Beware the Recaster(s)

[Sweet Rabbit]

I did not want to get involved in this discussion, since well Im sorta new to this board...BUT...as an ARTIST/ANIMATOR/DESIGNER for a major TV Network, and a FREELANCE ARTIST on the side, all our work is owned by the network...they can chose to do what they want with it when they want with it. Its stated in our contracts....we even had a meeting recently where we where warned that if we did outside work on company computers, that, that TOO would be property of the network. I just finished a freelance gig where i got paid and handed over all ASSETS (illustrations, designs, animations) to buyer. He took it in his drive, and the assumption is, he has the right to do what he pleases with it...its his...no longer mine...I was hired by him...I finished the job, I got my money, now if he chooses to destroy the drive that's on him, or if he chooses to take my animation later down the road and get it reworked by another designer, thats his choice as well.
Again, Im just speaking on behalf of an ARTIST being commissioned to create something. The person who commissioned it then OWNS it after job is complete... we just walk away to the next job in hopes to see our work in public...and theres been times when our work changes so many hands it different by the time it reaches broadcast..BUT again...its in our contracts. So we are well aware of it.

I got an original comic art page commissioned about 2 years ago or so & Aspen saw it before I even had it in my hands. they used it for a cover and a print. I got a copy of each out of it at least

 

[mightyq]

I didn't know that. I thought he casted Adams Bale head for himself and his LOL nephew. Didn't know he sold stuff.



Did deeper, there's lots of Freaks on his feedback page.

This was a few months ago
I stopped at page 6 or something, and I already counted at least 8 Freaks

yes but mike, dont convict all yet,, i purchased from him also, at the time i never knew who he was, and he only had a few items wich looked like all rainman to me, so i thoght he was a collector selling out... i bought a dude sculpt, and shoes.....i also bought a they live sculpt and he done the hnds for me,, thats probably his stuff as i never seen that custom on here..... suffice to say, i didnt use the dude or the shoes, still have them,,,, i was going to do a youtube smash the reacst vid....but its a losing battle... they will always find a buyer, the newbie has no idea, he could prey on them until its too late......this will never end unless the original sculptor offers a never ending supply.......but, like you say 8 freaks,,, i guess you can tell if they are veterans....

 

[karamazov80]

I agree with you GB. It would be best to hammer those out ahead of time.

I know and you bring up great points, I just feel some people don't carry out these discussions how they should and instead point fingers and go on a witch hunt.

Yeah, and that's what motivates some for sure. In some cases, I think it really does benefit the board by keeping undesirables out. In others, it seems more personal. You take the bad with the good sometime.

Then why would HT no do "artistic commissions" of their pieces?

I'm not sure I follow, but HT, being a large company, would have no incentive to do small artistic commissions as part of its business strategy.

 

[Pajji]

The argument I'm making is over a commissioned work, not a small run collectible, and I think there is a difference. But this straddles issues of legality and appropriateness (which are different things of course), so I can completely understand someone taking a different view. Though I personally don't think it's wrong, I can understand a Rocco being upset over his commissioned work being re-cast for sale. And that very likely contributed to his current rule of not doing commissions. So, certainly there could be negative consequences to that behavior.

I think we agree on this... if I commission a specific piece then there should be an agreement as to what happens to the item. If I pay hundreds, up to thousands of dollars for commissioned item I would expect that either I a) own the rights to reproduce or not reproduce the head or b) that I will own the only copies or have save over how many copies are made and sold and the artist may or may not retain the original. That should be discussed and agreed upon before hand.

The issue with Rocco was, IMO, an example of how this can go wrong.

This was my point as well with my earlier post. As the artist you must iron out all the details before taking the gig, and charge accordingly.

And I forgot to mention this of course, but I do charge 2 times as much for freelance work than i do company work, since with freelance, after it leaves my computer i have no idea where its going to end up and i have no control. Studios usually quote a price that includes all assets, based on idea they are doing entire package, but once you mention that you will only need one design of a certain asset, they automatically (and correctly) assume it will be versioned out not by them, so they up the price for design since they know it isn't coming back to them. Again all goes back to what was agreed upon before job is started.

 

[LipSmack]

I agree with you GB. It would be best to hammer those out ahead of time.


Yeah, and that's what motivates some for sure. In some cases, I think it really does benefit the board by keeping undesirables out. In others, it seems more personal. You take the bad with the good sometime.


I'm not sure I follow, but HT, being a large company, would have no incentive to do small artistic commissions as part of its business strategy.

No but they could (Hypothetically) do "made to order" like alot of the sculptors here do right?

 

[thenammagazine]

I think we agree on this... if I commission a specific piece then there should be an agreement as to what happens to the item. If I pay hundreds, up to thousands of dollars for commissioned item I would expect that either I a) own the rights to reproduce or not reproduce the head or b) that I will own the only copies or have save over how many copies are made and sold and the artist may or may not retain the original. That should be discussed and agreed upon before hand.

The issue with Rocco was, IMO, an example of how this can go wrong.

That's the part Kara keeps ignoring. There's virtually no difference in a single person commissioning a headsculpt and paying $500 for it or 20 people commissioning a headsculpt and paying $25 each for it other than the number involved. Commissioning a piece does not automatically grant one the right to recast the item to sell unless it's agreed upon by both the artist and customer(s).

