1/6 Scale REDMAN TOYS Collectible Figure Accessory Lethal Weapon A & B

[Asta]

 

[Asta]

Looks like they might've recast the Iminime sculpt?

(Photo from Mystolle's thread).

 

[Darkseed]

A for the win.....means I can keep my Iminime Murtaugh

 

[Mr.E]

These guys really love Iminime.

 

[jstep13]

yes! I love Redman toys!!

 

[cmiller99]

Sigh...

 

[Cap'n Cook]

yes! I love Redman toys!!

Yeh. Everyone loves recasters....

 

[superado]

...recasters of original sculpts based on unlicensed property, lol

Seems like there aren't a lot of 80's movie fans like me as I thought there would be (as well as these Asian producers), but I'm glad that Martin Riggs is being mass-produced in some form. How likely is it now that we'll iminently see the original Mad Max by Redman or some other outfit?

 

[Cap'n Cook]

Ah. That old 'argument'.

 

[superado]

No argument there...it's a plain fact

 

[jstep13]

Ah. That old 'argument'.

truth hurts.

 

[karamazov80]

Lame. . .

 

[Cap'n Cook]

truth hurts.

Not really.

It's a go to response for people who support this particular kind of ripping off. The whole 'blah blah it's all unlicensed' doesn't really fly. Yes, stuff from these kind of properties is mostly unlicensed as we don't stand a hope in hell of getting licensed collectibles for these kinds of films. It is a shady area but, at the end of the day; recasting is the lowest of the low in this hobby.

And that truth may hurt.

 

[GlobalObserver]

Has anyone considered the possibility that Iminime might be ripping off Redman Toys instead of the other way around?

Suppose Iminime were in possession of a time machine. They go forward in time, steal the original sculpts from Redman Toys, then return to the original date of departure, and present the stolen Redman sculpts as their own creation.

 

[potato]

Not really.

It's a go to response for people who support this particular kind of ripping off. The whole 'blah blah it's all unlicensed' doesn't really fly. Yes, stuff from these kind of properties is mostly unlicensed as we don't stand a hope in hell of getting licensed collectibles for these kinds of films. It is a shady area but, at the end of the day; recasting is the lowest of the low in this hobby.

And that truth may hurt.

in situations like this, i can only blame the original sculptor for not capitalizing on the market, producing high quality but very limited quantity of their products. yes it's their right to do so and it's wrong to bootleg them, but if they aren't happy with it and the authorities can't do much or wanting to do anything to stop these bootlegs, you will have to fight them off yourself.

easy way would be reproducing their products in higher quantities, or at least unpainted version of them if time is an issue. because if they don't, sooner or later some recast will bootleg their products, because there is a demand in the market, someone has to fulfill the market because there's money to be made in it.

 

[superado]

Not really.

It's a go to response for people who support this particular kind of ripping off. The whole 'blah blah it's all unlicensed' doesn't really fly. Yes, stuff from these kind of properties is mostly unlicensed as we don't stand a hope in hell of getting licensed collectibles for these kinds of films. It is a shady area but, at the end of the day; recasting is the lowest of the low in this hobby.

And that truth may hurt.

So, the unfulfilled demands of collectors justify violating the legal rights of intellectual property owners? If it's the Robin Hood factor that justifies the ripping-off of intellectual property, then wouldn't Redman's affordable price-points vs. that of Iminime sets (that only those with the big bucks can routinely afford) absolve Redman for his recasting? If not, then shame on the reputable retailers frequented by members on this board for even selling Redman sets, and the Sideshow Freaks board itself should be held accountable for allowing Redman merchandise to be sold in the Commerce section.

 

[DKA8976]

Artist produces product and sells it through a distributor.

Somebody else, years down the line, takes the original product and makes lower-cost and lower-quality copies, and sells it without the approval, permission, or knowledge of the original artist.

Sure, throw in whatever extra crap you want on it, but that is the base truth, and it sucks, especially because that is pretty much exclusively what Redman Toys does. They capitalize off of already produced and successful product, not by improving it but by copying it and selling it cheaply.

Ask any 1/6 sculptor - they HATE seeing their stuff re-casted. Rationalize it however you want. I'd never buy this garbage.

 

[Asta]

I love the smell of recasting arguments in the morning.

 

[superado]

Artist produces product and sells it through a distributor.

Somebody else, years down the line, takes the original product and makes lower-cost and lower-quality copies, and sells it without the approval, permission, or knowledge of the original artist.

Did the "original artist" pay the intellectual property owners of the Lethal Weapon movies for the rights to produce collectibles based on their movies?

 

[cmiller99]

Has anyone considered the possibility that Iminime might be ripping off Redman Toys instead of the other way around?

Suppose Iminime were in possession of a time machine. They go forward in time, steal the original sculpts from Redman Toys, then return to the original date of departure, and present the stolen Redman sculpts as their own creation.

Darn! Foiled!

I must notify Denny that the game is up.