What I did with Harrys Paua

I can't find it on your site :o(

I've gotten a fair amount of orders this month, any I'm about to join the "I Love Harry" club.....once I win one of these auctions ;o) I can't wait! :o)

I can't see it either. Can you give us a link?

In article , ally writes

The link below works now - doh! (slaps head) I was so keen to get the page updated I forgot to send it to the server! :-)

< Oh wow my hearts of Paua are beautiful! I might have to try and make some more. lol Those were tough cookies to cut! Absolutely beautiful!!!

Harry My Ebay Auctions are at

They are lovely I can imagine they were really hard to shape but you did a great job. :-)

That is so nice. I don't have any imagination when it comes to jewelry making.

< Ahhhh... shucks....Thank you so much! My Ebay Auctions are at

Actually, I don' think one is supposed to use the Swarovski name at all when reselling your own designs created using Swarovski crystals. Swarovski generally reserves the word *Swarovski* for their own products, including finished jewelry. I believe that designers incorporating Swarovski crystals in their work are supposed to use the phrase *Austrian Crystals* to describe any Swarovski crystal components in their designs. Here is a link to ebay's Vero page which better describes the use of their trademarked name:

Can you imagine how many listings ebay would need to shut down if Swarovski ever decided to excercise their Vero rights? It's my understanding that a primary purpose of this rule is to avoid liability for non-Swarovski produced products; they don't want to get your bracelet back sent back to them for repairs or replacement because the consumer was confused and thought it was a genuine, or authorized, Swarovski product. I don't know how large a problem this is for them with individual pieces of jewelry when the Swarovski beads are listed as one of many components, but I have noticed a trend on ebay for some artist-designed products to be displayed with the official Swarovski Swan logo, and can see how that is a tad misleading (especially since the Swarovski Component logo is a stylized bicone). There are also lots of findings listed on ebay as Swarovski xxxx that are really independently produced findings incorporating Swarovski stones (i.e.some rondelles, two- holed flower connectors, etc.) and, in my opinion, many don't measure up to Swarovski's usually high-quality standards.

Does it matter? I don't think there are any *but I....* exemptions in copyright law LOL. If what you are doing is an not acceptable use of their copyright then you probably shouldn't be using it, period. I can imagine there might be issues other than product liability involved, to maintain control of their image for example, or to take exclusive advantage of their own advertising dollars.

I don't understand what you're criticizing here. I believe this (half of) the thread started with questions about presentation and identifying materials in a piece of jewelry. And Sooz (isn't it?) said described how she wraps her jewelry, and then described how she identifies her materials, what techniques are used (eg, wooly worm), and what materials (eg lampworked beads), including whose work it is.

Did I read it wrong?

Tina

The discussion about whether to use the name "Swarovski" when describing products made with "Swarovski" beads is an interesting one. I can see their point IF the jewelry is advertised as being "Swarovski" - without any information as to what that actually means. But I don't see how they can block the use of the word "Swarovski" in the description of a product, such as saying, "This bracelet is made with Austrian crystals manufactured by Swarovski".

If you were selling a lawn mower made by John Deere, it would sound silly if you said "This is a lawn mower made by a famous American company" (assuming that the company still is), for fear that mentioning the brand name will get you in trouble.

Or if you are selling a necklace made with Miyuki Delicas... would you say "This necklace includes Japanese seed beads"? It might make a difference to the buyer to know whether the beads are Miyuki, Matsuno, or some off the wall brand no one ever heard of.

It may sound like splitting hairs, but for a company as well known as Swarovski to deny the purchasers of its products from referring to them as Swarovski is just plain silly and I don't believe this is what the law means.

I wonder WHERE their name is copyrighted or trademarked (in the US, Europe, world wide), what the governing laws are and when (if) it would expire?

Nope. I can understand why you might think that, given that is how most other vendors operate, and also because when you pay so much for high-end components you probably want to be able to list them as such. But the Vero rights statement seems to be very clear about this, here is an excerpt:

"Even if an item such as a bracelet which is sold on eBay contains crystals made by Swarovski, describing that item as a "Swarovski bracelet" or ?a bracelet with Swarovski crystals? is misleading if the bracelet itself is not manufactured by Swarovski. Such a bracelet could properly be described as ?a bracelet with Austrian crystals.?

I was wondering if any lampwork artists restrict their copyright. I know I've seen auctions of lampwork beads where the designer has said the beads are misfits or seconds, and to please not credit or mention their name if you use them in designs for resale. But does anyone restrict the use of their name for first quality beads as a regular business practice?

That is an excellent question, Letrinka. I am in the habit of giving the artist of beads I use in my designs, credit. Most of the artists that I have asked have no problem with it, after all it's free advertising. I haven't asked all and think that is a mistake I should correct if for no other reason than it's good business practice and form.

Not the same analogy. You can buy a Swarovski pin and resell it as a Swarovski pin, or you can buy a Swarovski component (bead, rondelle, etc.) and resell it is a Swarovski component. Can you buy John Deere parts, add a few other non-John Deere parts, put them together yourself instead of under John Deere's quality control, and then say here is lawn mower made by John Deere? No. Can you say here is a lawn mower made with John Deere parts? Depends on their trademark and copyright regs.

