Recently a member posted an Easy Rougher for sale. I was appalled to see another member then lay out how to make one of the tools. I find this to be the height of discourtesy to the seller.
-
We just finished moving the forums to a new hosting server. It looks like everything is functioning correctly but if you find a problem please report it in the Forum Technical Support Forum (click here) or email us at forum_moderator AT aawforum.org. Thanks! -
Beware of Counterfeit Woodturning Tools (click here for details) -
Johnathan Silwones is starting a new AAW chapter, Southern Alleghenies Woodturners, in Johnstown, PA. (click here for details) -
Congratulations to Dave Roberts for "2 Hats" being selected as Turning of the Week for April 22, 2024 (click here for details) -
Welcome new registering member. Your username must be your real First and Last name (for example: John Doe). "Screen names" and "handles" are not allowed and your registration will be deleted if you don't use your real name. Also, do not use all caps nor all lower case.
Want Adds
- Thread starter Paul M. Kaplowitz
- Start date
Well I didnt like it very much either but the post was made in April of this year and now in November and with two replies about price I would guess its sold or he has lost interest in selling it. A thread containing posts on how to make your favorite tool would be pretty cool but the want ad forum is not where it would belong.
Paul:
When I read that response, I had exactly the same reaction as you did. It was out of place, and even though contained accurate information, it shouldn't have been posted to the want-ad area.
To be honest, I did make my own easy rougher equivalent years ago (I really don't use it much), but I wouldn't post a how-to on how to make one in the same thread as a seller advertizing the availability of the tool.
Rob
When I read that response, I had exactly the same reaction as you did. It was out of place, and even though contained accurate information, it shouldn't have been posted to the want-ad area.
To be honest, I did make my own easy rougher equivalent years ago (I really don't use it much), but I wouldn't post a how-to on how to make one in the same thread as a seller advertizing the availability of the tool.
Rob
I am sorry for posting that response on the want ads. I guess I was excited about having made my version of dthe easy rougher even though I have three of them myself.
I didn't mean to submerge the deal, sorry if the person didn't sell his or her rougher. My attempt at making a tool is I guess for my personal boost, an attempt to satisfy my need for creating something from simple things.
jAgain, please accept my appoligies.
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2004
- Messages
- 8,637
- Likes
- 4,976
- Location
- Lakeland, Florida
- Website
- www.hockenberywoodturning.com
This thread brings up another issue.
Inventors of tools are also hurt when posts are made.
Generic tools that have been around for years and are in the "public domain" are not an issue
How to make a hook tool is fine
How to make an Ellsworth sharpening jig is wrong by any standard.
There are lots of things in between.
Folks have been bolting carbide to to steel shafts for years.
Showing folks how to make a carbide tipped tool is not an issue.
From that standpoint, I doubt you affected the sale. For most people the time to make a tool is not worth the effort.
Telling someone how to make an "easy rougher". Raises a moral issue at least.
Most of these tool makers are turners like us who are trying to make a little money from something they came up with.
We should show them some respect.
I think is if fine for me to make anything I can make in my own shop for my own use.
It is wrong to make copies of videos or tools for others and it is wrong to teach others how to make their own copies.
My 2 cents.
Alt
Inventors of tools are also hurt when posts are made.
Generic tools that have been around for years and are in the "public domain" are not an issue
How to make a hook tool is fine
How to make an Ellsworth sharpening jig is wrong by any standard.
There are lots of things in between.
Folks have been bolting carbide to to steel shafts for years.
Showing folks how to make a carbide tipped tool is not an issue.
From that standpoint, I doubt you affected the sale. For most people the time to make a tool is not worth the effort.
Telling someone how to make an "easy rougher". Raises a moral issue at least.
Most of these tool makers are turners like us who are trying to make a little money from something they came up with.
We should show them some respect.
I think is if fine for me to make anything I can make in my own shop for my own use.
It is wrong to make copies of videos or tools for others and it is wrong to teach others how to make their own copies.
My 2 cents.
Alt
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 14, 2004
- Messages
- 445
- Likes
- 1
- Location
- Middlesex County, Virginia
- Website
- www.velvitoil.com
Al, I agree with you.
john lucas
AAW Forum Expert
Al I agree to a point. Since I write articles about tool making and often teach it at demos, you are going to have a few people make tools. I don't think there are enough to really hurt the business. It's kind of like going to see a John Jordan Demo and then making a John Jordan piece for yourself or as gifts.
What does hurt is copying the tool and then selling them. I've seen this happen a lot. It is too expensive for most small tool makers to patent their tools and certainly too expensive to actually take someone to court over this. I don't know what the best recourse would be.
As a handyman I have built copies of many of the tools and jigs out there simply because I don't always have the money to buy them. I have ended up buying them anyway in the long run. I made my first Ellsworth jig and copy of the Oneway as well as a homemade version of the Don Geiger Diamond wheel truer. I now own one of each purchased from the manuractuer. They simply work better than my homemade versions so when I had the money I stepped up.
