Signature on the work.

[JohnBarton]

Okay so it's time for my monthly moral/ethical problem for the group here to solve for me.

Recently I showed you our latest case. Some of you may have noticed that there is a signature on the inside of the lid. This is my signature laser engraved into the case.

The tooler, Zhen Hai Lee, signed the case on the bottom but I didn't show you that picture because there is another surprise there that the customer has not seen yet.

I signed this case because I designed all the elements and hand-walked everyone through every stage of the construction. As well on this one I did a lot of the physical labor on the construction.

My take on this is that when I elect to sign a case it's because it's a special piece that I am really invested into.

There is a person on the billiards forum who thinks that I have no right to sign our cases because I don't do all the work all by myself. He even started a poll about it which devolved into a personal insult slugfest.

This is the very last thing I wrote on this at the billiard forum:

When I sign something then I am saying to my customer that I stand good for what I am giving them. I am saying to them that all that I am is invested in this case and I give it to you with pride in my and my team's accomplishment.

This is obviously a sensitive topic.

But who better to ask than you all? So fire away and let me know what your thoughts are on this subject.

[rdb]

Personally, I think you have every right to sign it. As you say, basically you are the designer, even jumping in with handwork at times. Any of the famous designers proudly label their products with their names. I don't believe they give ANY credit to their workers.

Many saddle shops produce works with the owners maker's stamp, even though they were produced by their employees. Many saddlers worked their way through other peoples shops before they got to put their stamp on something.

Many medieval Painters had apprentices that produced work under the guidance of the master. A popular artist just couldn't produce all the pieces requested. That's when "business" kicks in. The Master would sign the finished piece. Forensic science has a hard time distinguishing between Master and Apprentice work.

There is nothing ethically wrong. It's your business, your product, your name is on the line. You have never claimed to make the entire product, only that you are a contributor to the entire effort. Any criticism is probably just a simple jealous reaction.

Teamwork is an over used phrase nowadays, usually it's meant to just get more out of the worker. In your case, you have a genuine pride in your team, and the work it produces. I give that seven thumbs up!. I just wish I had some help around my shop...lol

[Johanna]

The person on the billiards forum is just jealous. For example, LW is also a team effort. Just because my name appears as "admin" does not mean I do all the work or take the credit, just the blame. You were right to sign your name to the case- it's YOUR team that built it. Having your chief tooler sign his too shows your (the leader's) respect and adds value for the eventual customer. Don't let them drag you down, John. Your makers stamp was appropriate (after all, who sold and who funded this adventure?) and well within standard craftsman practices. Sounds like you ran into a troll on the billiard forum.

Johanna

[TroyWest]

John,

Personally, I think you are well within your rights to sign the case. Billy Cooks name is on thousands of saddles he never touched, but he designed them. Ford is on millions of cars that he never touched. Calvin Klein is on clothes he never touched.

I think personal slugfests are unprofitable. In the saddle world, if you ordered a Chuck Stormes saddle you would know he is the only man who touched it. If you ordered a Billy Cook you would know he didn't touch it. Their names would be on them. I don't see it as a real ethical dilemma. Seems a small thing to be upset about. Just my thoughts.

Troy West

[UKRay]

Nice question, John but far more complex than it appears on the surface. It seems to me that you have a number of issues running in tandem here:

Issue 1: Who should claim credit for making an item - the company or the individual maker/s?

Issue 2: Who should be responsible if the item fails - the company or the individual maker/s?

Issue 3: Who 'owns' the intellectual property associated with the job - the company or the individual maker/s?

Issue 4: Who 'owns' the moral right to the kudos for creating the work - the company or the individual maker/s?

Issue 5: Who is the official maker when a job is a team effort?

The situation can be likened to the Italian Rennaissance artworks which are attributed to a single artist but whch were actually created by a team of artisan pupils led by that artist. There is another parallel in the works of Henry Moore who would create a miniature sculpture and have his team of artisans copy it faithfully to create the full size piece of art. Nobody would argue that the sculpture was by Henry Moore even if he hadn't carried out the final polishing of the stone.

Issue 1: Who should claim credit for making an item - the company or the individual maker/s?

If you worked for a factory making refrigerators and you were responsible for soldering up the main wiring loom then you wouldn't try to calaim credit for making the refrigerator

If you were the guy who designed the refrigerator then you wouldn't try to claim credit for making the refrigerator.

If you were the guy who owned the company which owned the factory then you could reasonably claim credit for making the refrigerator simply because you owned the company - but the claim would be a lot stronger if you had designed the refrigerator and actually took part in the manufacturing process.

Using artisans to carry out 'low grade' tasks makes sound financial sense and, in a commercial situation, does not affect the 'moral' claim to having made the item. Even if a highly skilled artisan is paid to do part of the job, the whole project would not, and could not, happen without the guy who owned the company and the factory.

