diamond of Tolkowsky? the question is interesting that the patent is published 14.sept.2010 of Tolkowsky D 623.551 twelve trifoliate the pavilion side is almost identical to 01 232 (1946) from the upper side of gemcad 01 517 (1995), there are simply added facets. you'd think it was a plagiarism? nothing new then! the name Tolkowsky disappointed me.
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 11:10 am Posts: 299 Location: Illinois
"there are simply added facets."
Hello, interesting thought. However, if he has changed it by adding something how is that a copy? I doubt that Gabbi Tolkowski is trying to copy something.
_________________ I love the smell of Methylene Iodide in the morning...
I am new in this forum. Living in Switzerland is English quite difficult for me. Please apologize all of my mistakes.
What Nonprofona wrote ist quite interesting. I can't find any new elements in this design worth to be patented. It is nothing but a 12-sided SRB. Im my opinion there is no invention, this is a well known cut, even if it isn't published in any book.
That brings me to my main question:what are the criteria that a new design can be patented? How far away has an new design to be from an older one? The same design as in this patent with a faceted girdle, with a smaller/wider table, with unstacked mains, with a culet: are these new designs? What's with a 11-, 13-, 14-sided SRB?
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 10:56 am Posts: 6461 Location: The frozen north prairie :-/
The pavilions are the same, but the table of the Tolkowsky seems to be more of a circle than a square or octagon. Guess that could make enough difference to patent
_________________ IIJA Registered Gemologist GIA Graduate Gemologist
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 12:01 am Posts: 556 Location: Vancouver, Canada
Hello nonprofana,
Patenting of Diamond cuts is all about branding and absolutely nothing to do with innovation. After Marcel there hasn't been a lot of room for that to happen anyway.
I can't think of a better example than the 'Hearts and Arrows' vs 'Hearts on Fire' Both guys think they are the best and can explain why, sadly they're both wrong. Doesn't stop the customers from lining up to buy.
My favourite is the 'Princess" cut, what a lovely romantic scenario is suggested by the name....A Princess for a Princess...ooogh...aaaagh. What a piece of rubbish to look at though, the only thing you can do to a Diamond that is more ugly is an Asscher or an Emerald cut.
Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2006 9:44 pm Posts: 1079 Location: Washington State
TheGemDr wrote:
Patenting of Diamond cuts is all about branding and absolutely nothing to do with innovation.
Isn't that the truth. Head on over to the USPTO site and do a query on "gem cut". A large selection of stones which we routinely cut daily are there on display. There are even recent patents for designs which have been in the public domain for 40 or 50 years. The attached image is of a barrel crown which was awarded in 1999. I had always thought that something had to be novel to get a patent, but the whole system is so corrupted now that innovation has little to do with what can or can not be patented.
Quote:
My favourite is the 'Princess" cut, what a lovely romantic scenario is suggested by the name....A Princess for a Princess...ooogh...aaaagh. What a piece of rubbish to look at though, the only thing you can do to a Diamond that is more ugly is an Asscher or an Emerald cut.
Tony.
Sounds like you feel strongly about that Tony. So you don't cut a lot of Princess cuts for little princesses? How are you ever going to make it if you aren't making up stories and pushing them?
Do you think that if one of us were to cut this and post some pictures that the patent holder would send their attack lawyers after us for violating the patent? Would the patent be upheld if you decided to fight back? Are patent documents copyrighted and will I be posting from jail tomorrow? All interesting questions.
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 12:01 am Posts: 556 Location: Vancouver, Canada
Hello Michael,
Some years back I got a list of diamond patents and was quite surprised by the number and lack of variation. the names were another matter, brilliant, innovative and creative....grin.
Yup, I'm not much of a salesman. It doesn't take much to prove my point though. A Barion simply outperforms by strides, Emerald, Asscher or Princess when placed alongside look like glass. Trap cut pavilions are for colour enhancing, that's all they do well. Making the tiers bent doesn't do a lot to offset this.
Nice diagram, I can't imagine why it didn't get popular.....I would of thought diamond setters around the world would have loved the challenge of setting such a wonky girdled stone.
Unless you take up Diamond polishing and name stealing there's absolutely no chance of the big boys caring. To play it safe I have never used a patented name directly. When putting it on paper I use a phrase such as; "Following the style of the Royal Asscher patented Diamond cut with pavilion and crown angles adjusted to suit the gem material....etc..,"
Incidentally I did write to the Royal Asscher company about 6 years back advising them that I had been commissioned to cut some Sapphire sidestones to complement a customer's recent acquisition of a Royal Asscher Diamond and asked them to confirm the jewellers assertion that a Sapphire cut in this design would not infringe their patent. I used the quote in my previous paragraph as my intended description in my 'Cutters Certificate'. I wasn't deemed worthy of a reply...even after a follow-up.
Patenting is almost all about the name but the properties of the product do play a part. A Diamond cutting pattern patent is good for Diamonds, nothing else. Any cutter has the legal right to exactly copy any patented design as long as it isn't a Diamond being cut. If you have lawyers it is possible to get away with copy cut Diamonds but the name absolutely has change. Apparently "and Arrows" to "on Fire" is good enough.
Using a patented name is a different matter even if the patent holder is not in the gem trade; Trying to market a gem cut with a name like CocaCola or Mickey Mouse cut is going to get you into trouble at some point.
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 12:22 pm Posts: 21600 Location: San Francisco
Important Sidebar. The "asscher" cuts we routinely see are NOT anywhere close to a Royal Asscher. They are misrepresented squarish step cuts with tables you could have lunch on with non-existent crowns.
Each and every Royal Asscher Cut diamond is laser inscribed with the Royal Asscher Cut logo and an identification number belonging to that particular diamond only. This authenticity number is registered with Royal Asscher and is listed on a certificate accompanying the stone. A real Royal Asscher:
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 11:32 pm Posts: 1747 Location: Florida, United States
So, the Tolkowsky patented cut is twelve mains on the crown and twelve mains on the pavilion. What is the innovation? Yes, I think this was solely about marketing and not improvement.
Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2006 9:44 pm Posts: 1079 Location: Washington State
Nicky Newark wrote:
How would a colored stone like purple garnet look in a royal asscher cut? I know someone with a large piece of rough.
This is a rendering that I did for a client when she was deciding how she wanted a garnet to be cut. I mentioned that the asscher would likely be pretty dark, since the stone is deep and reflections off of each facet only occur at certain angles, (not much bounce around inside the stone compared to a more rounded stone). She chose the cushion.
On the other hand, in lighter stones, this asscher cut works really well to deepen color. Here's an aqua in the same cut. Sorry about the fuzzy image, old picture from an old camera.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum