As some of you may know, Fine Woodworking and PBS are now showing a new Rough Cut with host Tom McLaughlin.
It's showing locally here in the SF Bay Area but not yet on the premium PBS channel.
I saw one show an have another recorded which I expect to watch today or tomorrow.
I enjoyed the previous version of the show but can see that this one is not only different in scope but of a high level of craftsmanship. No dog houses will be built here.
What to you all think?
MJ
I'll look for it - thanks for the heads up. John T.
WGBH-TV is sued by woodworking show host Tommy Mac
By Emily Sweeney Globe Staff April 27, 2018
Thomas J. MacDonald, who goes by the nickname "Tommy Mac," spent years filming himself while he built fine furniture. He posted the videos online for his weekly webcast, "The Rough Cut Show," and developed such a following that WGBH-TV eventually picked up the show.
MacDonald went on to host "Rough Cut: Woodworking With Tommy Mac," for seven seasons on WGBH, and after the last season ended in December 2016, he thought the series was over.
But it wasn?t. Last fall, MacDonald was surprised to find out that WGBH was promoting Season 8 of "Rough Cut," with a new host named Tom McLaughlin.
MacDonald is now suing WGBH for trademark infringement.
After not renewing his contract, WGBH partnered with Fine Woodworking magazine and changed the name of the show to "Rough Cut with Fine Woodworking." In a lawsuit filed last week in federal court in Boston, MacDonald alleges that WGBH pirated his name and image "to produce a counterfeit show."
WGBH disagrees and says it owns all the trademarks related to the series.
"The claims in this case have no basis in fact," WGBH said in an e-mailed statement. "Our agreement with Mr. MacDonald makes clear that WGBH owns the series title and all other trademarks relating to the series. WGBH has in no way suggested that Mr. MacDonald is involved with our new production. We hope to be able to resolve this issue."
The Fine Woodworking magazine website says, "WGBH has spent the last seven years building the Rough Cut brand. The brand is synonymous with the craft of fine woodworking."
"Tommy MacDonald has decided to branch out and pursue other opportunities on his own," the website says. "WGBH and Tommy MacDonald had seven great seasons working together on Rough Cut. Rough Cut is the strongest woodworking brand on public television and that brand continues on, with a new host."
According to the complaint, MacDonald worked as a carpenter until he injured his shoulder in 1997. He then embarked on a new career in cabinetry and woodworking and enrolled in the North Bennet Street School in the North End, and went on to promote himself and his work through online videos.
From 2006 to 2009, MacDonald produced a weekly, Web-based woodworking show called "The Rough Cut Show," "which ultimately had over 2 million page views and hundreds of thousands of followers," the complaint states. MacDonald filmed the show at his workshop in Canton, and the episodes appeared on Bob Vila?s website
MacDonald?s lawsuit alleges that WGBH, The Taunton Press, Inc. (the company that publishes Fine Woodworking magazine), and Laurie Donnelly, the executive producer of the series, "are infringing on the trademarks, name, picture, and reputation" of MacDonald.
In the complaint, attorney John J. E. Markham II argues that under the terms of MacDonald?s contract, WGBH was allowed to register a trademark for the title of the show (?Rough Cut: Woodworking with Tommy Mac?) but should not have registered standalone trademarks for "Rough Cut" or his nickname, "Tommy Mac."
Markham filed a motion for a preliminary injunction Friday alleging that the defendants are "attempting to pirate" MacDonald?s "good name, his reputation, and his trademarks."
The motion seeks to stop WGBH from promoting the new show as "Season
8" and from using photos of MacDonald and the phrases "Rough Cut" and "Tommy Mac."A memo filed in support of the motion states that "MacDonald has been known since the early 2000s as ?Tommy Mac? of ?Rough Cut,? the latter name being his longtime woodworking show. For many years, strangers have approached him on the street and called out ?Hey, you?re Rough Cut!? or ?Hey, Tommy Mac!??"
Markham said MacDonald is "very saddened" at the situation.
"Tommy MacDonald put his heart and soul into that show for seven years," Markham said in a telephone interview. "He is very saddened at what they?re doing, and he looks forward to having a quick court resolution."
Sounds like Tommy should have had a sharper lawyer up front and did some trademark filings.
Exactly. He's being a bit of a crybaby. Good news is, maybe I'll be able to watch that show now that he's not on it. I couldn't take more than 30 seconds of his annoying voice and exaggerated mannerisms.
Cohen was busy with other things at the time and didn't return his calls...
It's all about the Benjamins. I predict a fairly swift payout to T Mac to make it go away.
WGBH: "We hope to be able to resolve this issue." T-Mac's lawyer: "looks forward to having a quick court resolution."
