Carl, take it easy. No one has accused you of copying this specific set. You have accused HoS of basically copying yours when they have produced evidence that their 1849 set is an original based off of a set they had commissioned. And whether you received a supply of that set or not, really is insignificant because the sets have different aspects to them including the weighting system and a couple of other things.
Carl, you have admitted that you sell duplicates of HoS sets that were designed before your sets were produced or offered. Well, that is copying whether you like it or not. And I'm not saying that copying is a bad thing per se.
However, the evidence HoS has provided about their set does make it different than the one you have pictured above. And that is even though the sets look the same. There can be a difference in quality of wood, the weights and other things like the lozenges, for example.
You apparently are angry with me for disagreeing with you. I am sorry for that, but I do not yield to misinformation or things that aren't true.
I do wish you well in your business.
this part is what i do not concede to, perhaps you have misread?
you state:
Carl, you have admitted that you sell duplicates of HoS sets that were designed before your sets were produced or offered.
this is not correct. I explaied that we are not selling duplicates of HOS?? what i said was we are offered the same designs by the manufacturer, these sets are NEVER HOS sets?, they are the designs of the manufacturer or the main carvers creations such as Bhupinder Singh of MR Pal.....
can you not understand that HOS are a mddle man and NOT a manufacturer? they themselves will ask the manufacturer to copy a design, or they will sell a design that is someone elses under coyright, such as the examples i have posted about?
so whilst you have this warped idea that HOS are originators of chess designs you are blinded by that nonsense! in reality Frank in the past may have tweaked a design or created a knight such as the imperial knight, hower in most cases the sets are pre exsisting, and the manufacturer meets with the distributor to market those new set designs- and I know from experience HOS always demand Exclusivity of those designs, this doesnt make the design theirs? the manufacturers have little option but to look up to the big HOS giant and accept their terms so they dont lose the business. But the manufacturr will ultimately offer HIS/THEIR desings to other distributors....the distributor cannot be held repsonsible can they?
Also, ask HOS to prove ownership of all those design they lay claim to? they cant, you know why? .....because they are not the originators of those designs, simple as that.
regarding the 1851 set, you say your an eye specialist ? are you sure of that ? :)
Carl, take it easy. No one has accused you of copying this specific set. You have accused HoS of basically copying yours when they have produced evidence that their 1849 set is an original based off of a set they had commissioned. And whether you received a supply of that set or not, really is insignificant because the sets have different aspects to them including the weighting system and a couple of other things.
Carl, you have admitted that you sell duplicates of HoS sets that were designed before your sets were produced or offered. Well, that is copying whether you like it or not. And I'm not saying that copying is a bad thing per se.
However, the evidence HoS has provided about their set does make it different than the one you have pictured above. And that is even though the sets look the same. There can be a difference in quality of wood, the weights and other things like the lozenges, for example.
You apparently are angry with me for disagreeing with you. I am sorry for that, but I do not yield to misinformation or things that aren't true.
I do wish you well in your business.