"Ok, Tmo, so I made a tyop....
Is that the best you've got? Poking fun of my pathetic tpyign skills? What do you thikn secretaries are for, anyway?
Pat's right: you guys can't (or won't) answer the question about the analogy between laying a pipe or a 2 iron next to the intended line of putt and the cheater line, yet you're willing to rest the entire premise of your argument that the hand-drawn cheater line is legal on an ANALOGY between the hand-drawn line and the manufacturer's line based on their functional equivalency.
Is that isn't a classic case of black calling the kettle pot, I don't know what is!
An analogy based on functional equivalency is good enough to make the hand-drawn cheater line legal under Decision 20-3a/2 because the trademark is legal, but it's not good enough to make the cheater line illegal under under the RULE ITSELF based on functional equivalents that are illegal!"
Shivas:
I'd be glad to offer an answer to Pat's analogy of a pipe laid on the putting green to indicate a line for putting and a mark or line on a golf ball used to indicate a line for putting as to why the Rulesmakers have made the former a violation of Rule 8-2b and the latter not a violation of 8-2b as indicated by Dec 20-3a/2.
While I'm willing to answer that question I remind you I am not a Rulemaker but I have spoken to one who is (or was) about this specific subject and he's offered an answer (it's apparently his answer and not some official answer from the USGA's Rules Committee (of which he was a member and may still be)).
For you both to get an official answer to your question would logically be to make a written proposal to the USGA Rules Committee about what you think this Rule should include and just see how they respond. Chris Brauner has made this point to you on here and so have I.
'Here how it is with respect to marks. Any mark that a player places on his golf ball for whatever reason is OK such as identification or assistance in positioning the ball on the putting green. The reason for this is that the ball is marked by the manufacturer in many ways and there is no practical way to regulate this. But that is where the "line" is drawn. The Rule itself is abundantly clear - "a mark may not be placed anywhere . . ." and that means anywhere [but on the ball] and, for example, prohibits placing a tee on the fringe or the putting green itself to indicate the line for putting. My assumption is that the scope of the Rule was widened in 1988 just for that reason.
With respect to a line on the putter, aiming lines or marks are OK and may be painted on or cut onto a part of the clubhead. This is not governed by Rule 8-2b but rather by the club Rules in Appendix II.'
As you can see with this Rule the Rulesmakers have made an exception with the GOLF BALL and the PUTTER HEAD from ANYTHING placed 'ANYWHERE' ELSE.
The reason for making that exception has even been given. First, they apparently think trying to regulate marks on a golf ball is not practical and perhaps the Rulesmakers don't even think this thing you and Pat call 'the functional equivalency of a pipe and a mark on a golf ball' is legitimate.
You and Pat may not like that exception or that reason and rationale for it but nevertheless neither of you can legitimately say that an answer (and a bona fide answer) has not been given simply because you DON'T LIKE the answer or MAY NOT AGREE WITH IT.
To say that an answer can only be construed as a bona fide answer if you like the answer or agree with it, is, well, pretty immature or naive on your part, in my opinion.