The issue with Rocco was they recasted and sold it out of spite as there was no agreement releasing the "rights" to do so before hand. They felt that Rocco's regular version of the TDKR Batman was too close to the Battle Damaged TDKR Batman so that's why they did what they did. That's a huge difference over agreeing beforehand or during to commissioning the work with intent to sell.

 

[Cheungkinmen]

No but they could (Hypothetically) do "made to order" like alot of the sculptors here do right?

Not the company itself, but Yulli or Kojun could unless they are bound by a contract which I think might be the case.

Kojun used to sell sculpts and full figures before he was hired by HT.

 

[karamazov80]

No but they could (Hypothetically) do "made to order" like alot of the sculptors here do right?

Are you talking legally, or "ethically?"

That's the part Kara keeps ignoring. There's virtually no difference in a single person commissioning a headsculpt and paying $500 for it or 20 people commissioning a headsculpt and paying $25 each for it other than the number involved. Commissioning a piece does not automatically grant one the right to recast the item to sell unless it's agreed upon by both the artist and customer(s).

The issue with Rocco was they recasted and sold it out of spite as there was no agreement releasing the "rights" to do so before hand. They felt that Rocco's regular version of the TDKR Batman was too close to the Battle Damaged TDKR Batman so that's why they did what they did. That's a huge difference over agreeing beforehand or during to commissioning the work with intent to sell.

No Nam. I'm not ignoring anything. I said that the edition size doesn't matter. You are saying that unless it is specified otherwise, re-casting a sculpt someone totally owns is not allowable. Why not? Because you don't think it's cool. Fine. I'm saying that unless the agreement states otherwise, the implication is that ALL rights pass to the new owner, as Pajji says is conventional in his line of work. Same thing. In general though, best this gets ironed out one way or the other because it avoids any issues later, but ownership is ownership.

I know you've got a vendetta against Shortround and that's why you keep harping on this, and that's fine. But I don't have such a bias and am trying to examine this from a more general perspective. Whether or not someone acts out of malice or good intentions doesn't alter the nature of property ownership in my opinion.

 

[pixletwin]

I know you've got a vendetta against Shortround and that's why you keep harping on this, and that's fine. But I don't have such a bias and am trying to examine this from a more general perspective. Whether or not someone acts out of malice or good intentions doesn't alter the nature of property ownership in my opinion.

I have noticed that when anyone presses you on a particular point you tend to attack their motives for posting rather than ceding a point. It's not on topic nor is it really all that necessary (especially for a mod).

Interesting*.




*not really.

 

[karamazov80]

Oh, that's right. Nam is totally objective here.

 

[karamazov80]

It's not on topic nor is it really all that necessary (especially for a mod).

Time to bring out that old custom username, I think. Though your current one is certainly appropriate.

 

[pixletwin]

Time to bring out that old custom username, I think. Though your current one is certainly appropriate.

Hmmm. I guess so?

 

[thenammagazine]

Are you talking legally, or "ethically?"

No Nam. I'm not ignoring anything. I said that the edition size doesn't matter. You are saying that unless it is specified otherwise, re-casting a sculpt someone totally owns is not allowable. Why not? Because you don't think it's cool. Fine. I'm saying that unless the agreement states otherwise, the implication is that ALL rights pass to the new owner, as Pajji says is conventional in his line of work. Same thing. In general though, best this gets ironed out one way or the other because it avoids any issues later, but ownership is ownership.

No, you have it backwards. Unless stated otherwise, the right to recast lies with the artist. Otherwise, by your own admission, since Rainman and just about every other customizer here on the boards don't stipulate to every single one of their customers not to recast his products once they have them, they'd have every right to. Possession of a piece does not equal total "rights" ownership over what happens to it. But please, continue with another, longwinded post only further showing your confusion on the points being made.

I know you've got a vendetta against Shortround and that's why you keep harping on this, and that's fine. But I don't have such a bias and am trying to examine this from a more general perspective. Whether or not someone acts out of malice or good intentions doesn't alter the nature of property ownership in my opinion.

There's no vendetta. He was trolling this thread and you failed to realize that. I simply expanded on why I, and others who'd seen the Rocco incident first hand, already knew his stance on recasting. A shame that as a moderator, you try to pigeonhole people into certain corners to fit your zig-zagging thought process, as in this case I'd guess, poorly attempting to set me up for an infraction because of a "personal attack."

 

[pixletwin]

I think the first infraction I ever handed out was to nam.

 

[thenammagazine]

I think the first infraction I ever handed out was to nam.

And Prog.

 

[pixletwin]

And Prog.

Oh yeah. That's right! I infracted Skiman too once.

 

[thenammagazine]

Oh yeah. That's right! I infracted Skiman too once.

Which he never, ever forgot.

 

[pixletwin]

Which he never, ever forgot.

I know.

 

[karamazov80]

A shame that as a moderator, you try to pigeonhole people into certain corners to fit your zig-zagging thought process, as in this case I'd guess, poorly attempting to set me up for an infraction because of a "personal attack."

That's right. Nothing I like to do better than set you up for infractions. I have forgotten how many I'd given to you.

 

[peterparkernypd]

So, is it possible to have a list or a thread with the name of everyone that supports recasts, in order to let the artists know when is "safe" to negotiate with some members?