New Jacket offering

PLATON · Post by **PLATON** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 7:33 am

Just want to add here that the copyright does not belong to DEBORAH NADOOLMAN either since she was also paid to design the jacket. The character was created by Lucas and Spielberg so in the end of the day, everything around him belongs to them.

It was nice to read all your posts guys, but the subject was somehow changed from TODD's jacket to copyright talks (and I am also responsible for this).

So, I propose we continue with the jacket.
TODD, how much you sell the prototype with the straps facing backwards?
What size is it?

Kt Templar · Post by **Kt Templar** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 8:00 am

PLATON wrote:Just want to add here that the copyright does not belong to DEBORAH NADOOLMAN either since she was also paid to design the jacket. The character was created by Lucas and Spielberg so in the end of the day, everything around him belongs to them.

It was nice to read all your posts guys, but the subject was somehow changed from TODD's jacket to copyright talks (and I am also responsible for this).

So, I propose we continue with the jacket.
TODD, how much you sell the prototype with the straps facing backwards?
What size is it?

Ok, but one last point on artistic endeavours. The person who creates the artwork retains reproduction rights unless they specifically sell said rights. The item can be sold but the reproduction rights belong to the artist. This is doubly true if the artist is not in the employment of the patron. And by employ I do mean employ. Contractor's do not count, they have none of the rights and privilages of a full time employee.

e.g. You buy a CD, your rights extend to the CD media itself and playing it in a private home. You do not have the right to duplicate and sell copies. There is a theory that in the US you have the right to take a "back up" copy though I doubt that is more than heresay. The reproduction rights remain with the Artist or the label if his contract so states (I suspect in the case of most musical artists it does - bloodsuckers).

Sometimes this is not the case:

e.g. the guy who invented Post It's, he was an employee of 3M when he invented the product, his contract stated that anything he invented whilst employed by 3M belonged to them. 3M made millions he probably only got a pat on the back.

hanson · Post by **hanson** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:32 am

A 3M engineer named David Serino took another 3M guys design and turned it into Post-it Notes.3M owns the pattents on both items. They got nothing but their regular salaries and perhaps a bonus(attaboy). 3M owns the pattents,makes the millions. David invented the Pop-up tape dispensers that they sell around Xmas to wrap Xmas presents, same story, he gets his engineers pay, and 3M makes the big bucks. But, he didn't know these things were gonna sell like sliced bread and lots of things they invent don't do so well.P&D costs. BTW,David happens to be a close family friend,so I would think property rights revert to the company. regards hanson

Kt Templar · Post by **Kt Templar** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 10:03 am

hanson wrote:A 3M engineer named David Serino took another 3M guys design and turned it into Post-it Notes.3M owns the pattents on both items. They got nothing but their regular salaries and perhaps a bonus(attaboy). 3M owns the pattents,makes the millions. David invented the Pop-up tape dispensers that they sell around Xmas to wrap Xmas presents, same story, he gets his engineers pay, and 3M makes the big bucks. But, he didn't know these things were gonna sell like sliced bread and lots of things they invent don't do so well.P&D costs. BTW,David happens to be a close family friend,so I would think property rights revert to the company. regards hanson

He's not bitter is he?

If he was an independant inventor he'd get between 2 and 6% of the wholesale price of every pack sold as a royalty, dependant on the deal.

hanson · Post by **hanson** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 10:19 am

Not that I know of, but, he is getting ready to retire and move down here. regards,hanson.

Post by **Michaelson** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 1:07 pm

One question I'm sure has been asked, or answered, but I've missed it in the mire I created back there on page 2 somewhere with this copyright discussion.... 8-[

What will your lining be made of? If you come up with a source as found in the G&B jacket, you'll have a winner. That stuff is comfortable...breathes nicely, and is tough as nails.

Regards! Michaelson

independent · Post by **independent** » Sun Sep 03, 2006 4:15 am

Kt Templar wrote:
People with deep pockets would disagree with you there. Licensed products make the wourld go around, why else do we have McDonalds in every town, someone paid for the franchise. There is an inherant value in the product so it has to be paid for. Just try opening a McDonalds without paying your franchise fee!