I think a lot of clubs have weekend tool building sessions and I suppose that does affect tool manufacturers but should we really stop these? I think it's different than actually building the tools and selling them. At least morally anyway. I'll bet this has gone on since the beginning of turning. In the old days there were probably many more people around with blacksmithing skills than there are today. These are fun events and get more turners involved in the club. They will eventually buy more tools and in the long run probably means more money for the tool makers.
Along with teaching tool making I often demonstrate with a wide range of manufactured tools and this probably helps tools sales more than my teaching tool making hurts tool sales. The reason I say that is that I'll bet out of a club of 50, probably only a few will actually make any tools but half or more will drool after the latest Thompson, Hunter, or Easywoodtool that I work with and probably end up purchasing some.
One trend I see is we are getting many more turners who have no background in mechanical skills at all. These turners will never make a tool and often have disposable income to buy the tools.
So I think it's a double edge sword and would love to hear other's responses.
What does hurt is copying the tool and then selling them. I've seen this happen a lot. It is too expensive for most small tool makers to patent their tools and certainly too expensive to actually take someone to court over this. I don't know what the best recourse would be.
As a handyman I have built copies of many of the tools and jigs out there simply because I don't always have the money to buy them. I have ended up buying them anyway in the long run. I made my first Ellsworth jig and copy of the Oneway as well as a homemade version of the Don Geiger Diamond wheel truer. I now own one of each purchased from the manuractuer. They simply work better than my homemade versions so when I had the money I stepped up.
I think a lot of clubs have weekend tool building sessions and I suppose that does affect tool manufacturers but should we really stop these? I think it's different than actually building the tools and selling them. At least morally anyway. I'll bet this has gone on since the beginning of turning. In the old days there were probably many more people around with blacksmithing skills than there are today. These are fun events and get more turners involved in the club. They will eventually buy more tools and in the long run probably means more money for the tool makers.
Along with teaching tool making I often demonstrate with a wide range of manufactured tools and this probably helps tools sales more than my teaching tool making hurts tool sales. The reason I say that is that I'll bet out of a club of 50, probably only a few will actually make any tools but half or more will drool after the latest Thompson, Hunter, or Easywoodtool that I work with and probably end up purchasing some.
One trend I see is we are getting many more turners who have no background in mechanical skills at all. These turners will never make a tool and often have disposable income to buy the tools.
So I think it's a double edge sword and would love to hear other's responses.
I have to disagree with you on this one Al.
Although the poster might have posted his tool making on a different thread.
I saw a sharpening jig similar to Ellsworths, but made from wood, long before his name was attached to it. The Easy Tools are nothing new, just a new name and a new handle design for an old style tool.
Their is now a David Ellswoth parting tool. I have been sharpening one of my 3/16" diamond parting tools like this for nearly 16 years, as was shown to me by another non famous turner.
If to copy someones design is a moral issue, than to copy someones turning design, like John Jordans, or Bin Phos would you consider that to be a morel issue also?
I'm sure there are turners selling their work that is not of there own design.
If we as turners did not copy or try to make advancements in tool design, we would still be using high carbon steel tools, and there's nothing wrong with high carbon steel, I have quite a few that I still use.
I don't think there is a moral issue in this at all.
My pile of sawdust,
Jim
Although the poster might have posted his tool making on a different thread.
I saw a sharpening jig similar to Ellsworths, but made from wood, long before his name was attached to it. The Easy Tools are nothing new, just a new name and a new handle design for an old style tool.
Their is now a David Ellswoth parting tool. I have been sharpening one of my 3/16" diamond parting tools like this for nearly 16 years, as was shown to me by another non famous turner.
If to copy someones design is a moral issue, than to copy someones turning design, like John Jordans, or Bin Phos would you consider that to be a morel issue also?
I'm sure there are turners selling their work that is not of there own design.
If we as turners did not copy or try to make advancements in tool design, we would still be using high carbon steel tools, and there's nothing wrong with high carbon steel, I have quite a few that I still use.
I don't think there is a moral issue in this at all.
My pile of sawdust,
Jim
I agree that posting a DIY response to a want ad is bad form. The op has already apologized and that's a dead issue. Al expanded the discussion and I have mixed feelings on his position.
If someone will be put out of business by the posting of a DIY how-to video or pdf, then I don't think they have much of a business model. My guess is they are probably doomed as a business anyway (which I don't think is the case for the product that initiated this thread). If I have to chooe between (A) the open sharing of knowledge and skills and (B) strong-arm protection of somebody's profits by squashing the sharing of knowledge, then I'll go with A.