Issue 2: Who should be responsible if the item fails - the company or the individual maker/s?

No question about this one - it is the company's responsibility. Okay, within the company someone may have to take some heat for any failure but overall the company takes the blame.

Issue 3: Who 'owns' the intellectual property associated with the job - the company or the individual maker/s?

Once again it is the company who owns the intellectual property. The company pays people to make its products.

Issue 4: Who 'owns' the moral right to the kudos for creating the work - the company or the individual maker/s?

Everyone who had a hand in the manufacturing process should slap themselves on the back and take pride in what they have made together.

Issue 5: Who is the official maker when a job is a team effort?

The official maker is the person or organisation who made the creation possible, who brought the team together and supervised the process and ultimately is responsible if the item or job fails.

Just my thoughts and worth precisely what you paid for them...

[HorsehairBraider]

Great points by UKRay - and in addition, didn't you actually train these people to some extent? It seems to me that makes it "your" product even more.

If I should ever be able to find a helper (yeah, like *THAT'S* ever going to happen) I would have to spend a lot of time training them to do this job in the way my customers have come to expect. I would hope they came to the job with some initial talent or ability, but I expect things done a certain way and I know you do too. Maybe some people think of it as being picky... I think of it as doing things right.

So not only do you own the company, the tools, and do the design work - you've invested time in training your crew. They wouldn't do things up to your standard if you did not bring them up short when something wasn't right... and that's an opportunity for them to learn, but that's also you teaching.

I don't see any problem. No doubt, as others have pointed out, the guy who is giving you a hard time about this is simply jealous.

[pete]

John

check with your employees and see if they have a problem with YOUR name representing the company and final product.

If THEY don't then....... end of argument. Let the detractors take a hike.

pete

[AndyL1]

Michelangelo gets the credit for painting the Sistine Chapel. He did, of course, have apprentices helping him out. Not every brush stroke was his. Don't see any other names getting credit in the history books do you? I say sign away and without guilt.

[Suze]

While I am not disagreaing with the issue of you signing this case or any other. They are your product you can do what you want.

I wonder if your Troll would have been as "upset" if you had signed it something like -- John Barton Studios or somesuch

something that indicated that you didn't do all the work with your own two hands.

just another thought for the discussion

[outcast]

To be honest I dislike the signing, or the use of makers stamp on anything. Although it may be good advertising for the maker (although I'm not convinced that it is good for anything but vanity), the client isn't paying for a product that essentially will be like wearing a sign that says "eat at joes". I've seen rediculously large makers stamps placed in rather obvious spots on leather goods that take away from any artwork. However, if it can be placed in a descreet spot that doesn't take anything away from the artwork itself I guess it's ok.

As for the issue at the forefront of the topic...I think you have every right to sign your work if you are the top of the food chain on the project.

[Rawhide]

John,

I think you absolutley have every right to sign off on that...You are the creative director so to speak...So you hired a contractor to do your carving...that's the way businesses work today. Jack Justis hires someone to do his carving and he still sell it as a Jack Justis case...

I work for a major defense contractor and I design a lot of parts for aircrafts...I don't get to sign my name on the aircraft when it flies...

monthly moral/ethical problem solved. Tell that guy to go scratch..

[Sharpshooter]

Every product we make in my shop has MY name on it and I don't feel in any way embarrassed by it.

When people compliment the work we do, I put the team in front and tell everyone what a terrific job they do.

When things go to hell in a handbasket it's ME that has to deal with it.

When business is slow, I'm the one who goes home without a paycheck, the crew get paid. When a run of sheaths is wrong, I decide to not ship it and I eat the loss because it's MY business.

I take the risks on a daily basis so your damn right MY name is going on the product.

If your carver is worth a damn, he's likely put his mark on the job... The people who do that work for me are told flatly that I expect them to do so.

Louis Chevrolet quit building cars a long time ago, around the same time as Henry Ford did. William S. Harley and Arthur Davidson don't build many motorcycles nor does Sōichirō Honda, last time I checked all of them are still dead but there are products sold with their name on them every day.

If you like, have the guy from the Billiards Forum come see me personally.... I'm running low on jackass hide.

[hidepounder]

In my opinion, there is no issue here, ethical or otherwise. It's your product....put your name on it! Putting your name on it just says you're proud of it and anyone who sees it should know that you produced it! In addition, it may someday have more value, because it has your name on it! Look at all the collectables whose values skyrocket because they manufacturers put their name on their product! Not an issue....quit worrying about that 8 ball!

Bob

[CitizenKate]

What about Ralph Lauren or Kenneth Cole? Their names are on their products, but they probably don't even see every product that leaves the factory, let alone have a hand in making them. Nobody questions that - sheesh!

Kate