You can reproduce a service no problem at all, it the tangible end product that is owned.

That's changing the subject. Puppetboy is not opening a 'McDonalds' - he's not opening another 'Wested' - am I making any sense?

If you want to use that analogy, what Puppetboy is doing is making a hamburger on a sesame bun with lettuce, cheese, etc.

Pepsi Cola is another analogy.

Your music piracy analogy fails because cd-copying is an exact duplication of the original. VHS was a landmark case, since it allowed home users to reproduce, but not exactly (basically lower quality), copyrighted programming. Puppetboy is not reproducing exact copies of anything. It's his interpretation of what he sees on film.

And again, even if he were making an exact duplicate of a Wested jacket, that wouldn't be illegal, given that this particular jacket does not have patentable features (as far as I or anybody else has seen).

But he's not, and I think it's a little unfair to talk about the ethical, when it's clear that Puppetboy is trying to make, in his own vision, his own version of the leather jacket and provide the consumers (us) with another option for our purchase. In fact, I think it's a little unethical to keep associating Puppetboy's venture with illicit activity (which it doesn't seem to be) or unethical business practice (strictly personal opinion).

After all, isn't Indy Magnoli offering an Indy shirt and pants and all sorts of indy gear, and isn't Wested itself offering its own version of the Indy Shirt and Pants? Is that hypocrisy, irony, or standard business practice (at least in the clothing industry)?

Ok, back on topic, Puppetboy, what lining are you planning on using?

Texas Jones · Post by **Texas Jones** » Sun Sep 03, 2006 8:58 am

Well said milesfides! As for your question, I asked Todd the same thing:

Puppetboy wrote:Oh, and the lining is cotton - an exact match for the LC material except in dark brown (the LC lining was sort of butterscotch color). It's a cotton twill sort of fabric - very durable.

Bufflehead Jones · Post by **Bufflehead Jones** » Sun Sep 03, 2006 2:58 pm

milesfides wrote:Puppetboy is not reproducing exact copies of anything. It's his interpretation of what he sees on film.

Boy, that is one heck of a contradiction. Puppetboy is trying to make a jacket that is as screen accurate as possible. In other words, he is trying to make an EXACT COPY of what Peter made and PUT ON FILM. That is pretty much the definition of "screen accurate".

moses · Post by **moses** » Sun Sep 03, 2006 7:42 pm

It's not a contadiction at all. He's interpreting his sight. We all know by now, what we see on screen and was or might have been are very different things. Think gussets, grooves, grey vs. brown, ... We mostly know what the "facts" are reported to have been, yet we still distrust due to what we perceive. Todd is interpretting what he perceives the jacket to have been, He's not copying what Peter is doing now. And for the record, I'm not even interested in a todd's jacket, being more than satisfied with my Wested.

Bufflehead Jones · Post by **Bufflehead Jones** » Sun Sep 03, 2006 8:06 pm

Wrong. It is a contradiction. It has nothing to do with his eyesight and how he interprets what was on screen. He is attempting to make an exact copy of what is on the screen to the best of his ability. If he $uck$ at his craft, it will not be a good "copy". If he is very skilled at his craft, it will be virtually an "identical copy".

He is attempting to copy a jacket that Peter made and Harrison Ford wore in Raiders of the Lost Ark. Plain and simple.

You can use semantics to argue that he is not copying someone else's work all you want to, but it is just a bunch of bunk.

He is attempting to COPY a particular jacket, period, dot, the end. You can argue wether it is legal or illegal all you want, that is, until a court would make a ruling on it, if it ever came to that. But, the fact that he is attempting to copy a particular jacket is not debatable.

moses · Post by **moses** » Sun Sep 03, 2006 8:10 pm

Wrong

What a jolly game - you even use my own arguments

whiskyman · Post by **whiskyman** » Sun Sep 03, 2006 8:17 pm

Bufflehead Jones wrote: That is pretty much the definition of "screen accurate".

In which book, I might have to buy it.
How can screen accurate be anything more than someone's interpretation of what they see on screen? Which vendor today makes a "screen accurate" piece of gear based on YOUR definition?