On the other hand. Let's assume someone copies a newly popularized product, oustources production to some slave camp in asia and trys to steal the market with nothing more than cheap prices. They won't win over the customers who realize that crap is never cheap at any price, but they might steal enough business to hurt the business of the guy who originally popularized the tool. I have a big problem with this scenario and I don't think it's right. But it happens and it's up to the first mover to offer a compelling total package that can win over the knock-off artists in the marketplace. None of this has anything to do with the sharing of knowledge.
So I guess my bottom line is that the free and open sharing of knowledge and skills is good. Even if it might cut into somebody's sales.
Ripping off someobody's idea and competing solely on price to try and make a quick buck for yourself is just plain wrong.
Probably too simplistic of a view of the world, but it's my view.
Ed
If someone will be put out of business by the posting of a DIY how-to video or pdf, then I don't think they have much of a business model. My guess is they are probably doomed as a business anyway (which I don't think is the case for the product that initiated this thread). If I have to chooe between (A) the open sharing of knowledge and skills and (B) strong-arm protection of somebody's profits by squashing the sharing of knowledge, then I'll go with A.
On the other hand. Let's assume someone copies a newly popularized product, oustources production to some slave camp in asia and trys to steal the market with nothing more than cheap prices. They won't win over the customers who realize that crap is never cheap at any price, but they might steal enough business to hurt the business of the guy who originally popularized the tool. I have a big problem with this scenario and I don't think it's right. But it happens and it's up to the first mover to offer a compelling total package that can win over the knock-off artists in the marketplace. None of this has anything to do with the sharing of knowledge.
So I guess my bottom line is that the free and open sharing of knowledge and skills is good. Even if it might cut into somebody's sales.
Ripping off someobody's idea and competing solely on price to try and make a quick buck for yourself is just plain wrong.
Probably too simplistic of a view of the world, but it's my view.
Ed
Last edited:
Reminds me of the cotton gin and Eli Whitney. He had a great invention and held the patent for it. It was so simple that almost anyone could make one and that was a huge issue. So he got creative, he got into the ginning business for himself. He offered to gin the cotton for the farmers in Georgia for a 2/5 cut of the profits paid in cotton.
As it applies to our discussion I do not want EZ rougher to come out and rough my bowl for me in exchange for use of the bowl on Tuesdays and Thursdays or something...
The final lesson I can take from Mr. Whitney is that a few years later he finally found his wealth from the manufacture of muskets by machine. So all those who make tools and try and horde the design and technique might consider giving it away freely in the first place, much like open source programming from Google (IMHO). Give to the community and it will eventually give back. Eli Whitney would have never gotten the gig designing the musket making machines if he was not already well known for inventing an industry changing device.
As it applies to our discussion I do not want EZ rougher to come out and rough my bowl for me in exchange for use of the bowl on Tuesdays and Thursdays or something...
The final lesson I can take from Mr. Whitney is that a few years later he finally found his wealth from the manufacture of muskets by machine. So all those who make tools and try and horde the design and technique might consider giving it away freely in the first place, much like open source programming from Google (IMHO). Give to the community and it will eventually give back. Eli Whitney would have never gotten the gig designing the musket making machines if he was not already well known for inventing an industry changing device.
odie
TOTW Team
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2006
- Messages
- 7,116
- Likes
- 9,817
What an interesting thread.......plenty of room for thought and discussion! :cool2:
I don't think Ellsworth was the first turner to use the sharpening principle he made famous......and, his attempt to profit from it came sometime after making it public knowledge. The fact that he was already famous for his hollow forms, is what made the sharpening technique he used popular, but he wasn't the inventor. The Sharpfast, Wolverine, etc., all apply basically the same theory, but I believe it's true that David Ellsworth was the first to capitalize, and profit from the concept.
There is nothing wrong with showing others how to make an "Ellsworth sharpening jig".......but few will actually make one. Like John Lucas said, most will purchase one of these.....and, it very well may serve to INCREASE the sales of those devices that are available commercially. I purchased the Wolverine in the early 1990's.....but, I did make my own Ellsworth jig first, just to see if it worked as well as others were telling us it did. My little homemade Ellsworth jig is long gone now......it wasn't nearly as good as the Wolverine I ended up with.
---------------------------------------------------
Gary, I wouldn't let it bother you.
I read that ad, and the ethics of your response didn't register.....at all.
I agree that there are some ethics considerations here, but anyone with any desire to see the motives that inspired you, will have an understanding that it was never your intention to prevent the seller of the Easyrougher tool from making the sale. As far as I'm concerned, you just saw the ad and your thoughts simply "shifted gears"......and you wrote about your thoughts. Next time, you and I BOTH will remember this......apply the ethics considerations involved.......and will take it to another forum.