Does Miyuki also make finished products, or do they just sell beads? What Swarovski wants to do is restrict the use of their name to their own finished products. What if you were selling bracelets made with your own beads, and at the same time were wholesaling your beads. You list your bracelets on ebay as Kandice Bracelets, someone else using your beads lists their bracelet as a Kandice Bracelet. So you send them a nice email reminding them Kandice Bracelets is your copyrighted name. So far okay but what if next they list their bracelets as bracelets made with Kandice Beads. Sounds okay too but what if you consider the designs tasteless in a God-awful sense, and the bracelet workmanship to be of very poor quality with cheap components. Do you want the name Kandice Beads to be affiliated with such a bracelet? Or maybe the bracelets are exquisite but are being sold for 1/2 the price of your own bracelets just because it's only a hobby to this particular designer. What if the designer goes out of business and later, when the bracelet breaks, it is returned to you for repairs because, after all, it has a Kandice bead and well, you are Kandice.

Well if you don't believe me, or think the trademark/copyright statement on the Vero page is wrong, then email the Vero contact thru ebay and ask them as I did (well, I called them) when I wanted to add this info to an About Me page for my Swarovski bead auctions.

I think they have the worldwide copyright and then each region (Swarovski America Ltd, Swarovski/North America, Swarovski /USA) has their own copyrights and trademarks, and then each division, Components, Optik, Collectables, Jewelry also has their own set of copyrights and violations. I imagine it must be full employment for more than a few copyright attorneys!

I see your point. And the exerpt from Vero makes it even clearer.

So it IS inappropriate to offer for sale a "Swarovski and ** Bracelet".

And I certainly think your comparison with a "Kandice Bracelet" is apt.

But I would think that including "Kandice beads" or "Swarovski crystals" in a list of components would be fine. Just as it would be proper to list "Swarovski lenses" as a component in a telescope even if Swarovski didn't make the housing for it, but you wouldn't list a hunting scope or binoculars as Swarovski unless they made the whole product.

So "Austrian Crystal and Pearl" it shall be.

Tina

Tina

Good question. Mostly I've heard beadmakers comment about NOT being given credit for their beads, allowing the inference that the necklace and beads are just components that the beadworker turned into a work of art.

Tina

"Letrinka" wrote

Ahhhh - I did not know this. Hmmmm. Now I do, and will change my wording in auction descriptions when I sell jewelry. I assume that when selling sets of beads that if I am including Swarovski crystals as part of that auction (because they are temporarily strung with the lampwork) it is okay to say "Swarovski crystal bicones shown in the pics are included in the auction" since they are not incorporated in a piece of jewelry? I can understand Swarovski's standpoint on this. They sell the same amount of beads whether or not they have a Vero statement, and having and enforcing a Vero statement helps keep their business running more smoothly. As far as my own name being restricted - I would most definitely rather be mentioned as the lampwork artist - no matter what the designer does with the beads, because jewelry design is very subjective. Something that appears ugly and not done well to one person might appear beautiful to another. So therefore - no, I, as a lampwork artist, do not have limitations on the copyright of my name and its use in product description, as long as someone else isn't claiming to be me, and as long as someone else doesn't claim to have made the beads I have made. Other artists may feel differently though. I also only sell first quality work - even when I clean out my stash from time to time. Anything that's messed up gets put in "the jar" or thrown away.

how interesting. I too have been including a written description of components with my pieces. Thanks for the heads up.

I never said that you should say that a piece of jewelry I made with Swarovski components should be called a Swarovski bracelet... only that my description of the components would include Swarovski beads or parts.

It's too late to do that IMHO since they've already used the name to sell components/beads.

What if you were selling bracelets made with your own beads, and at

Uh, my name is Karleen! Although it is flattering to be confused with Kandice who makes beautiful beads. I don't make beads, but my hubby does. We have no control as to what happens to them after we release them. If my buyers make awful looking jewelry, and say "I bought these beads from Karleen", I have no control over that. If they make wonderful jewelry and refer to me as their vendor, that would be better of course, but I also have no control over that.

When I was researching Swarovski, I found that they have lots of lines of jewelry with different names... I can't remember them all right now... but it seems to me that they would be better off using the alternative names for their jewelry if they are going to continue to call their components Swarovski... but of course they probably wouldn't listen to me anyhow.

I'm still confused as to how you should refer to beads or components that you sell that are Swarovski - if you are not allowed to call them Swarovski - or how to describe jewelry you've made with Swarovski components. What point is there in buying Swarovski if you can never refer to those components/beads as Swarovski? You might as well buy the cheaper stuff, just say "Austrian Crystal" and be done with it.

Since I rarely use or sell Swarovski, it's just a rhetorical queston to me, at least for now. But there are loads of listings at eBay & elsewhere that cheerfully identify their beads/components as Swarovski and they haven't been sued, so I'm wondering if the Vero guy is just trying to scare us with their unenforceable boogeyman of their trademark.

I do think we all need to be very careful that the descriptions of what we sell be as accurate as possible.