My bet is that he signed over the rights when they hired him.
I am in 100% agreement with you. Somewhere in the body of the contract tha t is no doubt 2" thick between TM and the station, and more importantly sin ce the producer is the station, there will be nomenclature similar to "WGBH (hereinafter known in this document as "the station") shall retain complet e and total ownership of all trademarks, copyrights, patents, devices, prot ocols, methodology, inventions, or any other work developed, displayed or e mployed by the TM for WGBH, the station, its affiliates, its associates, or the production company. Further, the station retains ownership of all int ellectual property, promotional material including, but not limited to, lik enesses, slogans, promotional videos, accompanying music, theme music, tran sitional video techniques, used in the show that are developed for the use of the show at the request or expense of the production company while in pr oduction."
Think of 50 pages defining their view of intellectual property, or ideas an d inventions that were discussed during the production of the show but neve r realized. Still, in these cases, if you thought of it while you worked f or the, your thoughts are their property.
I have read a lot about PBS and their development and production of shows. They learned a lot from the people that owned "Barney", that insanely moro nic purple dinosaur. PBS needed the money, and since they produced the sho w and were the sole broadcasters of it, they sued for a share of the insane profits that show made. PBS lost. They sued again, and lost again. The people that created that purple dinosaur only allowed PBS to produce and br oadcast the show. There were books, dolls, etc., and all manner of income streams that were generated, and PBS saw nothing from it. ZERO.
The admin that ran PBS at the time released a statement after the second lo ss in court that said the "Barney" business model would never again be used by PBS. They would either own outright, or not produce. Broadcast, yes. But if they were to go through the development, writing, producing, promot ion and all the other tasks of bringing a show alive, it was to be theirs.
Check it out:
Hard to believe the federal government paid to have the show made and when successful, the owners of the show kept ALL the money.
Betcha TM never read (or understood) the contract...
Robert
You're going to give me how much? When? Where do I sign?
Agreed, Tommy probably wet his pants with the opportunity of being on a nationwide TV show came up. WGBH saw this is one of thousands that they have signed on and are well versed in crossing the t's and dotting the I's long before they approached Tommy.
Exactly! Wasn't Tommy's series a spin off from SNL's Wayne's World? ;~)
I bet he signed over all rights to the show when he signed the original con tract. Just sore feelings now. This sounds about like if the SawStop inve ntor, who sold the company to Festool. If next year Festool improves the S awStop and makes lots of sales, the inventor guy then sues Festool for stea ling his saw business. He sold it! But he is a lawyer I heard. So its ve ry possible he is starting a lawsuit against Festool right now. Maybe clai ming they should have paid him twice what they paid him the first time.
The biggest problem with him has always been that he's a lawyer. Instead of coming up with an idea and bringing it to market and selling it, his original plan was to get a law passed forcing everyone to license his patent. When that failed then he started making a product but continued to try to get laws passed forcing people to buy it. He still failed at that. Then he showed his true colors after arguing for years that he was only interested in protecting people by suing Bosch when they developed a different system that achieves a similar result.
Apparently Festool took Gass on as part of the package--they say that the management team remains in force. I think it was a bad choice on Festool's part. The patents expire in 3 years and I suspect that the market will be flooded with clones shortly after.
Then again, wouldn't put it past WGBH to try to get away with more than what is actually in the contract, either.
Too little information available to be able draw any conclusions.
So seriously... you think Festool is so stupid, so inexperienced, and so naive that they didn't factor that in? Really? Festool (a subsidiary of a much larger investment group)alone brings in 400 million a year.
Doubt that their is a lack of business acumen on Festool's (or their parent company) part that would allow them to have those facts go unnoticed.
Robert
I think Festool is banking that people buy Sawstop because of its excellence as a saw and not because it makes their insurance company happy. They may be right, or they may not. The market will tell. I would consider Gass to be a liability in any company other than a law firm.
3 years is pretty quick. Hope that's all it takes to get more finger savin g saws on the market. I personally think its a great technology. But I al so think its far far far better to have a sliding table on a saw than this finger technology. Much safer that way. AND far more productive. Can't w ait until Felder and Hammer and MiniMax and Martin and Altendorf and SCMI p ut the finger technology on their sliding table saws. Make these stupid 18 00s American cabinet saws extinct.
I took a look at Felder.
5300 bucks for a saw that can't break down a sheet of plywood? I'm afraid that they need to learn a bit about the American market before they try to sell those things here.
Sure but every employment contract I've signed has a clause saying that whatever I do, they own. Usually, they try to say that everything I've ever done belongs to them, too, but I don't worry about such silliness.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.