Lost Wax - Legal?

[CSharp]

recently, i've seen a lot of 'lost wax' copies for sale. i also know that many mouthpiece makers copy from other mouthpiece makers (otto link is probably one of the most copied i guess).

my question is, are lost wax copies legal?

[Grumps]

I'd always thought it was just a sales pitch...

[martysax]

Who lost them? Should they be called "Found wax copies?"

Is the current Mustang a lost wax copy of the early seventies Mustang?

What about "Plaster casting?"

[odsum25]

I don't really know copyright law, but legal reasons are most certainly why they don't tell you exactly what pieces the Lost Wax are copies of on Bob Ackerman's website. Also, I don't know how this effects legal issues, but I believe they're made in Brazil.

[shmuelyosef]

The term 'lost wax' comes from the way that these are made. A wax 'positive' is made of an object (there are many ways to do this). So now you have a wax model of the object you want to reproduce. Then you build up a 'mould' around the wax model of some high temperature material (often fine sand in a resin). This sand mould is fired either before or during casting of molten brass, bronze, silver, etc, and the wax runs out (or is 'lost', hence the name of the process).

[jazzbluescat]

I never seen a wax mpc.

*Posted before I read the last post.*

[CSharp]

oh come on now...you haven't seen the "lost wax" mouthpiece for sale on this forum? they claim to be florida link copies. bob ackerman sells them though i agree his site only eludes to them being link copies...and surely you know that other mouthpiece guys make copies of famous mouthpieces.

i thought this was pretty common knowlege....didn't think i needed to go into what "lost wax" was. duh - my fault!

surely you've seen these for sale:

http://forum.saxontheweb.net/showthread.php?t=49468&highlight=lost+wax

http://forum.saxontheweb.net/showthread.php?t=48544&highlight=lost+wax

http://forum.saxontheweb.net/showthread.php?t=46771&highlight=lost+wax

and many more. not to mention all the ones i've seen on ebay.

speaking of mouthpieces, any mouthpieces (lawyers) out there that can respond to this?

[Selmer's_glu]

Although I am not an attorney, (but play one, on TV & in certain role playing games w/my wife)...

I believe that you cannot patent a mouthpiece design, ONLY the method of production, if that is unique. Can't remember where I heard that one from, I think because most sax & clarinet mpcs are just subtle variations on the same basic design. (chamber, tip, baffle, etc.)

Like I said, I'm not an attorney, but....

[rabbit]

Although I am not an attorney, (but play one, on TV & in certain role playing games w/my wife)...

Deviant perversion of the highest order. Congratulations.

(Is there a hat involved?)

[DD]

If she adjusts your briefs without consent, some might consider that unauthorized practice.

[Sigmund451]

You are correct. It is difficult to get a mouthpiece patent. Requirements are clear that the design must be significantly unique...by what standards this is judged I do not know but in general most basic designs cant be awarded a patent...there are a few though. The name however can be owned. Making illusions to a fla. link is only slightly pushing at the envelope by using the slang name for an otto link. There was never a Florida Link...as in specific named model...its just a name that was generated by players through time.

So the long and short...easy to get away with lost wax. Babbitt doesnt seem to push the issue...for one custom pieces are expensive and the ongoing popularity still helps to sell their pieces by imitating "legend". etc...bla bla bla

[MojoBari]

There are many mouthpiece design patents. But most deal with gimmicky features. Basic mouthpiece geometry is rarely patented. Sometimes it is and I can not see why it was granted. There is plenty of prior art to show what is common practice. But that is why we "need" lawyers.

[CSharp]

Found this one from Guardala. Surely there are others. Seems pretty general but I don't see the blueprint images so I'm not sure what all the patent covers.

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5293805.html

[MojoBari]

Guardala/Powell have 2 patents. One covers the outward appearance of the mouthpiece. The other, best I can tell, covers a unique chamber cross-sectional shape that does not appear on most Guardala designs. It is called "elliptical" but the diagrams show something between a round and a spade shape (like on playing cards). It may have been used on the fat boy models, but I am not sure. Sugal was taken to court years ago for infringement, but I do not know in what area.

[J.Max]

I've often wondered how he compensates for mold shrinkage. In the lost wax casting process, the cast is usually a bit smaller than the original. (It's only a teeny tiny bit bit smaller, and not usually noticeable) In copying a mouthpiece though, it could make a rather large difference in the way that the mouthpiece plays.