AA case begins

lingarn said:

---

Eh, I think he's just making a point, which I will attempt to paraphrase below:

Trying to defend the altruistic intentions of people who throw a prop maker into the lion's den (deserved or not) means that someone else doing similar must also have altruistic intentions, right? I mean, if it was all for the best that AA was brought down, then surely it'd be okay for the same standard to be applied to everyone else making inaccurate helmets?

PLEASE do NOT associate me with these comments. This is an interpretation of SL's post. I see sarcasm, not malicious intent.

Thanks, Lingarn, exactly.

artisanprops said:

---

Really? Hmmm.... I'm surprised You would say that....

He could have decided at any point that what he was doing was wrong and
stoped. Especially when LFL sent him a "Cease and Desist", But his arrogance
is what got him thinking he could profit from "IP Theft", also his arrogance that
made him ignore the warnings, and alas his arrogance that landed him in court..
Unless someone else is pulling his strings, I would have to say it is his fault alone..

If someone Blew the whistle on him and he was directly brought to court without
any warnings I would agree with you

Heh, I know you and I Doug get along like peaches and cream but I'll just mention that AA went to LFL several times trying to get something going and they ignored him. So it has nothing to do with arrogance. That doesn't make what he did right, but it's what happened.

And please try not to read into what people say literally or project motives into them. The point I was making about standards in the replica prop community was clear.

SithLord said:

---

You are. It's rhetorical and I don't mean it literally. It's like well if they are going to rat on a replica helmet maker and play holier than thou then any of us would be justified in doing that. I was being facetious.

Thomas,
I'm really glad to see you elaberated a little more on that comment since it can
be taken in a threatening way

Brak's Buddy said:

---

Please expound on these points and provide some evidence to back them up.

Even if just one member here goes to MR and says this guy is competing against you and infringing copyright, that's a reflection on all of us. This is what I heard happened. Again it's more meant figuratively in the sense that we supported AA at the beginning and were more than eager to obtain as many unlicensed replica props as we could. I completely agree that AA should have ceased production when he received the C&D. But we had many threads on his products on this forum and if we were so righteous we should have boycotted his products and ban mention of them on this forum. But that didn't happen. As evidence accumulated yes there was cause for concern. But there are always two sides to a story and looking at each of them is called being objective. I could have said ya he's wrong he's lying about everything, but what if there is truth? We won't see if if we think everything is a lie. All I did was give him the benefit of the doubt and I was misled. Am I wrong for being misled?

AA probably wasnt aware of the potential goldmine that is trooper gear until someone made him aware, and as a man not too familiar with the prop community (fanboys and nutters in his eyes) probably didnt know what kind of poop storm he was bringing down on himself.
I would imagine the trooper armour timelines and history from the start can throw up a few interesting coincidences. Such as the time SDS starts producing and the time certain people start hating on him (rightly so as it turns out)
I do wonder how differently it would have worked out if AA actually did have in his posession the full ANH armour/helmet molds? The case i'm sure would still have gone ahead but would he be getting quite as much vitriol.
He is being bashed from two distinct angles (which he deserves)
1) His bare faced lies about the molds.
2) His unforgivable decision to try to lay claim to IP rights of a 3D image he knew didnt belong to him but to an artist 30 years dead.

Hypothetically, had he actually been telling the truth about the molds, and indeed did still have in his possession all the original ANH armour molds, do we think he'd be hated on quite as much for what he's doing with regards to the IP theft?
I'm just trying to see through the fog of hypocrisy in all this.
i still say smoke him up like a kipper as it stands now mind you but had he the original molds in his possession? 'Meh'

SithLord said:

---

I'm not defending AA, I'm against the principles of the anti-SDS group and how they attack others...long before there was any evidence. So the only difference is that AA had a website? I've already said that I am disappointed in AA and he lied to me as much as everyone else. But we need to look at ourselves as a replica prop community. We went to MR. We took him down, not LFL. And all for the sake of competition. That's what I am talking about. It has nothing to do with supporting what AA did. AA got himself into this, but he didn't do it all by himself. We cheered him on at the beginning when the first prototypes came out and never did the soul-searching about whether it's right for him to have a website or not that we have done since the complaint. This is about the RPF and about our own conduct, not about AA. I don't question what AA did, nor do I defend it. What I have done is question this hobby and those who try to control or manipulate what is available. I looked at the replicas he made and tried to understand them as much as the next collector. I tried to give him the benefit of the doubt and I was misled. So if anyone wishes to judge me harshly for that then go right ahead. This is just a discussion forum about replica props.

