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

[SwedishHeat]

Really then, can anyone else explain how Redman came out with factory run PVC heads based on an "original" Iminime resin cast head?

Redman bought an iminime head (from someone) and sent it to a factory and had them make a steel mold of it.

 

[cmiller99]

But I find Redman's Blondie to be the least impressive of their trio.

Like I've said before, I believe that Blondie is a recast of an already recasted eBay sculpt. It shares a lot of similarities with a much more deformed recast that used to be plastered all over eBay.
Tuco and Angel Eyes appear to be straight recasts of the Iminime sculpts, quite well done admittedly - there are few deformities. The same cannot be said for Blondie.

 

[Asta]

Like I've said before, I believe that Blondie is a recast of an already recasted eBay sculpt. It shares a lot of similarities with a much more deformed recast that used to be plastered all over eBay.
Tuco and Angel Eyes appear to be straight recasts of the Iminime sculpts, quite well done admittedly - there are few deformities. The same cannot be said for Blondie.

Yes, he seems to be the odd one out.

Even so there's a lot of detail in the sculpt. The blazing blue eyes are a bit off putting! I'll probably repaint them - can't be any harder than putting pupils on 28mm figures.

(For the record I came out of the Stone Age today and got my first iPod, and it's taken me an age to type this!)

 

[PopCultKid]

Mike, you are a true statesman, and I appreciate your dedication to the hobby. The custom community is far better when you and others like you are around. Your reasoning and due diligence is much appreciated. All points are spot on, very well said!

Somebody might have gone to him with a fist full or dollars, and that could have tipped him. It's not a good thing really and i'd feel bad if it was like that, but it's the kind of ugly business we're in.

All i know is i'd still pay the original asking price, even if it was for few dollars more.

What you did there; we see it.

you guys don't deserve to comment on anything unless you've never downloaded illegally any Programs, Music or Movie files.

[video]https://www.getyarn.io/yarn-clip/c8e04f24-cdec-43f1-b83f-20705c7970b0[/video]

Unless you live in superado's world where all illegalities are equal.

Their Tuco came out best

 

[Ebeneezer Jones]

Those are better pic's Kuat. The one i got of the Redman, i just googled it and hit the image tab. It was the only one in daylight i could find. It's a screen grab as it's from a youtube review. In that review you can see Blondie's revolver is also wrong. The Iminime revolver between Angel and Tuco i bought up when they were getting made, but it fell on deaf ears. The revolvers aren't wrong, you just have to swap them. Give Angel's to Tuco and Tuco's to Angel. You would then obviously have to re-attach the cord to Tuco's, but basically it's a revolver swap.

Every pic here is taken in natural light. Only thing i did to these images was crop. No brightness or contrast changes or anything else.

Your first pic, i can only get this (pic below) of similar angle. Be interesting to see the Redman in natural light also with no image adjustments. Because the hat on the Redman sits so high, it's never going to be a good comparison from an above kind of angle. If you do that with Iminime's you get less face, and also the shadow from the hat.

Few more just because. Again, natural light, only cropped and no image adjustments at all.

 

[potato]

can't you guys just take off the hats to get a better comparison instead of saying the hat sits too high or too low or shadows blocking the face etc. they aren't glued up to the head right?

 

[Ebeneezer Jones]

can't you guys just take off the hats to get a better comparison instead of saying the hat sits too high or too low or shadows blocking the face etc. they aren't glued up to the head right?

Yes they are.

 

[Rydeck]

Ultimately what superado is getting at is that theft is theft. Iminime stole something that did not belong to them. Redman stole something that did not belong to them. Just because Iminime did more work to steal something does not change the fact that it was stolen. Just because one feels that your theft has more legitimacy does not make it justified. Thieves taking from thieves doesn't change the wrong.

This may be an oversimplification, but let's compare:

Iminime:

1. produces unlicensed figures
2. small production runs

Redman:

1. produces unlicensed figures
2. large production runs
3. copies/recasts Iminime's work

Some considerations:

1. Producing unlicensed figures is a breach of law.
2. Producing small (non-commercial) runs of figures may be viewed as fine art/self expression, which is not necessarily illegal (see Robbie's post); this undermines the argument that Iminime's and Redman's production of unlicensed figures are equivalent in the eyes of the law.
3. Iminime has ceased figure development and turned over assets when a licensor has called them on it (i.e., when the fine art/self expression argument didn't fly or wasn't worth the cost of fighting). This has happened once, to my knowledge, which means that 95% of the time, rightsholders have tacitly allowed Iminime to do its thing.
4. Anyone who buys either Iminime's or Redman's figures doesn't care whether a figure is licensed.
5. Recasting other people's work has driven artists from the hobby. Losing skilled artists from the hobby is objectively bad for everyone--we can't buy original works and Redman has no one to copy from. Maybe there's good in that because Redman would be forced to hire original artists.

Taking these things into account---and ignoring other factors like profit motive, quality of the product and level of community interaction---what is left for us to consider?

Iminime:

1. small production runs (legal gray area)

Redman:

1. large production runs (not a legal gray area)
2. copies/recasts Iminime's work

Now tell me who I should support.