Captain D · Post by **Captain D** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 12:19 am

In defense for Bufflehead, he's a good guy and he makes a good point.

What I interpret him saying is that Todd is obviously making/copying an "Indiana Jones" jacket. No doubt about it. If we gearheads look at it, and look at it closely, we say "ah, that's an exact replica of the 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' Jacket." I believe that is what Bufflehead is saying. It is indeed a copy. In other words, Todd isn't just creating a general "leather jacket." If he did, why would he even be making/selling the jacket under his "Indiana Jones" section on his website?

He's not creating this jacket from scratch. He actually has a great head start in his project. He has a WEALTH of information here. For example, he can use Agent-5's observations, he can take notes on knowledgable info here written by fellow members, and he may even have a Wested and G&B jacket to collect specific details for all we know. In that light, I would agree with Bufflehead, that it is indeed a "copy" of a specific jacket that physically existed in time PRIOR to Todd's project. Therefore, it's not what Todd personally sees on film. It's what we "ALL" see when we watch Raiders, therefore, it is indeed a "copy." If Todd is the "only one who sees what is screen-accurate," then why do so many folks here special request specific specs for their jacket from Wested to help make it more screen-accurate? US Wings, G&B, and even Wested are making "copies" of a jacket that existed over 20 years ago...

Bufflehead Jones · Post by **Bufflehead Jones** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 12:29 am

As far as I can remember, this is the dumbest argument I have ever been involved in.

independent · Post by **independent** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 1:16 am

Bufflehead Jones, my point is that puppetboy isn't making EXACT copies of the jacket. In fact, it's impossible to do so, since he probably does not have the exact jackets in his possession from the film to copy from. It was an extension of the analogy that ktemplar was using, cd-copying, which is indeed illegal because it is an unlicensed exact reproduction.

In Puppetboy's case, it's neither: he doesn't need a license to make the jacket, nor is it an exact reproduction.

And regarding screen-accuracy, from the countless threads, discussions and arguments about screen-accuracy, rendering a jacket based on what one sees on a screen involves a high degree of subjectivity. It's not an exact science. Different jackets were used. They were distressed. They were worn at different angles. Screen accuracy can be, was, is, and will be, continued to be debated, regardless of the original jackets now sealed in a vault under Wested's headquarters.

In fact, even Wested seems to be unable to satisfy indy fans' ideas of 'screen-accuracy,' even when fans are wrong. A significant example: Peter unequivocally correcting fans that the true leather used was authentic brown lambskin. But it doesn't look screen-accurate! So get dark brown. The Noel Howard shirt doesn't look screen-accurate! so let's dye it. It goes on and on.

Puppetboy's work is based on fans' input and screencaps. Ultimately, his work is an interpretation.

But EVEN IF he had copied the jacket from a Wested in hand, say, reverse engineering, the law recognizes reverse engineering as a legitimate business practice, especially when we're dealing with tangible products.

For example, Coca-cola doesn't have a patent on their formula. Many companies have tried to reverse-engineer the product, with various levels of success. That's not illegal. But hey, I heard Coca-cola still did pretty well for themselves. And yes, I like Coke better than Pepsi, but that doesn't mean Pepsi should not exist. Some people like Pepsi better.

In one sense, Wested's offering of the their indy pants and shirt is a copy. But it's not an exact copy, nor do they need a license (at least, I don't think so). That is why I said before, copying is done all the time, perfectly legally, and for good reason. There are many cases when copying is illegal, and for good reasons as well. That is why the law exists; there can be grey areas, but I don't think this is one.

Anyways, i don't think this is a dumb discussion at all, I think it's an important one. As a consumer and a fan, I wouldn't mind more items being offered. Variety is good. Choice is good. There will be inevitable differences. There is this strange, unequal treatment where we question Puppetboy's decision to offer another Indy Jacket, yet nobody seems to question Wested offering Indy shirts and pants, same with Magnoli (hey, his boots look like a copy of Aldens!).

I think it's arbitrary and unfair to Puppetboy. After all, the appropriate questions should be regarding the quality of his product, as we do when we ask Magnoli or Peter about the quality of their products.

Just my 2 cents, but I do think it's an important discussion, because it does affect all of us as indy fans and consumers.