Paul's original post is reasonable and correct. He's definitely not wrong for seeing the ethics involved and expressing his thought on it. There is purpose in it, because it now has been brought to the attention of some of the rest of us about these certain aspects........;
ooc
I don't think Ellsworth was the first turner to use the sharpening principle he made famous......and, his attempt to profit from it came sometime after making it public knowledge. The fact that he was already famous for his hollow forms, is what made the sharpening technique he used popular, but he wasn't the inventor. The Sharpfast, Wolverine, etc., all apply basically the same theory, but I believe it's true that David Ellsworth was the first to capitalize, and profit from the concept.
There is nothing wrong with showing others how to make an "Ellsworth sharpening jig".......but few will actually make one. Like John Lucas said, most will purchase one of these.....and, it very well may serve to INCREASE the sales of those devices that are available commercially. I purchased the Wolverine in the early 1990's.....but, I did make my own Ellsworth jig first, just to see if it worked as well as others were telling us it did. My little homemade Ellsworth jig is long gone now......it wasn't nearly as good as the Wolverine I ended up with.
---------------------------------------------------
Gary, I wouldn't let it bother you.
I read that ad, and the ethics of your response didn't register.....at all.
I agree that there are some ethics considerations here, but anyone with any desire to see the motives that inspired you, will have an understanding that it was never your intention to prevent the seller of the Easyrougher tool from making the sale. As far as I'm concerned, you just saw the ad and your thoughts simply "shifted gears"......and you wrote about your thoughts. Next time, you and I BOTH will remember this......apply the ethics considerations involved.......and will take it to another forum.
Paul's original post is reasonable and correct. He's definitely not wrong for seeing the ethics involved and expressing his thought on it. There is purpose in it, because it now has been brought to the attention of some of the rest of us about these certain aspects........;
ooc
Last edited:
Another reason why someone (such as myself) will buy a tool rather than make it is time. I am an occasional, hobbyist turner, and I get to turn a little on the weekends if no other family adventure is planned. For me to spend four or six hours making and adjusting a complex tool may use up all my turning time for one or two weeks. I would have to buy the tools to make the tools, and it's not a good trade-off.
By the same token, if I want to try out a "coving" tool or a "point" tool, I buy a tool steel rod, make a handle and grind it to shape. If I don't like it or it's not useful, I regrind it into something else, and it cost less than $10.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2005
- Messages
- 12,898
- Likes
- 5,187
- Location
- Dalworthington Gardens, TX
- Website
- pbase.com
Al, I agree with the overall gist of your comments, but not with all details.
With respect to David Ellsworth's sharpening jig, if I am not mistaken, he freely shared the design until finally deciding to begin producing and selling them. While I decided to purchase his jig (the old design, which was not very good, I am afraid because of the poor quality casting) along with the Geiger knob (purchased when it first became available), I wouldn't have any problem with "rolling my own" if I ever decide to take that unlikely step. The main thing is his signature gouge with the special flute shape. Very few of us would have the necessary tooling to duplicate -- and, besides being morally, ethically, and probably legally wrong, it would not be economical. His new design jig if far better than the old one.
I have not used a Varigrind jig in a blue moon, but I believe that it can be set to very closely, if not exactly, do the equivalent function of the Ellsworth jig. Does this mean that one may be treading on any sort of intellectual property of the other? It doesn't in my NLQ (not-legally-qualified) opinion. Sometimes things are fuzzy, but most of us know if we're stealing.
john lucas
AAW Forum Expert
Didn't Jerry Glaser come out with the first sharpening jig? It sat on the floor as I remember. It was after that we started seeing the Ellsworth, Oneway and others that used that principal.
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2004
- Messages
- 8,637
- Likes
- 4,976
- Location
- Lakeland, Florida
- Website
- www.hockenberywoodturning.com
The first jig I saw was the Glaser (circa 1995?). It was about 4 feet long and pivoted from the floor.
The ONEWAY and Ellsworth followed later.
All three have some common elements and some unique elements.
Sometimes makers of tools give permission to copy. Often this is to specific individuals for their own use. Sometimes they post it for everyone.
Around 1980 I was involved with usage issues for software I helped develop for DoD. The basic issue was we had given it freely to many government agencies and the navy gave it to one of their contractors. So far so good. That contractor decided to sell it to the air force.
Not good anymore... We stopped the sale.
Al
The ONEWAY and Ellsworth followed later.
All three have some common elements and some unique elements.
Sometimes makers of tools give permission to copy. Often this is to specific individuals for their own use. Sometimes they post it for everyone.
Around 1980 I was involved with usage issues for software I helped develop for DoD. The basic issue was we had given it freely to many government agencies and the navy gave it to one of their contractors. So far so good. That contractor decided to sell it to the air force.
Not good anymore... We stopped the sale.
Al
Last edited:
I applaud Gary Chapman for his explanation and apology. He is a man of integrity and character. I have apologized to countless people during my 67 years and no doubt there will be more.