Painters and recasters

[thenammagazine]

I made that joke first. Why you not laugh?

Truth is funnier coming from a moderator.

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.

If this was a public forum, yes. But it's Dave's forum and he can do with it what he pleases.

 

[galactiboy]

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

You mean my unlicensed nightmare of a cape I did get it in today... I think it will work nicely, although I was pretty shocked that the inner robes are just a piece of cut material

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.

How exactly did I attack you? I explicitly said I'm not accusing you of buying, but you are supporting them by essentially saying that since the first action of selling is wrong the second isn't wrong. IE recasters aren't in the wrong... just perpetuating a wrong. And just because you don't agree with me does not mean that my argument/point was not adequete or appropriate.

But I do completely disagree with you and feel that your argument is wrong If you can't see the difference then there's not much use if discussing it further. But at the very least the board views these as two very different things and generally encourages artists to display, share and sell their work while condemming those that only steal from the artists.

 

[ShortRound]

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.

This is a bit extreme. Let's not forget that this is the custom section and everything here is unlicensed.

 

[csi]

How exactly did I attack you? I explicitly said I'm not accusing you of buying, but you are supporting them by essentially saying that since the first action of selling is wrong the second isn't wrong. IE recasters aren't in the wrong... just perpetuating a wrong. And just because you don't agree with me does not mean that my argument/point was not adequete or appropriate.

But I do completely disagree with you and feel that your argument is wrong If you can't see the difference then there's not much use if discussing it further. But at the very least the board views these as two very different things and generally encourages artists to display, share and sell their work while condemming those that only steal from the artists.

your argument is invalid. Just because I find you hypocritical does not mean that I support recasters, again you are trying to twist my words to discredit me and justify your position. I get that the boards supports one kind of stealing and opposes the other, (er..I mean artistry, and copying), as is their right. Doesn't make it less hypocritical.

 

[csi]

This is a bit extreme. Let's not forget that this is the custom section and everything here is unlicensed.

what does that have to do with anything?

 

[galactiboy]

your argument is invalid. Just because I find you hypocritical does not mean that I support recasters, again you are trying to twist my words to discredit me and justify your position. I get that the boards supports one kind of stealing and opposes the other, (er..I mean artistry, and copying), as is their right. Doesn't make it less hypocritical.

Or that you don't agree with it (for whatever reason) and therefor I'm a hypocrite... hmmm; name calling; seems hypocritical

Again, we disagree, fine... but I hope that you avoid any custom artists since you feel so morally opposed to their theft

 

[csi]

Or that you don't agree with it (for whatever reason) and therefor I'm a hypocrite... hmmm; name calling; seems hypocritical

Again, we disagree, fine... but I hope that you avoid any custom artists since you feel so morally opposed to their theft

I am assuming you can read and are just being deliberately obtuse to try to paint me in a bad light and thus strengthen your point. I own customs, and have no problem with customs. I do not own recasts and would not buy one. However, I am not out on the boards trying to justify one and vilify the other. Don't worry, I am in no way advocating they take away your works of art, just noting the ridiculousness of the justifications people are making.

 

[ShortRound]

what does that have to do with anything?

You're comparing bank robbery to a sculptor creating art. If you're gonna do that, might as well shut down the whole customs section. Everything created here can be pretty much put in the same category as a sculptor creating an unlicensed head sculpt.

 

[ShortRound]

Or that you don't agree with it (for whatever reason) and therefor I'm a hypocrite... hmmm; name calling; seems hypocritical

Again, we disagree, fine... but I hope that you avoid any custom artists since you feel so morally opposed to their theft

He has WTB threads for Trevor Groves customs head sculpts.

 

[Dr. Odd]

For some reason, "McCarthyism" keeps coming to mind.