Kt Templar · Post by **Kt Templar** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 5:38 am

milesfides wrote:
In one sense, Wested's offering of the their indy pants and shirt is a copy. But it's not an exact copy, nor do they need a license (at least, I don't think so). That is why I said before, copying is done all the time, perfectly legally, and for good reason. There are many cases when copying is illegal, and for good reasons as well. That is why the law exists; there can be grey areas, but I don't think this is one.

There is this strange, unequal treatment where we question Puppetboy's decision to offer another Indy Jacket, yet nobody seems to question Wested offering Indy shirts and pants, same with Magnoli (hey, his boots look like a copy of Aldens!).

I think it's arbitrary and unfair to Puppetboy. After all, the appropriate questions should be regarding the quality of his product, as we do when we ask Magnoli or Peter about the quality of their products.

Just my 2 cents, but I do think it's an important discussion, because it does affect all of us as indy fans and consumers.

Wested began making the shirts and trousers after Noel stopped making them, I don't see an issue there.

My comments do extend to Mags boots only in the part connected to price, I think they are different enough to fall into the "homage" camp. But that's a different discussion.

Shawnkara · Post by **Shawnkara** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 6:45 am

Buff is right, this IS a stupid argument

I really don't get this, at all. What the heck is it with the jacket!? First some of you attack Todd for his pricing and, now bored with that, you're calling him unethical for making the jacket!? How many people do we have on this board making replica gear? I've never seen ANY of them attacked in this way! Has anyone insulted Steve Delk for trying to make the most screen accurate fedora possible? NO. Steve is practically a god around here for his efforts. Has anyone ever attacked Magnoli for his very extensive line of replica props, and now replica clothing, too? NO. What about the WIDE range of whip makers out there (Winrich, Nolan, Strain, Bernardo, etc., etc.....) that either make Indy "styled" whips, or strive to make exact screen replicas? Nope, never heard a single attack made solely on the basis that they were doing/trying to do it. Hey, while you guys are on your soap boxes about Todd and his illegally illicit, over-priced jacket you haven't even SEEN YET do me a favor; pop on over to Gibson & Barnes' website and read their copy for their "Expedition". They specificallt say their jacket is an exact replica of the INDIANA JONES jacket... they use the name, the title 'Raiders of the Lost Ark', etc. and even openly bash other manufacturers and point out their opinions of what other companies have done wrong! They even claim to have had photos of that stunt jacket which, according to _, never existed because they were not allowed to take any when they examined the jacket. And I know US Wings used to get their jackets from Cooper, which I do believe had a liscence at one time for the Lucas Fan Club jackets, but that's not the case anymore. They're made by someone else exclusively for US Wings and carry THEIR tag. I seriously doubt that US Wings has a liscence to make Indy jackets. And what about the lesser known version from FlightJacket.com? So there you have THREE unliscenced companies making replicas of Indy's jacket, all priced FAR above Wested and I've never heard them attacked in this way. Seriously, what is you guys' problem with Todd?? I've never heard a gripe about any of his other Indy gear. Heck, a lot of us have BOUGHT his other gear. I have.

I hope I'm not coming off as angry, that's not my intent. I just honestly DO NOT GET THIS, at all. What is the problem with someone else making a replica prop and giving us another option!?!?!

IndyBlues · Post by **IndyBlues** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 7:46 am

Very well put, Shawn. I totally agree. You can't cast aspersions towards Todd, without doing the same to USWings and G&B. Those aren't the original, yet people still like those. It's just another option, thrown into the mix.
Hey, I was going to throw some very screen accurate socks that I've been working on into the mix, but after all this, forget about it. It's not worth the aggravation.

'Blues(just kidding about that last part

)

PLATON · Post by **PLATON** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 8:33 am

TODD FOR PRESIDENT!

Post by **Michaelson** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 10:11 am

Interesting observation from the G&B site, Shawnkara. That was the OLD write up that they had eliminated and re-wrote when the Expedition was first posted at their old website as 'Flightsuits', and after Dave Marshall and Peter had a long phone conversation.

