Glass Identification - Post here for all ID requests > Glass

Question re wording "of Lalique design"

<< < (3/4) > >>

Fuhrman Glass:
In advertising and even in some texts this has been used a lot, such as in Tiffany style, or Tiffany type shade. Even in modern stuff many refer to pieces as being in the Chihuly style that have no resemblance to his stuff outside of being large, having a ruffled edge and lots of color.
Think how many things are referred to as being in the Bauhaus style that have no connection to it at all. Some names have a well known design connotation that they have become the common way to describe them. Art critics use these style and design terms a lot when describing someone's work. Think how many references are made to something being in the Frank Lloyd Wright type of design. Good designs and designers  have a habit of taking on a new life with their names creating even "movements", "eras", and definite styles. Wright's work was actually in the "prairie style", but most don't recognize that as a term that is as well known. Good design takes on a "life" of it's own.
As long as people don't try to actually sell or describe an item for what it is plainly not, I think it is OK to use references to well known designers and their designs to describe the item.
In addition, there are some glass pieces that I know of personally that have been produced by as many as 3 or 4 different companies all from the same molds. A line of glassware designed by Reuben Haley and initially produced by Consolidated Glass was eventually made by as many as 4 different glass companies all from the same molds and in different colors and decorations. This line of ware has been described many times as being in the Lalique design style and they were produced in the 1920's.

flying free:
Even though I wouldn't have been caught out by what I think of as their weasely description, I still think there is a difference in adding the word 'style' to the description though -

'of Lalique design style' says very different things to the wording of the phrase 'of Lalique design'

One means the item is of Lalique design - i.e Lalique designed it (that's a catch I hook onto because if Lalique had also MADE it, it would have just said ' Lalique vase' )
The other implies an item ' in the style of Lalique Design'.  No claims.

Weasely words - Is it actually a Lalique design?  if not then I think that it is a claim too far and there is potential for Lalique to be involved over brand protection rights.

Fuhrman Glass:
might work in France but in the US Tiffany tried to enforce it and spent lots of time and $ to no avail. Lots of shades and lamps that are advertised as Tiffany design. What it amounts to is, if someone wants to deceive and advertise in slanted ways there is no easy way to stop them. Here in the US patents are becoming very useless unless you have a lot of time and $ to enforce them. Courts are all ready jammed up with too many law suits and no one wants to spend additional tax $ to add more courts and judges for suits that no one gets any $ from and little consumer protection. It's too bad people have to resort to deception based on semantics, but it happens to the tune of billions every month.
 You're right about adding the style, but "weasels is be weasels." I sell items that I mention only as being similiar in appearance and style to those made by glass companies no longer producing.

John Smith:
... "MOST" collectors of R Lalique, know of most patterns, and they will instantly recognise a piece as most of his works are well doccumented and recorded. Added signatures will not dupe a collector, or will any suggestions that it is Lalique, if it is not. Much the same as when we see other glass being called Sowerby or Bagley for example, when it is not. "In the style of" or "In the manner of" is permissable as I am sure we would all agree... If any major auction house mis-represents then they are breaking the law. The golden rule should be, do not purchase unless you are 100% certain about what you are buying, or have a firm guarantee that you shall be refunded if it is not what it say's it is.

chopin-liszt:
I don't think too many of us are in the "Lalique collectors'" price range - I certainly would not know *every* pattern.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page