I've been trying to think of the name for the past two days while reading these threads, obviously I need to brush up on my history

 

[karamazov80]

csi, you can feel as you do. Power to you for that. But it should not be difficult to understand that two completely different issues, with a different set of legal and ethical concerns, different kinds of individuals involved in the conduct of their behavior, and different kinds of supporters/opponents could be understood as, wait for it. . .different by any given person. The connection you, Nam, and others have made ("a thief is a thief is a thief") is based on a certain set of premises that not everyone will adhere to. The logical extension is that stealing national security information for the Chinese is no different than stealing a 5 cent eraser from Wal-Mart, and suggesting otherwise makes one a "hypocrite" or in Nam's words "shady and ignorant." Again, that's your opinion. But by no means is it the only legitimate way to think about things.

 

[csi]

He has WTB threads for Trevor Groves customs head sculpts.

That should be "had" WTB threads, as I finally found the heads I needed to complete my Firefly set. But don't let that stop you from a witch hunt and completely trying to bash my reputation so you can feel better about yourself.

 

[csi]

csi, you can feel as you do. Power to you for that. But it should not be difficult to understand that two completely different issues, with a different set of legal and ethical concerns, different kinds of individuals involved in the conduct of their behavior, and different kinds of supporters/opponents could be understood as, wait for it. . .different by any given person. The connection you, Nam, and others have made ("a thief is a thief is a thief") is based on a certain set of premises that not everyone will adhere to. The logical extension is that stealing national security information for the Chinese is no different than stealing a 5 cent eraser from Wal-Mart. Again, that's your opinion. But by no means is it the only legitimate way to think about things.

the majority of what you posted I agree with, except for the bolded part. I do not believe there would be any different legal consequence for a custom artist who created an unlicensed head sculpt and the recaster who made copies of it. If the rights owner pursued either one, the penalty would be the same.

 

[ShortRound]

That should be "had" WTB threads, as I finally found the heads I needed to complete my Firefly set. But don't let that stop you from a witch hunt and completely trying to bash my reputation so you can feel better about yourself.

I'm not trying to do that. Just pointing out that you're kinda being a hypocrite.

 

[Darklord Dave]

I have cleaned up this thread, I want to leave it open. This is a discussion worth having as long as people don't get emotional about it.

I hesitate to make a list but aside from Odell Young, Q, and diver5 - I don't know of any other active recasters that have been on this forum.

Known alias - Brian Cunningham - don't send him stuff.

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

This kind of reasoning is rather naive and just a bit infuriating. I would imagine anyone equating these 2 completely different activities is either trolling, or trying to justify something they know is unethical. It is the FIRST place recasters always go to to try and justify what they are doing.

Just so you know the board's position (which is my personal moral standard):

Selling another person's creative endeavor without the original creator getting any compensation; is morally, ethically wrong on every level. This is what a recaster does.

I'm still of 2 minds about selling something that is based on a previous work but has been significantly altered or is used for a completely different purpose. We would need to address these on a case by case basis. But if the original work is from an individual artist and not a manufacturer - we will always side with the artist.

Creating a work of art based on someone else's intellectual property or likeness, while technically unlawful, is about a million times down the scale of "morally wrong" from stealing an artists work. Especially if there is no active license for a particular property. However any infringement of a license controlled by an friend of the forum will not be tolerated.

 

[TurdFerguson]

Recasting is bad.

 

[Punishment1218]

I guess the situations with Q were before my time here on the forum, but I've heard the stories about the guy. I know I'd be pissed if I saw my stuff being recasted and sold on Ebay......and I know everyones wanting a list of recasters who maybe on here; but has anyone thought of possible people who might be buying for these guys so that they CAN recast? That's a list I'd be wanting to see. I know it's near impossible to formulate, but it's just a thought. And what's stopping these recasters from coming back under a different name. And no offense to anyone, but by reading some of these posts on this thread.....sounds like some people are defending them. Hmmmmm.
Ok. Im done rambling.

 

[Jen]

Odell has been banned a few times after using different names as have people who bought heads for Q to recast.

 

[galactiboy]

Part of what we can do as a community is to try and identify any new recasters or returning offenders in order to at least bar access here. Some of the offenders have MOs that are identifiable and other members have been able to ferret them out.

 

[Lejuan]

Creating a work of art based on someone else's intellectual property or likeness, while technically unlawful, is about a million times down the scale of "morally wrong" from stealing an artists work.

Very happy with this. It passes the 'reasonable person's' test.