Looks like someone drug out the old write up when they officially fired up the new Gibson and Barnes website. Very odd, but then a lot of their original practices fell by the way side when Dave was moved out.

USWings HAD the Lucasfilm contract to make the jackets, and still the blessing from Lucasfilm to continue to do so, so accurate or not, they're as 'official' in the canon as Wested, inaccuracies and all. Wings still makes their own jackets in their plant in New Jersey, after their main production line was destroyed by flood in Stow, Ohio a few years ago. They had a falling out with Cooper, and began making their OWN jackets several years ago, and still had the Lucasfilm contract. Yes, Cooper made them, but it was Wings that owned the contract, not Cooper. That contract, as I understand, has since expired, but they still have the blessing of LucasFilm and co. to make the jackets, and the claim.

Oh, don't worry too much folks. You're not plowing new ground with these discussions. _ and Lee Keppler (mostly _) was practically crucified when the Expedition was developed, and these points were made and RE-made in the exact same fashion, same wording, and in the same loud voices. THAT'S what I posted to Todd to be prepared for.

If anyone wants to bother doing some research, you'll find Peter and Noel Howard talked back in 1996/97 about Peter making the shirts and pants. Those discussions were sparked by discussions that took place at Indyfan, and Peter and Noel made their first public forum appearances. Noel decided to offer them again rather than hand the patterns off to Peter, and Peter pulled back from the production. Noel finally retired, and Peter stepped back up to the plate to fill the gap. It was all on the up and up, and all the major parties talked before proceeding.

Regards! Michaelson

agent5 · Post by **agent5** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 11:13 am

TODD FOR POPE!

hanson · Post by **hanson** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 11:49 am

Don't worry Todd, they don't crucify you for making jackets anymore. Unless you're a carpenter and the jackets are made out of wood.regards,hanson.

Fedora · Post by **Fedora** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 12:17 pm

Wrong. It is a contradiction. It has nothing to do with his eyesight and how he interprets what was on screen. He is attempting to make an exact copy of what is on the screen to the best of his ability. If he $uck$ at his craft, it will not be a good "copy". If he is very skilled at his craft, it will be virtually an "identical copy".

He is attempting to copy a jacket that Peter made and Harrison Ford wore in Raiders of the Lost Ark. Plain and simple.

You can use semantics to argue that he is not copying someone else's work all you want to, but it is just a bunch of bunk.

He is attempting to COPY a particular jacket, period, dot, the end. You can argue wether it is legal or illegal all you want, that is, until a court would make a ruling on it, if it ever came to that. But, the fact that he is attempting to copy a particular jacket is not debatable.

I agree with you Bufflehead. I know lots of us like those gray areas instead of the black and white aspect.

If this ain't black and white, you are color blind.

( a joke as black, and white are technically not colors)

This falls into the category of, "figures don't lie, but liars can figure"

A reality check is needed here. Is he trying to copy the film jacket, or not? If he is, how can anyone argue that point?

But, I got a big kick and laugh out of this today, so thanks to all involved.

Has anyone insulted Steve Delk for trying to make the most screen accurate fedora possible?

Actually, I have had several insulting emails.

I have been accused of trying to make money from replicating the Raiders fedora. I have been accused of not using the proper felt, i.e. rabbit. I have been accused of not being accurate by not using the current HJ block shape.

Of course the answers to those accusations are basically, I was only trying to make a hat that I was satisfied with personally as I could not find one that pleased me. I can assure you if HJ was offering the Raiders fedora, I would have never got into this hatmaking deal. But, they do not and the rest is history. In that sense, I know what _ was bugged about in regards to his quest. What he saw in the Westeds of that time was not what he was seeing on screen and he ventured out to get one as close a possible, with the addition of having it constructed in a more durable fashion for real world use. I took my cue from him.

From my point of view I welcome new attempts at providing Indy gear. But only if the new gear is better than the others. If you can improve upon it, go for it. Nothing wrong with that. Fedora

hanson · Post by **hanson** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 2:25 pm

Todd and Steve stop reading your insulting emails and start making my AB and jacket please.lol..hanson.