 

[potato]

Now tell me who I should support.

you support whoever can provide you the things you need at the price you can afford.

Iminime is not well known to general collectors and their items are not given much exposure and due to the quantities produced they aren't available to most people. even if we take price out of the equation most people will still buy Redman over Iminime, purely because Redman has alot more exposure compared to Iminime that most online shops are selling their products. won't be surprised when people saying Iminime copied Redman.

Whether it's Iminime/Rainmain/Brothers production, majority folks in the hobby just don't know them. You have to follow their facebook or hang out in customizing forums to know them. whether they bother to market themselves to the mass market & whether they are seeking exposure is another question, maybe they just enjoy customizing & helping customizer that they don't really care about whether most people know them or not.

and i believe selling 50-60 copies is considered "mass production" and violates copyright law just fyi. you need to be below 10 or 20, depends on the law you are subject to. that is why many comic-con artists sell very very low numbers of them. some just a handful.

 

[C0L0SSUS]

Hey, guys! How far back through these posts do I have to go to find something on topic?

 

[Asta]

Hey, guys! How far back through these posts do I have to go to find something on topic?

The first page would be a good bet.

 

[Rydeck]

you support whoever can provide you the things you need at the price you can afford.

Iminime is not well known to general collectors and their items are not given much exposure and due to the quantities produced they aren't available to most people. even if we take price out of the equation most people will still buy Redman over Iminime, purely because Redman has alot more exposure compared to Iminime that most online shops are selling their products. won't be surprised when people saying Iminime copied Redman.

Whether it's Iminime/Rainmain/Brothers production, majority folks in the hobby just don't know them. You have to follow their facebook or hang out in customizing forums to know them. whether they bother to market themselves to the mass market & whether they are seeking exposure is another question, maybe they just enjoy customizing & helping customizer that they don't really care about whether most people know them or not.

and i believe selling 50-60 copies is considered "mass production" and violates copyright law just fyi. you need to be below 10 or 20, depends on the law you are subject to. that is why many comic-con artists sell very very low numbers of them. some just a handful.

Fair point. Customizers flying under the radar is probably mostly intentional and wanting to escape mainstream notice would tend to bring their activities into question----if you're not doing anything wrong, then why try and hide? I have my personal justification for who I buy from and I'm lucky enough to be able to afford the asking price (sometimes), but it's clear from this thread that there is no ethically unsullied position to take. And the debate will continue because Redman isn't going anywhere for the simple reasons you stated. However, at the very least, people posting that Redman is recasting helps spread the word to the general collectors that don't know--ones that frequent this board anyway--and then they can make more informed decisions, whether that knowledge would change their minds or not.

 

[ishothimsixtimes]

Hey, guys! How far back through these posts do I have to go to find something on topic?

Hold your horses. My old gran wants to know if she has any legal recourse against Redman for sticking version B of Riggs in a pair of boots clearly ripped off from her s####y bingo-lady snow battlers?

She feels violated....and she hasn't felt violated since before the Berlin wall fell, but he was her husband and he did ask permission first. Unlike Redman.

 

[PopCultKid]

^^^^

People really want to stay on topic in this thread when the current topic is far more interesting??

 

[jstep13]

This may be an oversimplification, but let's compare:

Iminime:

1. produces unlicensed figures
2. small production runs

Redman:

1. produces unlicensed figures
2. large production runs
3. copies/recasts Iminime's work

Some considerations:

1. Producing unlicensed figures is a breach of law.
2. Producing small (non-commercial) runs of figures may be viewed as fine art/self expression, which is not necessarily illegal (see Robbie's post); this undermines the argument that Iminime's and Redman's production of unlicensed figures are equivalent in the eyes of the law.
3. Iminime has ceased figure development and turned over assets when a licensor has called them on it (i.e., when the fine art/self expression argument didn't fly or wasn't worth the cost of fighting). This has happened once, to my knowledge, which means that 95% of the time, rightsholders have tacitly allowed Iminime to do its thing.
4. Anyone who buys either Iminime's or Redman's figures doesn't care whether a figure is licensed.
5. Recasting other people's work has driven artists from the hobby. Losing skilled artists from the hobby is objectively bad for everyone--we can't buy original works and Redman has no one to copy from. Maybe there's good in that because Redman would be forced to hire original artists.

Taking these things into account---and ignoring other factors like profit motive, quality of the product and level of community interaction---what is left for us to consider?

Iminime:

1. small production runs (legal gray area)

Redman:

1. large production runs (not a legal gray area)
2. copies/recasts Iminime's work

Now tell me who I should support.

Tell me something then, if it's a grey area yada yada yada...why does Iminime/CK/??? use so many different names, try so hard to fly under the radar with clandestine emails etc etc? If he's so free to do as pleases, he shouldn't have to hide right?

 

[C0L0SSUS]

Hold your horses. My old gran wants to know if she has any legal recourse against Redman for sticking version B of Riggs in a pair of boots clearly ripped off from her s####y bingo-lady snow battlers?

She feels violated....and she hasn't felt violated since before the Berlin wall fell, but he was her husband and he did ask permission first. Unlike Redman.

