Shock Shock Two more Toothpick Holders

Messages
4,834
Location
Goodland, Kansas
Here are a couple more I made out of ambrosia maple. They are finished in lacquer per the customer. These were picked up today. Six more to go. Three to go with salt/pepper mills as sets.
 

Attachments

  • Toothpick Holder 9.jpg
    Toothpick Holder 9.jpg
    29 KB · Views: 59
  • Toothpick Holder 10.jpg
    Toothpick Holder 10.jpg
    26.7 KB · Views: 44
  • Toothpick Holder 11.jpg
    Toothpick Holder 11.jpg
    25.1 KB · Views: 56
Last edited:
Those are beauties, Bernie. Nice to see that you're still making them now that you seem to have started quite a little rush on these things.:D:thumb:

Hope to get time to make some myself in the next few days.
 
Those are too cool, Bernie. With the dark finial and the ambrosia markings, it looks like the finial melted and ran down the side of the holder.

I need to make one with that flush lid, too. I was going from memory on mine and didn't get the top just right. They sure are fun, though. :)
 
Bernie,
I hate to rain on your parade, but what's Wood Magazine's policy on using their plans/articles for financial gain?

Reason I mention it is that I posted pictures of a child's rocker that made on another site (but I won't mention SMC here). It was made from highly modified plans from a fifteen year old article in Wood Magazine.

One of the friendly (?) mods over there forwarded my pictures to Wood Mag, who then forwarded it to the article's author. I then got a somewhat nasty email informing me that since I'd already made two of these chairs, they must be being made for personal gain, and that she, the author, OWNED the design!

The only 'personal gain' I received from the chairs was the appreciation of the little kids I gave them to.

Now, I doubt that anyone here will ever forward (report) your work to Wood Mag or the article's author, but be careful...

'Nuff said.
 
There was letter to the editor in Wood about this once. Don't remember which issue, I also don't remember what they said in the answer....Does anyone else?

Personally, I think since it was an article done by the staff of Wood there wouldn't be ownership like the lady with your rockers Jim?...the mag is published to show people like us how to do things, the video wouldn't be on their website either. If a tool store used the tool reviews in Wood to push a customer one way or another would that be "stealing" the idea from the mag? :dunno::huh:

PS: I forgot to say Well Done Bernie:thumb:
 
I guess I didn't give it a second thought Jim. Reason being is why would they put templates in the article or have a video to show how it is done with all the dimensions given. Sounds to me like I had better stop production. Thanks Jim for the heads up and thanks everyone for the comments.
 
I do not know, but I VERY much doubt that the design is "Unique" to Wood Mag, I suspect that this design has been around for a LONG time. In the video, they do NOT show how to do various steps, like how they attach the basket to the dowel to the top to the finial. I use a shop turned dowel, and I hollow out my body after drilling, so my method changes it from what they show.

I very much doubt that you are in violation of anything Bernie, but it is a good subject to bring up, so thanks for that Jim.

Cheers!
 
I have a e-mail and just asked them. My granddad said how ya going to know if you don't ask. I will post the answer when I find out. I guess I really don't understand if these "expert" turners write articles, books, make video's and DVD's on how to make this stuff complete with material lists and tools how can they claim I will show you but it is mine so don't make it. Guess I am just a old simple country boy and don't understand.
 
I have a e-mail and just asked them. My granddad said how ya going to know if you don't ask. I will post the answer when I find out. I guess I really don't understand if these "expert" turners write articles, books, make video's and DVD's on how to make this stuff complete with material lists and tools how can they claim I will show you but it is mine so don't make it. Guess I am just a old simple country boy and don't understand.

I hear you :rolleyes:

I found this on their site..........

Link to Wood Mags legal stuff <-link

Seems they are saying that you have a "Limited Right" of use :dunno:

Thing is, with "Copyright" on stuff like this, they can copyright a specific design, but they cannot, IIRC copyright the concept, for example, you cannot copyright, or patent the concept of a heavier than air flying machine (airplane) but you could patents a specific design........ or something to that effect. I think if you made a 100 that are exactly the same as the plans they publish and show the video of, you could be in trouble, but I wonder what percentage of change from the original design you have to hit for your design to become unique? :dunno:

I'll wager that you will get a "No way, stop making them" kind of e-mail, as they will want to cover their assets completely. :wave:

Cheers!
 
I don't think any magazine article that presents an idea as a possible or suggested project has any recourse regarding someone simulating the design, what on earth is the point of publishing the 'how to' projects if they are not to be copied.

If the magazine has highlighted a marketed product and/or referred to the availability of drawings for the item then I can see a problem if you copy it in every substantial detail and market it without buying the design.

The couple of times I have 'had a go' at something to test my ability to make a like item I have acknowledged the source of inspiration out of courtesy but I think unless one uses patented or copyrighted design drawings to manufacture the parts I don't see how an interpretation of a design concept can be objected to.
 
...Personally, I think since it was an article done by the staff of Wood there wouldn't be ownership like the lady with your rockers Jim?...the mag is published to show people like us how to do things, the video wouldn't be on their website either. If a tool store used the tool reviews in Wood to push a customer one way or another would that be "stealing" the idea from the mag?....

The article was in the Dec. 1993 Wood Mag, which was before they did 'centerfolds of plans, but they did provide gridded drawing of all the components, and offered full-sized drawings for sale (which I bought).

Nowhere in the article or magazine could I find any 'number of copies' restrictions.

Besides, by the time I got done with the latest chair, the only remaining unmodified parts from the original drawings were the bear cutout, and the arms. The seat, back, seat-to-back angle, and the rockers were all changed significantly to improve on what had been a pretty simplistic design.

What I really took offense to was the assertion that, since I'd used the (basic) plans more than once, it was for commercial gain. How many of us build more than one of an item for multiple nieces, nephews, grandchildren, etc.? My four neices have just begun to have kids of their own, so now I've got a whole new generation of grand-nieces/nephews to build stuff for!
 
The fly in the ointment has to do with financial gain. Giving them to your relatives precludes that. An assumption of financial gain is a long way from proof of financial gain.

Build, give, enjoy.

BTW. Nice job.
 
I'm pretty sure WOOD magazine didn't invent the toothpick holder, lol. I'd just vary my design from theirs, quit referencing them regarding the holders and keep on making them.

I think it was Solomon who said, "There's nothing new under the sun" and that was about 3,500 years ago. :eek:
 
Cody you are right. Heck with it. I am heading out to make a few more.

Jim I agree with you 100%. How can they say 2 is for commercial gain. Yea maybe if you mass produced 200 I could see the point.
 
Well, I was out today, and we were in a "Souvenir" shop and I found nearly the exact same design made by Japanese turners, apparently it is an OLD design, so there is NO WAY anyone can claim it as their own. :wave:
 
Top