PLATON · Post by **PLATON** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 6:21 pm

Hey TODD,
Here's the B&N label so you can copy it.

http://www.theindyexperience.com/news_a ... cket_8.jpg

Shawnkara · Post by **Shawnkara** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 12:05 am

Wow, Steve that *****

There ARE a lot of people out there, though, with nothing better to do than write insulting emails. In my experience, these are usually just people who want what you're offering, can't afford it, so they cry and moan publicly. My favorite useless argument is that prop makers are trying to make money, so they're somehow scum

Man, and this whole time I thought MOST people made their living from the fact that there is money to be made from goods and services?

When that argument fails it always comes down to, "Whatever, you stuff isn't accurate, anyway. I ALONE know what's accurate, and that isn't it". Like their observations or ability to watch a movie are any better

Or like you said, they base it on what the "original" manufactuers sell and what they say even though, surprise, those guys are ALSO trying to turn a profit for their goods and services

Some people really know how to walk that fine line between being entertaining and just plain retarded.

Post by **Michaelson** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 9:45 am

Shawnkara, we used to call the folks you're referring to as 'stitch nazi's'.

Regards! Michaelson

Shawnkara · Post by **Shawnkara** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:49 am

Thanks, Michaelson

I was having trouble coming up with a name for them. Nice to know one already exists

Post by **Michaelson** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 12:36 pm

Yep. First time I ever 'heard' it was back in '98 on Indyfan.

Regards! Michaelson

Tyrloch · Post by **Tyrloch** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 1:04 pm

The first time I heard it was last year from one of the guys in my black powder group -- it was referring to whether you clothing & acoutrements were handmade or machine-made...those who look too closely at your gear to see if the stitches are nice & uniform, i.e., from a sewing machine, are the so-called stitch nazis...

~Jace

Puppetboy · Post by **Puppetboy** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 1:13 pm

Sorry, I've been away for a few days and couldn't keep up with this.

The discussion is interesting, and I hope everyone's still friends! I believe EVERYONE is right in this discussion, but not for the reasons they think. I think I can summarize:

1. There is nothing LEGALLY wrong with making my own jacket the way I want it. It will be screen accurate as far as it is possible to know with the limited information available. I am "interpreting" a little in my choice of leather. It is not the original leather, but looks more like the leather on screen after distressing.

2. I am making an EXACT copy, and I'm NOT either. The only EXACT copy I would have would be the same size as the original. And I am not making an EXACT copy of what Peter offers today for the same price. There would be no point to that.

3. I understand that some of you feel loyal to Peter and think he's being ripped off. That's understandable since he's been involved here and many of you think of him as a personal friend and member of the club. Just to ease your mind: I don't intend on impacting Peter's business. I intend to impact FlightSuits' business and US Wings business since my jacket will appeal to their customers, not Peter's. I hope to offer a better jacket than theirs at a competitive price. When the dust settles, I am really offering a better "Expedition" at a lower price. Does that help? Peter is above all this, as his jackets are still the most desirable to the true fan.

As to the liner, it is a durable and warm cotton twill, medium weight. It is a perfect match for the liner found in the LC jacket, except that the color is darker.

Yeah, FlightSuits is legally crossing the line to put "Indiana Jones" and "Raiders of the Lost Ark" anywhere on the same page as their Expedition jacket (and so am I, but I plan to tone it down a little). That's the problem with selling on the web. If you DON'T use those words, no one will find your product since they will use those words to look for it. A sticky wicket...

At least I haven't gotten any death threats yet...

Does that help? Does this summarize the feelings on both sides?

Copyright was meant to stop mechanical reproduction of published material. It has grown to encompass much more. BTW, there is a bill pending to extend copyright protection to fashion design, which is what we're talking about here. I hope it doesn't pass. Can you imagine? The fashion design industry would grind to a halt and monopolies would be created instantly. No designer could create another piece of clothing without a team of lawyers to advise on it's legality. The lawsuits over who stole who's button placement, sleeve taper, cuffs, pocket design... it would never end.

The fashion design industry is getting by just fine without it. So who do you think would push for such a law?

I should have been a lawyer.

Post by **Michaelson** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 1:38 pm

Lawyer? HECK no!

We'd be out one fine prop master if you had.

