after the CB 1849"

So at last we see who the movers and shakers are in this business.

The collectors series HOS launched first yes yes and up until recently Amritsar Ivory Works offered us the design, claiming that they created it and it was theirs to offer to others? If there is an issue with this then it is up to HOS to clain itelectual property and have us an the other countless distributors remove the sets from our catalogue? and moreover take this up with the actual carvers AIW. 

A director/owner of Jaques in our recent telephone conversation called HOS a bunch of thieves!! ...shall I go on ?

the point im making is its competitive out there, none of us are completley innocent are we ?  

If Josh would have kept his accussasions to himself, I would not have gone on so much, im tired of it now so if you dont mind?

cheers 

yes and i thank you and Vik for all you have done and continue to do :)

Alan, without a doubt you are the man!

(The folks at NOJ must be happy that they do not have this problem.)

Carl and Ron,

Thank you both for your kind words I am suitably humble of course. ;)

As an asside Carl, I met Joe J at their wharehouse in Edenbridge a few years ago and got a similar response to you in your recent phone conversation with them.

I would like to know in plain terms the difference in weighting between the new House of Staunton set vs the sets from Official Staunton.

And I will also add my own statement that I firmly believe if not for Alan Dewey, Sir Alan Fersht, and Jon Crumiller there would be no current reproductions at all.  Their passion for Jaques chess collecting is what has stirred the market enough for the current wave to propogate through all the main vendors. 

No doubt Alan....Jaques did not hold back to me about HOS and to be honest in the same breath I was also told off for using the colour green/cream in some of our packaging, similar to Jaques colours...I admitted when confronted that I was emulating the best there is in chess...it was lightheatred and accepted that no one can lay claims to colors.....I have tried to emmulate the best in the business, such as Jaques and HOS, such as website styles and also have used their images in the past, like i did yours off ebay!! but I have alo found images of ours on other websites, as well as registered chess designs, so all im saying is, it goes on.

The thing that gets me everytime is HOS parade as if they are squeaky clean, but they are not, no one in this business can lay claims to playing fair, its cut throat and we are all guilty of copying each others ideas and innovations. 

Well, all the companies having this problem are reliant on manufacturers from India to make the Chess sets.  And the sets come in a wide variety of quality and design.  Also, these manufacturers have no qualms in taking a design from one person and selling it, as their own design, to others.

Noj is a family business.  Gregor and his brother are the only two full time workers carving the sets.  Their father, who is retired, comes in and does all the finish work on the sets.

Gregor posted on this forum that a set takes them approximately 26 hours to produce.  From sets I have ordered from them I believe it.  Gregor would email me when they started making that batch of sets and would send emails with photos during the process.  The last set I got from them was the GM Pavasovic set.  The batch they made had only 2 sets in it, mine and another fellow's.  It took them about 2 weeks to make those sets to completion.

So, the retailers certainly are not doing anything the same but are dependent on their manufacturers.  Those retailers cannot directly compete with Noj because of the hours into a set and because the materials, especially woods, are European.  All the others are from materials available in India.

I know that when I have spoken with HoS about my 4 sets made by Noj, they tell me that they know the products they offer are different and to two companies really don't compete.

Jack, I too wonder about the weighting system.  Frank Camaratta described a weighting system that he was designing, as an engineer that he is, a number of years ago.  I bet that this is the design he was working.

My suggestion for weighting sets was to set the slightly undersized (lead? weight) in hot melt glue. I thought of this years ago and give it freely to anyone who wishes to use it.

There is a problem with using lead in something which might be used by children so be warned.

I admire the guys at NOJ also and count them as friends.

I guess I know most people in the chess business having been restoring sets for at least 30 years.

So Carl, are you saying that Frank Camaratta and/or Shawn never designed or commissioned a design on their own?  Are you saying that those designs existed already and Frank, and then Shawn, simply bought those sets without any say in the design?

Shawn couldnt design a toffee apple! Frank is the brains, we all know this! Yes the majority of designs are created by the artisans, then the distributor may make modification requests and request exclusivity of a design.

When Josh pointed out that there were some specific things about this 1849 set, making it different from other sets, you are saying they are exaggerating or making this up and selling the exact same product as you but at a much higher price?  Be careful.  He talked about a patent pending weighting design.  Are you sure that your sets have the same weighting?

No, what Im saying is we have both been supplied by the same manufacturer the same set albeit with very minor nuances to the knight facial feature on HOS version. HOS have made additional features to the design by adding leather pads and lozenge, and supposedly their weighting system is proprietary. 

And Carl, you said, in writing, that they copied your 1851 set.  Do you disagree with Josh when he says they sent Frank's 1849 set to the craftsmen to duplicate it instead of any other set currently on the market, as yours was and is?

I did say HOS copied our 1851 design the inference drawn simply because we launched our set way back last year and the incredible likeness of HOS recent launch of their 1849  to our 1851 design. I do not disagree that Frank had a set sent to the manufacturer as this was disclosed to me by Frank himself, he went on to say he would appreciate if we did not make a competing set, however as I told him at that time, we had already had the set at production.....all Im trying to explain is it is virtually the same set, and does not justify IMO the $3500 price! I am sure I am entitled to my opinion? 

The entertainment value of this verbal joust is fading.

I get that you have a history. Fierce competitors in a cut-throat business and all that. But, disregarding past disputes, isn't it a little bit ridiculous to claim that somebody is copying your design, or even comment on the likeness of a product offered by the competition, when in this case we're discussing a reproduction?

I think you have no reason to raise your voice at all Carl, it would be enough to congratulate HoS on raising the bar with a fine looking set, but leave the question as to whether these minute improvements can be worth the price tag.

Everybody on this thread agrees with you already. We'd rather have 4 of your beautiful sets than 1 of this ridiculously overpriced one.