But are they "exclusive" rights to build. Are they "exclusive rights to the name", are they"exclusive rights to distribute". It gets complicated, Ray. I beileve the fiasco regarding Hetchins (or Hetchin's) evolves around these distinctions.
For example, Tom Board, one of the premier living British framebuilders , IMO, who worked for Hurlow/Rensch at Paris Cycles in the ;ate 40's, has been producing very exact replicas of Hetchin's, Paris-Galibier, Baines Flying Gate, and other orthodox and unorthodox frames for years. His work is exemplary, and in my opinion (and it's just my opinion) as good or better in detail, craftsmanship and execution than the David Miller (who build them on any given day is open-ended) and the Joynt frames. Funny how Tom doesn't get any press.
Tom has never run into the kind of trouble that has surfaced over the Miller/Joynt/(fill in the blank) productions to my knowledge. He openly admits to these recreations as "studies" and not replicas nor reproductions. His intent is for the sake of personal/professional development by copying the masters - very much like (although on a much higher level) the post Raphaelites copied renaissance masters (there are great examples of studio-copies of Rembrandt's work that are recognized as study-by -copy).
The problem exists when there is blatant misrepresentation of the final work, and we all know who they are. However, I hold in high regard, any framebuilder who picks up a torch and gives faithful reproduction a try - weather it is just to have fun or to hone his/her skills. Sort of like what Baylis did with his Masi Special* Pista replica. I'm sure he learned alot while having good fun in the process.
(8" of slush, water, and clogged catch-basins at every intersection , but we still rode today!)
Cantiflex@aol.com wrote: Hi Jerry and All, That's the exact reason I negociated the 'Rights to build' in 1995. Ray Etherton in Maldon, UK