HIGH regards! Michaelson

Rundquist · Post by **Rundquist** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 4:50 pm

Hopefully Todd won’t lose too much money on this endeavor. He has said that he hopes to impact US Wings and Flight Suits sales. Those companies hardly sell any Indiana Jones jackets. The trend on this board has pretty much always been for one product to far outsell other products in each category. In hats it was originally the PB. Then came the Akubra Federation and now it’s the Adventurebuilt. Most “newbies” go with whatever is the most popular product at any given time. Their research consists of finding out which product is the most popular. This doesn’t mean that what’s popular isn’t great. But what it does mean is that great products are not always very popular.
In the case of the jacket, Todd will face an uphill battle trying to turn a profit. He’s previously stated that he’s already sunk 10 G’s into this project. _ said that Aero Leather sunk that much alone into trying to get the pleats right in their version of the jacket before they abandoned the whole project. The people on this board are also notorious for showing no mercy to vendors. Hopefully Todd will find a niche.
I personally think that the FS Expedition is an awesome creation (even though nobody buys them). To me it will always be a shame that more people didn’t get them. I understand the main reasons (Peter made the movie jacket and sells his version for less money), but it’s a shame nonetheless. Cheers

Post by **Michaelson** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 5:02 pm

I can't speak for the FS sales, but it's quite the contrary regarding Wings....they sell lambskin Indy jackets literally by the thousands to the Tennessee Valley Authority for their lineman and field managers. It's been a standing contract they've had with the TVA since 1989.

Regards! Michaelson

Rundquist · Post by **Rundquist** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 5:07 pm

That’s good. I was mostly talking from an Indyfan (gearhead) perspective. Wings is a good company. Their stuff is solid. I just hardly ever see a “I just ordered my first Wings jacket” or a "check out my new Expedition” thread is all.
Cheers

Post by **Michaelson** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 5:17 pm

True....but past experience has shown us that unless you want a good old fashioned street brawl, you just don't mention those two companies products around this joint...especially Wings.

HIGH regards, old friend!!

Michaelson

Rundquist · Post by **Rundquist** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 5:25 pm

Michaelson wrote:True....but past experience has shown us that unless you want a good old fashioned street brawl, you just don't mention those two companies products around this joint...especially Wings.

HIGH regards, old friend!!

Michaelson

Too true. What was I talking about? Oh yeah, stay out of my beer (cryptic Simpsons reference).

Rundquist · Post by **Rundquist** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 5:31 pm

Michaelson wrote:True....but past experience has shown us that unless you want a good old fashioned street brawl, you just don't mention those two companies products around this joint...especially Wings.

HIGH regards, old friend!!

Michaelson

Actually it might be fun to pull out the old jackets and take comparison pics and see how some have evolved. I still have access to an old Wings goatskin jacket, an old Wested and an old Lucasfilm Cooper.

Post by **Michaelson** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 5:38 pm

You're one of the masters of comparison shots.....lock and load!!

Regards!! Michaelson

Captain D · Post by **Captain D** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 10:55 pm

I totally agree with Rundquist on the point that he makes about the Expedition not getting the credit that it often deserves at times.

It seems as if people oppose G&B, not because of the quality of the product (it's an extremely well-made product), but because we don't have an "emotional attachment" to G&B like we do with Peter. Therefore, we naturally want to protect and guard the name Wested no matter what happens.

I respect the fact that Todd wants to make a screen-accurate Indy jacket that has everything standard like we get on the Expedition jacket, that we don't always get as standard on the Wested jackets. That's GREAT and I respect that. Even though there are some pretty big shoes to fill, such as in the quality leather, stitching, lining, ect...I wish him the best and I would be willing to give his jacket a try when complete.

