Painters and recasters

[pixletwin]

I gotta say this again (sorry pixie) the first "original" sculpt an artist makes is "ART" the he casts that and sells it he is just as good as a recaster... He didnt pay royalties or ask for likeness rights he is a thief of someone elses "ART" just as much a s a recaster

 

[mojo customz]

it is not ok to recast but charging a $1000.00 for a unlicensed item is ok.........very interesting....................
to be clear before freaks here start bashing me -----
both are wrong and there is no right here, it seems that what benefits a freak is what he/she defends.......all should remember ht started the same unlicensed way........

 

[galactiboy]

This thread is an eye-opener.

Yeah, makes you wonder how long before you see some of your work on babyQ's eBay page.

 

[Jen]

Yes, Jen, the first part is pure sarcasm. The second part, is not. I appreciate your feedback, however, as Dave is the creator of this thread, shouldn't he start this 'list?'

I agree he should start it...and I imagine he will when he's able. However, if people know of recasters, it would be helpful if they point them out to a mod or Dave so it can be looked into.

 

[mojo customz]

spoken like a true prodigy

 

[pixletwin]

I agree he should start it...and I imagine he will when he's able. However, if people know of recasters, it would be helpful if they point them out to a mod or Dave so it can be looked into.

Unless your name is nam, you mean.

 

[galactiboy]

I agree he should start it...and I imagine he will when he's able. However, if people know of recasters, it would be helpful if they point them out to a mod or Dave so it can be looked into.

Unless you are Nam though as we will categorically ignore anything he shares with us and possibly use it to bait him into a trap... because that's what mods do

 

[tinister]

Seems to me that supporters of recasting are offering up two defenses that are in conflict with each other:

- The first argument being that recasting is necessary since the sculptors don't make enough duplicates of their work available, or they charge too much for them, or they don't make duplicates at all.

- Then the second argument is that sculptors who make duplicates of their work and offer it to people are just as bad as recasters.

 

[Jen]

it is not ok to recast but charging a $1000.00 for a unlicensed item is ok.........very interesting....................
to be clear before freaks here start bashing me -----
both are wrong and there is no right here, it seems that what benefits a freak is what he/she defends.......all should remember ht started the same unlicensed way........

What matters is the board's and admin's stance on this...and I think that position has been made clear.

 

[Jen]

Unless you are Nam though as we will categorically ignore anything he shares with us and possibly use it to bait him into a trap... because that's what mods do

 

[pixletwin]

I made that joke first. Why you not laugh?

 

[galactiboy]

It's funnier coming from me... although in my defense I was posting it while you were so I didn't see yours until after mine was up

 

[Jen]

Seems to me that supporters of recasting are offering up two defenses that are in conflict with each other:

- The first argument being that recasting is necessary since the sculptors don't make enough duplicates of their work available, or they charge too much for them, or they don't make duplicates at all.

- Then the second argument is that sculptors who make duplicates of their work and offer it to people are just as bad as recasters.

I agree. It's enough to give one a headache. If I were an artist however, there are a few people I would think twice about selling to...so I suppose the thread has served some small purpose.

 

[Jen]

I made that joke first. Why you not laugh?

So sorry.

 

[Pixelpiper]

Speaking as an artist and long-time (and current) author and publisher of copyrighted works, this thread gives me a very creepy feeling.

Selling copies of someone else's work is not only wrong, it's illegal. However, starting a witch hunt, no matter the original premise and compiling lists and blanket banning people is a very slippery slope and itself can have very serious legal consequences, not the least of which would be a quick libel claim.

My advice is to avoid these kinds of threads, don't compile public blacklists and instead focus on informing copyright holders of people stealing their work. Then leave it up to the copyright holder to follow up to gain recourse, whether it be with eBay, the legal system, whatever.

In my travels I've already seen one forum shut down because of the legal s4itstorm operators/mods put themselves in with banning/blacklist practices. Please don't let that happen here.

 

[pixletwin]

It's funnier coming from me... although in my defense I was posting it while you were so I didn't see yours until after mine was up

Why are you posting here? Shouldn't you be trying to futz with the nightmare that is the Lferigno cape?

 

[TheObsoleteMan]

Seems to me that supporters of recasting are offering up two defenses that are in conflict with each other:

- The first argument being that recasting is necessary since the sculptors don't make enough duplicates of their work available, or they charge too much for them, or they don't make duplicates at all.

- Then the second argument is that sculptors who make duplicates of their work and offer it to people are just as bad as recasters.

I don't know that anyone is actually supporting recasting, merely stating why a) recasting exists and b) how hypocritical it is for people who steal others work to ***** about people stealing their work.

 

[aesthetics]

Yeah, lets just shut this thread down .... not.

Finally sculptors can see who they can trust or not. THAT is a good thing!

 

[csi]

I really disagree with this... the two wrongs make a right argument really doesn't hold up. Sculpting a head takes time, effort and talent. It is true that an unlicensed item is "stealing" or at least profitting from another... but if you can't see the difference between creating a piece of art versus straight copying the art then I really don't know what else to say

So it really doesn't take any twisting to make it sound like you are supporting recasters. Doesn't mean your buying or helping them, but you are basically saying the action is justified since the original item is unlicensed.

well that didn't take long did it. If you can't adequately dispute the statement, attack the person making it.

It doesn't matter how much time, effort, or talent goes into the theft of intellectual property, its still theft. Stealing is stealing, justifying based on the level of talent that went in to it won't change that fact. If you knock over a 7-11 with a quick, no talent smash and grab and I execute a masterful, well planned, highly skilled, theft of high priced, highly guarded object, are we not both committing the same crime? Sure I did it what a lot more style and flair, but we are both going to be bunk mates in jail.

If you want to steal intellectual rights from people knock yourself out, but save the hypocritical judgements and justifications to yourself.

And for the record I have never knowingly purchased a recast and have never dealt with Q. I do not support recasters in any way, but at the same time I don't have a high tolerance for hypocrites either.

 

[ZsaszSays]

Sounds good.