Thomas you're still not seeing the black and white here. It was NEVER about competition. None of the other producers of helmets or armor were looking at AA like this. Those guys are LOW key sellers. They don't advertise, they don't make a living off of their wares, and they don't dare blatantly crap on LFL. Initially they contacted AA thinking he did have something special, planting the seed in AA's head making him see $$$ signs. He decided to go it alone and fabricated many a lie to cover his tracks. Only a complete fool would have gone into a business partnership with this man.

The whole thing was and has been about being misled by AA, telling the world he had THE original molds. When the website popped up and the stunt helmet was revealed big red flags went up about major inaccuracies. Those in the know pointed out the facts about screen used helmets.

We took him down? Thomas LFL/MR are here amongst us as members. AA did this to himself and has only himself to blame for what transpired due to his brash behavior.

Why is this so difficult for the AA camp to comprehend?

SithLord said:

---

Heh, I know you and I Doug get along like peaches and cream but I'll just mention that AA went to LFL several times trying to get something going and they ignored him. So it has nothing to do with arrogance. That doesn't make what he did right, but it's what happened.

And please try not to read into what people say literally or project motives into them. The point I was making about standards in the replica prop community was clear.

Thomas I personally don't have a problem with you.. I'm just someone who
tends to get caught up in the heat of the moment, and may even at times say
things I don't mean.. I like to argue a point just like anyone else as long as there
are no personal or verbal attacks being thrown around. Were Cool on My end..
I don't hold Grudges..

Now back to the Argument lol
Thomas I would have to say that when LFL ignored him.. AA should have, at
that point let it Go.. He may not be an Arrogant Man, but it sure was an
Arrogant approach that he took selling his Product..

SithLord said:

---

Am I wrong for being misled?

No. You aren't wrong. Many were misled and it is a bit arrogant of those who really didn't know to say "told you so" now, but at the same time, it seems to me you are making great efforts to spread the blame around with blanket statements that really don't seem to hold much water at all. Statements like "we told MR" and "we took AA down, not LFL" just seem a bit unfair and incorrect. While I certainly don't know everything, I don't know of anyone who went to MR... and I mean come on... MR had numerous employees here posting actively on the RPF... it isn't like anyone needed to go and tell them anything. Is there anything beyond hearsay on that one?

In regard to saying "we took AA down, not LFL" again, that just holds no water at all. No we didn't. This isn't "our" fault. What, because members here bought AA items? Let me ask you a question. Since it is well known that you and Gino have issues, if LFL went after Gino would you make such a statement, lamenting his demise because members here have supported him and bought items from him? No, I don't think you would. More likely then not, you would applaud his demise and tell people he had it coming and kudos to LFL. You wouldn't be very quick to spread the blame around or take on any yourself with that all inclusive "we." We didn't do this. LFL did. LFL sued Andrew and as much as SOME (like that better Onigiri?) like to take credit for it, this was always in LFL's hands. They spent the money. They are pursuing it. This isn't the fault of the RPF or its members or even the people who bought AA's helmet. As much as I don't care for Matt, this isn't even his fault. Yes, he showed AA a potential market, but AA took this on and ran with it. This isn't Matt's fault or Gino's fault or Jez's fault or the all inclusive "we"s fault. This is LFL and AA and that is it. I just don't understand why you are trying to broaden the net here or trying to diminish the blame. I don't have it out for Andrew nor do I hate him. I don't wish him ill will and I really hate to think about what is probably about to happen to him. Still, HE did this to himself...

2) His unforgivable decision to try to lay claim to IP rights of a 3D image he knew didnt belong to him but to an artist 30 years dead.

Well i for one think it's discraceful that he claimed Liz Moores work as his, to be factual though the IP rights belong to LFL and anyone here hating on someone for ripping off a studio is completely hypocritical.

defstartrooper said:

---

Well i for one think it's discraceful that he claimed Liz Moores work as his, to be factual though the IP rights belong to LFL and anyone here hating on someone for ripping off a studio is completely hypocritical.

This is not about hating someone for ripping off a studio - it's about hating someone for taking the credit for the work of others and being a bare faced liar.