PETER · Post by **PETER** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:01 pm

I have now read the full monty. A few members comments about my pants and shirts but I am the only person whom has full permission from Angels & Bermans to make the shirt and pants from the original design.
Bear in mind Noel was an employee at the time and took the patterns with him to MBA. When he gave up I took over with everyones agreement.
My dealings with Todd were limited. He bought jackets from me which if you read at the start he has never had but there was not enough profit for him. [edited by moderator]
Want a film authentic. No problem $295
Want an Indian made Wested No Problem $225
Spice Girls song' Tell me what you want, what you really really want'

When are you going to realize that I love the product not the profit?
The film I am on now True North has stopped me going to Finger Lakes
but I will now aim to go to LA summit and a meeting with Lucas Films.
Cheers#Peter
'

Post by **Michaelson** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:04 pm

See. My memory isn't to rusty regarding Peter's involvement with the shirt/pants, as that's how I remembered it when it occurred at Indyfan.

A meeting with Lucasfilm, eh?

Do we read more into this than we should...or should hope for?

Regards! Michaelson

independent · Post by **independent** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 5:05 pm

PETER wrote: Want an Indian made Wested No Problem $225
Spice Girls song' Tell me what you want, what you really really want'

I won't lie, that had me laughing!

One thing that's a little confusing - so does Angels & Bermans have legal protection of the shirt and pants of the original design, in the form of a patent or copyright? Or is 'full permission' more of a professional courtesty?

I ask, because if Peter and Wested have the legal rights to make the shirt and pants, then...there are quite a few vendors who very well might be guilty of breaking the law - true? Including...Noel? Say it aint so!

Anyways, I do think Peter and Wested offers a great product, and my finger has been on the trigger for 2 months because of the raiders collar/pocket size question - Peter is that resolved yet?

PETER · Post by **PETER** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 5:24 am

In todays world marketing, product promotion & protection is the norm but 25 years ago before internet and broadband you simply made for the film and moved on.
I had original ROLA jackets hanging on the rails which no one wanted now $10,000 or more the same with Star Wars and Bond Film costumes but no one knew I made them or how to find out who made them.
In the first 10 years after ROLA I think I sold about 18 indy jackets.
In the first week of our web page I sold about 19. Thats progress.
As far as rights are concerned Deborah Noodleman was the costume designer for the whole film not just the jaqckets. When the jackets she had were not rights I was called in.
She knew what she wanted but I designed patterned and made it.
B&N only bought the jackets not the patterns or the rights to reproduce which I maintain to this day. The cost of litigation is the only thing that has stopped me persuing the rip off companies.
Cheers
Peter

Ace · Post by **Ace** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 7:50 am

Hey Peter

Thanks for setting things clear about the rights to the pattern.

See you at the summit in Hamburg
Regards
Ace

mark seven · Post by **mark seven** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 10:02 am

PETER wrote: I had original ROLA jackets hanging on the rails which no one wanted

...it breaks the heart!

..anyone know where I can get a time machine?

PLATON · Post by **PLATON** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 10:57 am

Soon I will order my 3rd Wested and declare full loyalty to Wested an Peter as nobody can beat the original maker of anything.

I have a Wested Raiders auth lamb standard, a predistressed with agent5 specs, and now will buy a dark lamb Raiders with some agent5 specs.

Speaking copyright etc, I am still of the impression that the rights belong to Lucasfim and understand that authorised companies label their products e.g. OFFICIAL INDIANA JONES JACAKET (TM) or something like that.

Peter is not stating that his jackets are the official product, but that he is the original maker and that's unbeatable. I don't really give a dime if it's official.

However, I cannot hide the fact that the TODD jacket is intriguing. I think I 'll get one out of curiosity to compare with a Wested. Now, Indian or not, it still looks better to me than the ones offered by Wings, FS etc.

PLATON · Post by **PLATON** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 11:06 am

Peter, one question.

What's with the collar?
Everybody's saying that on screen the collar is smaller than your standard Raiders collar (which looks OK to me).

FS who say that they copied a stunt jacket, have made the collar smaller. TODD also made it smaller?

What's the true story ?

Gobler · Post by **Gobler** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 2:34 pm

PLATON wrote:Peter, one question.

What's with the collar?
Everybody's saying that on screen the collar is smaller than your standard Raiders collar (which looks OK to me).

FS who say that they copied a stunt jacket, have made the collar smaller. TODD also made it smaller?

What's the true story ?

I just watched Raiders last night and noticed in the temple sceen the collar looked like bat wings they were huge! I think it's the way he wares it in the film.