A poll on copyright/IP and recasting

[Someone passing by]

Indeed it requires creativity and skill that’s why I phrased it that way, I was just mentioning that to a cynical mind it’s the same theft, it only involves more work from the “thief”, if an analog would be made robin hood would be a nice one, indeed the common folk praised him and all but to the cynical observer he is just a criminal with good intentions but a criminal and for good or evil falls in the same category as one that steals for himself.

I am not trying to defend scibor or accuse honest sculptors that’s not the issue of this thread, I am concentrating on the IP part and its appliance, miniature ranges similar to GW’s or other successful big companies exist or are created all the time, it is a viable option for small companies to make compatible looking model ranges with the big companies so they can stay in business a common practice that is ether tolerated or even (in some mirror cases) praised, but is IP theft never the less, on the same path I assume would be all those “hobbit” variants that are just that with different name, I assume no of the sculptors or companies pays any IP rights to whoever holds the Tolkins IP rights and if my memory serves me well they were his creation and not a part of any north (or other) mythology.

On another hand as I said earlier recasting is viewed as evil/ tolerated/ essential part of the hobby differently in different parts of the hobby, if one starts going rampant about how bad is recasting in a manga/ anime garage kits forums, he will be confronted in the same way (probably more polite though) with a person saying he recasts someone’s models in this forum same thing different aspect of the hobby different perspectives.

Sorry if I am becoming tiresome, I just want to show that there are many different perspectives on the subject.

[Badger Loving Fluffster]

[Snowcat]

Robin Hood is not camel.


_________________

That appeals to my inner Sheldon.
"BAZINGA!"

[Bodhi]

Personally I feel that the conservative tastes of a great portion of the customers - meaning that they will only buy things that are more or less a copy of a preexisting style - is a much bigger issue and problem than IP theft. IP theft is simply boring but boring tastes make some people feel forced to do these boring things.

As is often the case in most parts of life - in my opinion - nostalgia is the great crook here.
I'm trying to wage war against nostalgia on all fronts.
Just my little mission in life

[Cosmotiger]

I wouldn't buy miniatures that I knew or suspected were pirated, or conversions based on existing figures.

However, in the case of original sculpts, I buy what I like and want, even in the case of figures that are quite obviously unlicensed, but meant to be characters from TV shows, movies, etc. If the IP owner wants to protect their property within the legal system of their country, that's fine by me, but I'm not the IP police, I'm the consumer. The mini companies and the IP owners can fight it out in court. I don't feel any obligation to get involved with their legal disputes.
_________________
Oh, sorry I thought this was Frothers. I must have logged on to TMP by mistake.

[Drewster]

The "RULE" you play by is MONEY.
How much money are you making with the piece.
How much money the infringed party has to spend or loose.
How much money it costs to file a suite.

There is a business among us that makes blatant Predator knockoffs at 28mm. I contacted the movie studio legal department directly, shared the url with them and we talked. He said that it was obvious infringement, but unless the company is raking in over $200k per annum with the product, the studio will not lift a finger.

But then a much much smaller business like GW has alot more to loose in revenues and "good will" by letting the same thing happen at meerly $40k or $50k per annum, and they will often take the case to the knockoff business without delay.

It is also to do with the actual people in any relevant legal office and how busy they are already of course. But most of the time, nobody will scream Bloody Mary unless they either see (or forsee) serious money to be made or lost.

Just consider the big fish and the little fish. GW works hard to rip the f%$# out of all sorts of IPs, but they can get away with it because they retain a strong legal office.
_________________
Drew Williams
Professional Miniatures Sculptor
Satyr Studio
http://www.satyrsculptingstudio.com

[Marquis]

[caryn]

I do not sculpt or paint figures, but I do create Intellectual Property (albiet, most of it pornography). So I voted for the last opition, because the first option does not cover the most typical case with the majority of sculptors---they sell the rights to their work along with the sculpt itself.

In publishing, one used to "license" the publisher only the right of first publication, for approximately 10% of the revenues (and we'll skip the varying definitions of "revenues"). The creator retains the Copyright to subsequent issues (like paperbacks), movie deals, etc...

So...you do not have the right to sell your IP without regard to your legal obligations. And despite what the Terminator Studio told Drew, they were leaving themselves extremely vulnerable---no legal precedent exists to allow for a "money line" in defending IP/Copyright infringement. It is very much an all-or-your-screwded business. That's why McDonald's, Disney, The Oscars, etc..., go after everyone they find or find out about---not because it particularly bothers them, or hurts their bottom line, that some podunk cheeseburger joint in BFE is named McDonald's, after its owner, but because they have a product to protect, and the only way to protect it is to be zealous in your defense of your IP.

On the other hand, much that people believe to be IP is actually not. Orcs are not an invention of Tolkien any more than Goblins are. Changing the spelling to Orks isn't going to create IP, either, anymore than adding "Space" to them, will.

The problem area for minis is the merchandizing aspect of modern films. The names and characters themselves are not, and cannot be, protected as an Intellectual Property; onlt the employment of the name and character within the context of the protected work is an IP. If you make an Achilles that looks like Brad Pitt (why?) you're going to get smished, and you should get smished. If you sculpt an Achilles that looks like some Greek guy, however, no body can win anything against you. You may have to drop a Summons on Drew and his respondant, but you will win.

As for minis that have been modified, the IP Law is very clear, despite popular misconceptions. If you paid for the original figures, you may recoup the cost of the figure and charge for your time, effort, etc..., to any amount the market will bear.

But if you "recast" figures from one you purchased, if you "recast" heads, parts, or even sprues, from one to make many, you have stolen the IP of the mini company. As Ben would say, you are a thief. All you had to do was make a licensing agreement to make it legal, and at least with the Movie people Drew talked to, that would be a simple matter up to $200K (US, I presume).

You recast Space Marine heads, your work is copied from. You "press mould", you copied. You "scribor", you derived. You have an oroginal sketch, or can show clear evidence of originality of interpretation (like a series of false-starts, a pile of greenstuff, etc.., or you comissioned concept sketches, or a history of sculpting like Hasslefree), you are good to go, within the legal agreements you make.
_________________
I got my Jumbo Strap-On at http://www.frothersunite.com/files/UnclEvl/Lab/

[frotherGuest]

I second Marquis - Drewster, what a completely shitty thing to do - keep your beak out! what business is it of yours anyway! Who voted you Judge Drewster?
I'm really chuffed the studio took no action - I hope that pissed on your candle of justice.

[frotherGuest]

From Satyr website...



tut tut.. now where's the phone no. for Newline cinema legal department, I need to speak to them direct.