EXACTLY!!!

DARKSIDE72 said:

---

The whole thing was and has been about being misled by AA, telling the world he had THE original molds. When the website popped up and the stunt helmet was revealed big red flags went up about major inaccuracies. Those in the know pointed out the facts about screen used helmets.

We took him down? Thomas LFL/MR are here amongst us as members. AA did this to himself and has only himself to blame for what transpired due to his brash behavior.

Thanks Doug...sure thing no worries.

DARKSIDE72....my impression was that there was disappointment in there not being a deal with AA...that's all. What transpired after that as you describe I can't really argue with.

joepinaaples said:

---

Hypothetically, had he actually been telling the truth about the molds, and indeed did still have in his possession all the original ANH armour molds, do we think he'd be hated on quite as much for what he's doing with regards to the IP theft?
I'm just trying to see through the fog of hypocrisy in all this.
i still say smoke him up like a kipper as it stands now mind you but had he the original molds in his possession? 'Meh'

I think you make a good point. Some would still hate on AA no matter what for ego purposes, etc, but I think the majority of the hobby would have embraced him as the savior of trooperdom had his first helmet turned out to be exactly what we had hoped and expected. I was involved long before AA ever turned anything up and I remember the excitement and the anticipation and I remember seeing the very first prototype pics and I was just kinda stunned... It was like:

"oh boy oh boy oh boy oh buuuuuu... WTF is this?"

It was incredibly confusing and frustrating because we were told these were right off the original molds but it didn't look like it from the very start and it had nothing to do with build... it was the pieces themselves. I really do believe the majority of the members here would have taken a very different pov had AA actually had what he claimed and almost everyone would be lamenting the lawsuit as it would mean the loss of a great piece..

I mean, lets face it, this whole hobby is based on IP theft. You can't deny it. Some try to pretend it isn't or that they stand on some sort of moral highground but they are just blowing smoke up their own butts. The core of this hobby is theft, plain and simple. LFL is simply gracious enough to allow it because most replicators are small time and it is good, free PR. Andrew's IP theft is no different than 1000 people here. Anyone in the prop community who wants to grind an axe over that issue... well... lets see your prop collection. The lying about the molds is something else entirely.

Brak's Buddy said:

---

MR had numerous employees here posting actively on the RPF... it isn't like anyone needed to go and tell them anything. Is there anything beyond hearsay on that one?

I don't know firsthand, ok. But we were all there discussing AA's products and not questioning his rights. And when did MR join the RPF?

Brak's Buddy said:

---

Let me ask you a question. Since it is well known that you and Gino have issues, if LFL went after Gino would you make such a statement, lamenting his demise because members here have supported him and bought items from him? No, I don't think you would.

A valid question, but I'm not lamenting AA's demise, nor would I lament Gino's. But I would not wish that or facilitate that to happen to anyone here.

Brak's Buddy said:

---

More likely then not, you would applaud his demise and tell people he had it coming and kudos to LFL.

For the record, I respect Gino's extensive knowledge and enthusiasm for the hobby. We have our history and have butt heads more than we should have perhaps. But I would not be happy about anyone having that happen to them.

Brak's Buddy said:

---

You wouldn't be very quick to spread the blame around or take on any yourself with that all inclusive "we."

I think it's a different situation. AA was never one of us. Gino is. If one of our own gets taken down by LFL, it's a sad situation. Of course we all have to realize that replica prop making won't always be without risk.

Brak's Buddy said:

---

We didn't do this. LFL did. LFL sued Andrew and as much as SOME (like that better Onigiri?) like to take credit for it, this was always in LFL's hands. They spent the money. They are pursuing it. This isn't the fault of the RPF or its members or even the people who bought AA's helmet. As much as I don't care for Matt, this isn't even his fault. Yes, he showed AA a potential market, but AA took this on and ran with it. This isn't Matt's fault or Gino's fault or Jez's fault or the all inclusive "we"s fault. This is LFL and AA and that is it. I just don't understand why you are trying to broaden the net here or trying to diminish the blame. I don't have it out for Andrew nor do I hate him. I don't wish him ill will and I really hate to think about what is probably about to happen to him. Still, HE did this to himself...

