Odyssey113
Birdie Member
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2013
- Messages
- 348
So you agree then that everyone who sells dyes needs to come up with their own term for any style that has a name that was coined by someone else?
Someone somwhere invented the term Brainwave. Does that mean no one else should be allowed to use that term? The pioneers of SC dyes probably coined the term marbling for that - can we no longer use that term as well? Same thing with fly dyes, hell someone somewhere invented the term tye dye. At a certain point, when a name for something like this is used by the vast majority of the people doing it, the name become public domain imo.
I give mad props to anyone who invented the dyeing methods I now use, and I mean as little offense as possible, but I do think it petty to be so concerned about what others are calling their dyes.
If he is really so concerned he should TM it.
Well put Roggen...My sentiments exactly. Again people will choose to have a dye done by you based upon the quality of the work they have seen you do, not a stupid dye style name. Its not like its a specific product with functionality that is being replicated, its a style of art. Every individual dye comes out looking different.
Again I think Wondernut does amazing work, and he's one of the few of us that has the ability to turn this into a full time business, but I don't think it will hurt his business by others calling a dye style nebula. That of which Jeff Ash was the first to do this style anyways, hes just the first trying to coin it for himself.
Again no disrespect to Scott Helms aka Wondernut. Just my 2 cents on this since this is being debated publicly on and he has chose to contact more than one of us about this now. This will be my last post about this topic. Lets let this die (dye) guys. On to making the "spacey looking" soap dyes :thmbup: