I don't agree that most framebuilders lack interest in their past productio n. Many of them maintain extensive build records and most can be quite h elpful. But they are trying to make a living in a difficult business, so they have limited time to talk about bikes built years ago.
It is said that Albert Eisentraut has no interest in his old frames, but I don't know whether that is true or not. After all Bruce Gordon once had a reputation as being rude and insulting, but I think he has been exposed o n CR List the last couple of years as - Dare I say it? - actually a very ni ce guy. Sorry, Bruce, but I think your cover was blown some time ago. I doubt everyone who buys a used Gordon on eBay will pay a 10% royalty, but I agree that was a very nice gesture. Of course, if this catches on, maybe I'll have to pay "residuals" to Richard Sachs and Peter Weigle and M att Assenmacher. Don't think I have to worry about paying on the Cuevas or McLean or Behringer or Romic or Tesch.
Big Spring, Texas, USA
From: firstname.lastname@example.org <email@example.com> Subject: Re: [CR]Most Pleasant Surprise in my Email-Now Trademark and Herit age To: firstname.lastname@example.org, "Classic Rendezvous" <email@example.com> Cc: "Classic Rendezvous" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Friday, December 12, 2008, 12:35 PM
This is an interesting post.
Since Bruce didn't sell licenses to use his bikes, as far as I know,
he's not entitled to any royalties, although it's certainly very nice
that someone would want to pay him for his frame's "appreciation."
Thank goodness the frame didn't decrease in value-perhaps the buyer would
have asked Bruce for depreciation to be paid.
What is more interesting, however, and not addressed in Bruce's post, is
that, it seems that both major and minor framemakers and bicycle manufactur
do little or nothing to protect their legitimate trademark rights.
Is any member aware of a frame or bicycle maker having taken legal action t
protect his/her trademark?
Do many framemakers or bike makers even take the steps necessary to obtain
trademark or other legal protection?
Moreover, I have the impression that even the greatest frame/bike makers
(unlike watch makers, for example) have little interest in their previous
production and heritage. Do other members share this impression?
George Hollenberg MD
> This morning while having my coffee and watching the "Depressing
\r?\n> News" on
\r?\n> TV, I received an email from someone who bought a frame of mine
\r?\n> on ebay.
\r?\n> Usually this type of email (I usually get about 1 per week) asks for
\r?\n> detailed info about a frame I have built in the last 35 years.
\r?\n> My standard
\r?\n> answer is that I have every piece of info dating back to 1976 - but,
\r?\n> It takes at least an hour to research it - time spent not
\r?\n> working - time I
\r?\n> must charge for. This answer is usually followed by emails
\r?\n> about what an
\r?\n> @#$%$#%^#$%%$ I am for charging for that research.
\r?\n> Well much to my surprise - the new owner of my frame said how
\r?\n> well made it
\r?\n> was, and that he was anxious to get parts on it and ride it.
\r?\n> Now for the "Kicker"!!!!!!
\r?\n> He had made a deposit in my Paypal account of 10% of the price
\r?\n> he paid for
\r?\n> it as a "Royalty" in appreciation. This is for a frame I built
\r?\n> 29.5 years
\r?\n> ago. It almost brought tears to my eyes - yes - Bruce Gordon
\r?\n> has feelings -
\r?\n> contrary to public opinion.
\r?\n> It was not the $$$, but the appreciation of the 'New Owner" that
\r?\n> choked me
\r?\n> Something to think about.
\r?\n> I hope everyone has a Happy Holiday Season.
\r?\n> Bruce Gordon
\r?\n> Bruce Gordon Cycles