I'm not trying to diminish the blame. Of course we didn't sue AA, and of course it's not anyone's fault here if AA has infringed copyright, but as a replica prop community we gave him an environment of support in which he felt he could flourish and profit...and it turns out in a way that was dishonorable to the collectors. What do we want in the future? I ask myself this question, what if the original maker of the rebel and imperial helmets offered to make them available? How would this forum react? Hell ya! If you take away the legal case and the lies and the endless discussions and the camps, in the end that's what we wanted all along because we are collectors. But it turned out very differently and in the worst way...that those who wanted to collect these helmets can't take pride in their collection. It's really sad...I don't even need to know the outcome of the case because that one photo tells the story.

so i guess it really boils down to the age old recasting faux pas he commited from the outset pure and simple and he will for ever go down in the history books as being the idiot who totally underestimated the replica prop community's eye for detail.
when alls said and done, i dont hate the man, i nothing him

SithLord said:

---

And when did MR join the RPF?

http://www.therpf.com/members/mrcustomercare/

I think there were a couple others as well. They, obviously, aren't very active now, but when MR was selling Star Wars items they were posting and even taking care of customer service issues here on the RPF.

SithLord said:

---

I don't even need to know the outcome of the case because that one photo tells the story.

We can certainly agree on this point. That pic pretty much opens and closes the case for me. It is sad that such an awesome image has come to light under such ugly circumstances.

GINO said:

---

-The most significant thing that separates AA from anyone else in this hobby, is that he basicly was saying the trooper was his design and not LFL's, and that he had every right to do whatever he wanted with it. I don't know of any SW prop maker who would EVER dare make such a claim.

Yes, but that was part of the crux of the matter for me at least...he actually was involved in the making (in whatever fashion) of the helmets. No other prop maker today can say that. When you get a prop from you, TE, or anyone it's from another fan, not from someone who sat there with the *original helmets*. Nobody can deny he was involved in the process, even just pulling the things, which puts him way closer than everyone else to the final product.

Like Gino said, I too am hugely disappointed and wish that things had gone differently.

I can, and did, accept the changes of tact and sales pitches...I've heard and seen that enough time from fan prop makers. I'd even go with his admittance of "fetting the tumblehome", etc.

And it would not be the first time an IP right was found to have been transferred under suspicious circumstances.

BUT...lying about the creator of the helmet, and defaming others involved in the movie to cover that lie? No. No way in hell.

Lord Abaddon said:

---

Yes, but that was part of the crux of the matter for me at least...he actually was involved in the making (in whatever fashion) of the helmets. No other prop maker today can say that. When you get a prop from you, TE, or anyone it's from another fan, not from someone who sat there with the *original helmets*. Nobody can deny he was involved in the process, even just pulling the things, which puts him way closer than everyone else to the final product.

Like Gino said, I too am hugely disappointed and wish that things had gone differently.

I can, and did, accept the changes of tact and sales pitches...I've heard and seen that enough time from fan prop makers. I'd even go with his admittance of "fetting the tumblehome", etc.

And it would not be the first time an IP right was found to have been transferred under suspicious circumstances.

BUT...lying about the creator of the helmet, and defaming others involved in the movie to cover that lie? No. No way in hell.

However the most mind blowing thing I witnessed with you and others. Were your earlier defense of these lies. Even when the recast of the MR stand was brought to attention. When I think many of the lies were quite obvious.

Darbycrash said:

---

However the most mind blowing thing I witnessed with you and others. Were your earlier defense of these lies. Even when the recast of the MR stand was brought to attention. When I think many of the lies were quite obvious.

So now you say AA supporters defended lies? Honestly...

Was the MR stand in the case? Did MR sue AA for the design rights? No, but people here made issue of that and I'm sure brought it to MR's attention.

As far as anyone knew back then, no one else sculpted the helmet and armor so when the armor came out and it was a recast of fanmade armor, the argument was did he have rights to it and could he recast fanmade armor. Then it was found out that Brian Muir sculpted the armor, so all that was left was the helmet with no one accounted for who sculpted it and AA claiming the molds were the sculpture. Those were simple arguments. But it seems you like to construe things to implicate the intentional support of lies.

Lord Abaddon said:

---

Guilty until proven innocent.
Benefit of the doubt.
Etc.

What was mind blowing to the other side was how quickly he was vilified on every little thing possible nearly from the beginning. Several people stated from the get go he was not and did not know anything about the prop community and that maybe the MR stand was brought to him to use. Without the plaque, who would know if they didn't know what MR was?

