CNC Al Cass duplicates/fakes/copies

steve cass about CNC Al Cass duplicates/fakes/copies etc etc etc.

I recently purchased a painting from Vienna, by Remigius Geyling.  It 
> is a beautiful painting that has been lost since? For many years. I 
> made a triangle deal for it. I sold a painting to a guy in the 
> netherlands, who paid the person I obtained the painting from in 
> Vienna. But It is so wonderful. I would like it to be seen by the 
> masses! I could sell MILLIONS of copies. Make Millions of $. I would 
> gladly pay the artist family if I could only find them to communicate 
> such a revival in Remigius' work. I couldn't imagine why they would 
> not want to. Nevertheless. I cannot find and locate the family to 
> secure rights to this work of art. Since the artist died in 1974, 
> even though the date of the work is 1903, I am not allowed to make 
> prints of this work until 75 years after the artist has passed. I can 
> make one for myself, or possibly a run that I could give away as 
> gifts to family and friends. But...I would need to wait 42 years 
> before I could legally sell prints without having to contact the 
> family. Some have told me to just "play dumb" and make money on the 
> prints now and worry about paying off family later. I just can't do 
> this. I don't feel right about that knowing what I know about 
> copyrights. Or at least what I think I know.



> Why am I telling you this? Because today, there are some machinist 
> operated companies that make copies of any brass instrument 
> mouthpiece you send them. They scan the piece, then convert and 
> import the scans into a modern CNC lathe. Which supposedly in turn 
> makes "exact duplicates". These "copies" have been said by many  who 
> have had them commissioned, being inferior to their original. Why? 
> They are computerized copies! On the otherhand there are those who 
> say they are exact. (with the exception of using the same grade raw 
> materials) Many say they are nothing close to the originals many say 
> they "have to be they are computerized copies". Regardless, that is 
> not the point. We can save this "debate" for another time. What I am 
> hoping to explain about is, since AL Cass signed each piece, who I 
> believe, is the only person/manufacture of mouthpieces to personally 
> engrave/ sign each and every piece they manufactured. Thus each piece 
> can and should be considered more a work of "ART". Because each 
> piece, is signed personally by the artist, each and every piece 
> becomes more a "sculpture" and in my opinion falls under artistic 
> copyright infringement laws. In other words, it's OK to take a picture
> (scan) of the mouthpiece. That too, IN ITSELF, becomes art. If I took 
> your scan and reproduced it, it would be copyright infringment 
> wouldn't it? However taking a picture is not breaking any copyright 
> law. However, when you use that same picture/ 3D scan to make a copy, 
> or the manufacture of the digital scan. THIS becomes the COPYRIGHT 
> INFRINGEMENT. If they were to make just 1, for 1 person, this I 
> believe is OK. If you needed to make a back-up of a piece you have 
> for your own personal use and you own the original. This is fine to 
> have a copy made for personal use. But you certainly couldn't 
> manufacture them to turn a profit. Nor is it legal for the person 
> whom you hired to make the scan & the copy, keep the Computer Scan on 
> file and manufacture them by name to/for every person who wants one.
> I felt a need to express my opinion on this matter, it has been 
> brought to my attention via emails, forums throughout the net that 
> there are several people/companies, who advertise and manufacture AL 
> CASS "copy's". They think what they are doing is ok, or perhaps they 
> are simply playing dumb like I was advised I should about making 
> prints of my painting mentioned earlier. Nevertheless, I feel because 
> each piece made and released by Al Cass, is signed personally, each 
> is a work of art. A photographer is certainly allowed to take a 
> picture of mountains, & reproduce the photo in the "media" of 
> photographs and sell them for profit. In this case the manufactures 
> of Al Cass copies turn the pictures back into the mountains! lol   It 
> will be legal one day to copy an AL Cass mouthpiece, but not until 75 
> years after the his death. In this case, Al Cass died 1989. So his 
> pieces are protected from piracy for at least another 56 years.
> We haven't even touched on the fact they use Al Cass' name to sell 
> the copy. After all, that is what is needed in order to be able to 
> justify to the buyer to pay a premium price. However....What disturbs 
> me most about all this copy stuff is this. Someone who gets "a copy" 
> who has never tried the original, gets one, trys it, and if they 
> don't like it..........., who do they blame? The person who made the 
> copy or Al Cass?! The response I have seen most is, If they don't 
> like it, or it's simply the wrong size for them, "I don't like Al 
> Cass" and the fact is, Al Cass had NOTHING to do with the piece they 
> judged Al Cass on.