Damn, that was good! I was nearly incontinent from laughter! Assuredly, all horses are worth holding since this thread has become more jovial.

 

[Rydeck]

Tell me something then, if it's a grey area yada yada yada...why does Iminime/CK/??? use so many different names, try so hard to fly under the radar with clandestine emails etc etc? If he's so free to do as pleases, he shouldn't have to hide right?

Right. Already noted. Since it's a grey area, I'd say they're not free to do as they please, particularly if 50-60 figures counts as a commercial operation. The fact that it's a grey area means they shouldn't open themselves up to wide-scale exposure and force it to become black and white. Ironically, limiting their exposure also works against them in terms of uninformed collectors buying recasts.

I'm not sure how Redman has escaped notice, unless they haven't or are otherwise beyond the legal reach of rightsholders who would like to enforce intellectual property rights, but can't.

 

[potato]

Right. Already noted. Since it's a grey area, I'd say they're not free to do as they please, particularly if 50-60 figures counts as a commercial operation. The fact that it's a grey area means they shouldn't open themselves up to wide-scale exposure and force it to become black and white. Ironically, limiting their exposure also works against them in terms of uninformed collectors buying recasts.

I'm not sure how Redman has escaped notice, unless they haven't or are otherwise beyond the legal reach of rightsholders who would like to enforce intellectual property rights, but can't.

if you look at Art Figures Super Armored Cop (Dredd), the best the licensor can do is request Sideshow Forum not to accommodate discussions about it. It couldn't even stop online shops in USA from selling them.

It's not just because Art Figures uses a different title for their figure, because if you want to pursue for copyright violation, i'm sure the similarities between the Super Cop design is at least 95% close to Dredd.

The reason is, Art Figures aren't selling enough figures (they mass produced but still limited compared to Hasbro/Playmates) to justify spending huge amount of money on a court case that would not bring in much money.

Also Art Figures is in China/Hong Kong, that makese filling a law suit even harder & costier and most likely you won't get the same result as suing some company based in USA.

If you are in the USA/Europe, it's way cheaper & easier to shut your operations down for copyright violations.

 

[superado]

Unless you live in superado's world where all illegalities are equal.

No, not equal; that's just a plainly stupid conclusion, like getting charged for grand theft for stealing a stick of gum, but the person who steals gum wouldn't be able to call carjacker a thief, without acknowledging that he's also a thief. If you owned a business, would it be okay for someone to steal one of your trucks? I'd guess "no," but if some of your employees on a regular basis take home office supplies, let's say in amounts no greater than a buck or 2 worth of pens and printing paper at a time, would that be okay for them to do? I'll tell you what, if it ever becomes possible for Iminime to successfully sue Redman for recasting, I wouldn't hesitate to admit just how wrong I am.

But anyway about that Pulp Fiction clip, wow, is that how you talk at the dinner table?

 

[superado]

This may be an oversimplification, but let's compare:

Iminime:

1. produces unlicensed figures
2. small production runs

Redman:

1. produces unlicensed figures
2. large production runs
3. copies/recasts Iminime's work

Some considerations:

1. Producing unlicensed figures is a breach of law.
2. Producing small (non-commercial) runs of figures may be viewed as fine art/self expression, which is not necessarily illegal (see Robbie's post); this undermines the argument that Iminime's and Redman's production of unlicensed figures are equivalent in the eyes of the law.
3. Iminime has ceased figure development and turned over assets when a licensor has called them on it (i.e., when the fine art/self expression argument didn't fly or wasn't worth the cost of fighting). This has happened once, to my knowledge, which means that 95% of the time, rightsholders have tacitly allowed Iminime to do its thing.
4. Anyone who buys either Iminime's or Redman's figures doesn't care whether a figure is licensed.
5. Recasting other people's work has driven artists from the hobby. Losing skilled artists from the hobby is objectively bad for everyone--we can't buy original works and Redman has no one to copy from. Maybe there's good in that because Redman would be forced to hire original artists.

Taking these things into account---and ignoring other factors like profit motive, quality of the product and level of community interaction---what is left for us to consider?

Iminime:

1. small production runs (legal gray area)

Redman:

1. large production runs (not a legal gray area)
2. copies/recasts Iminime's work

Now tell me who I should support.

Here's what I can predict. As long as these artists and producers can go under the radar doing what they do, and as long as there's money to be made, you can count on Redman and Iminime to continue coming out with their offerings...so I say, keep buying what you like; and if what you like is only being done in expensive, limited runs but you have the money to spend, go for it!

As pointed out, because of the complex logistics of enforcing international copyright laws particular to collectible figures and certain obscure properties (unlike properties owned by the giants, e.g., Lucasfilm, DC, etc.) I don't think any of these trends will slow down anytime soon and in fact, they are growing in different forms. Take the Bond franchise, in most cases companies are now producing only clothing and accessory sets. In effect, they're skirting the copyright issue and leaving the acquiring of Craig or Connery sculpts to the collector since there are many custom and a few mass-produced runs nowadays of these personalities. I wonder if either of Craig's or Connery's people have even looked into the manufacturing of their image overseas, but if they have, they probably concluded that going after these producers would cost more than the damage being done.