Not all of us can be the all knowing, all seeing Carnac the Magnificent like you Ben.

Even if he didn't know that it was MR's, he knew that it wasn't his and yet had no problem with throwing it on his vacuum form machine and making his own copies of it.

Seeing as how he used someone else's work for the stand and someone else's work for the armor and lied about having the original molds (as even I could see, and I know jack squat about trooper helmets) and bent the truth and change his pitch numerous times in response to people bringing his fabrications to his attention (I'll leave his lying about actually sculpting the helmets out, since that only came to light during the trial) , I can't help but wonder just how many other "benefits of the doubt" you and others were willing to give him for his lies and thievery before you'd finally see him for the shady human being he is. Not only that, but the fact some of you sound genuinely shocked that he would try to take credit for the sculpt that Liz Moore created, after seeing him try and take credit for the work of others all along (MR's stand, the armor with clear tells from another maker, etc.) is hysterical, bordering on frightening.

Lord Abaddon said:

---

Guilty until proven innocent.
Benefit of the doubt.
Etc.

What was mind blowing to the other side was how quickly he was vilified on every little thing possible nearly from the beginning. Several people stated from the get go he was not and did not know anything about the prop community and that maybe the MR stand was brought to him to use. Without the plaque, who would know if they didn't know what MR was?

Not all of us can be the all knowing, all seeing Carnac the Magnificent like you Ben.

C'mon now Mike. The every little thing you cite are all of the examples of differences between Ainsworth's pieces and the originals. Sorry for SL, but his photos only served to prove what everyone AGAINST AA was saying from the get go, at least in my eyes. The biggest glaring difference was in the back tubes and ear pieces, at least to me.

It boggled my mind that people could not see at least those two differences. I don't know if the vision was clouded by owning a piece of "screen used mold" history or what.

You cats know I am one of the Anti crowd, but I don't think you guys supported lies. I think you were duped by one of the assembly line people from ANH. All of this bitterness regarding this or that member is all horse***** to me. As has been said before, it's all plastic and fiberglass. The debating back and forth is a fun way to break up the day. There were some good arguments for the Pro-AA crowd, but those were few and far between.

Whether the pieces depreciate in value or not is not important to those who bought SDS pieces. If you are like me, you are going to keep what you have and the odds of you ever selling are slim and none. Slim is packing his bags, getting ready to leave. Hell, SL paid a tidy sum of money for one of his prize pieces. Despite some remarks from folks who are markedly anti-community most times, community when it suits them, we are all part of the same Geekdom.

To me, not knowing the full story about Ainsworth when I found out about the deal, I sincerely thought it as some charlatan trying to take and claim a piece of my childhood for his own. That is what hacked me off. I know it seems hokey to some of you, but that is how I personally saw it. I know that all of these things I grew to love as a kid sprang from the fertile imagination of Lucas and his hired gun artisans. Andrew Ainsworth may be a lot of things, but he is NO artisan.

Good Lord Almighty!!!!

Why is this so hard people? Grow up already!!! This whole thread can be boiled down to...

AA Lied! The truth is now out.

Anti-AA'ers are thrilled. They are dancing and yelling "Told ya so". Some are really rubbing it in as payback. They doubted AA and fussed since day one. Regardless of motives, they argued at every turn that AA's claims were crap. Some argued so vehemently they were banned.

Pro-AA's are sad. They are now faced with "Told ya so" and in light of that, they are squirming to avoid making the statement "I was wrong". They drank the AA Kool-aid. They overlooked glaring issues in favor of "a piece of history".

The pro's need to be gracious. The Anti's need to be humble. Gino needs to play nice with other people's pictures. AA needs to panhandle so he can pay his upcoming debts and everyone needs to thank Brian Muir and Liz Moore.

See...
Simple!

Oh yes and mods since the Moog was right about AA after all, you ought to invite him back.

Qui-Gonzalez said:

---

C
Whether the pieces depreciate in value or not is not important to those who bought SDS pieces. If you are like me, you are going to keep what you have and the odds of you ever selling are slim and none. Slim is packing his bags, getting ready to leave. Hell, SL paid a tidy sum of money for one of his prize pieces. Despite some remarks from folks who are markedly anti-community most times, community when it suits them, we are all part of the same Geekdom.

Uhhhh, which piece? I sold my SDS helmets a long time ago...and got them at market price.