Lucasfilm to Strike Back March 7th - Lucasfilm vs Andrew Ainsworth

defstartrooper said:

The judge made no judgement on the design being artistic design or industrial design because there was no case heard.
So actually you cant say the design is considered artistic in the US because no such case has ever been before a court in the US.

Click to expand...

A default in US courts equals a no contest or opposition to the facts presented, thus the facts presented become (as far as The Court is concerned) truthful facts and are entered as such...

........

Re: Lucasfilm to Strike Back March 7th

defstartrooper said:

The reason why someone would still buy a license is simple, they are paying for a brand and an official stamp and they can legally use trademark protected designs to market merchandise like official logos and suchlike.
Why would anyone buy £300 designer jeans when they can get a pair of jeans for £5 ? because they are paying for the brand.
There have been and still are numerous bootleg stormtrooper helmets produced and sold by various people they are readily available everywhere this didn't stop companies like MR and eFX producing stormtrooper helmets and selling all their stock did it ? and that's again because people are paying for the brand and it's official merchandise.

Click to expand...

Agreed.:thumbsup And both MR and eFX Stormtrooper helmets sold very fast.

On the other hand look at the licensed Stormtrooper armors: Rubies and Museum Replicas. They are a thing of beauty... :angel:lol The conclusion is that LFL should get someone to make a perfect Stormtrooper armor. But why I'm afraid we won't see this too soon? :rolleyes


BTW is there someone (a fan, a newpspaer, reporter etc.) taking notes or filming the lawsuit in the court?

While I am no fan of snitches, I wonder how quickly people with that attitude would buckle if it came to being sued into poverty, or spending time in prison? I've been on the good side of the bars, and I can tell you that the OTHER side is no place to be. I am not saying Matt was right in turning snitch to LFL, but I CAN understand it. Nobody is a fan of poverty.

Re: Lucasfilm to Strike Back March 7th

defstartrooper said:

The reason why someone would still buy a license is simple, they are paying for a brand and an official stamp and they can legally use trademark protected designs to market merchandise like official logos and suchlike.
Why would anyone buy £300 designer jeans when they can get a pair of jeans for £5 ? because they are paying for the brand.
There have been and still are numerous bootleg stormtrooper helmets produced and sold by various people they are readily available everywhere this didn't stop companies like MR and eFX producing stormtrooper helmets and selling all their stock did it ? and that's again because people are paying for the brand and it's official merchandise.

Click to expand...

Still, the difference between before and after this ruling... companies DIDN'T do unlicensed products, as they'd be shut down. They HAD to buy a license to sell Star Wars stuff. If you can do that now without buying a license, wouldn't you think MR and all those other companies would have saved the big bucks on the license and just done the pieces without one.

There's a BIG difference between companies and unlicensed fans competing and then two companies competing over the same product - one with a license, the other without. Who do you think would earn the most profit? They could even sell cheaper and still get the same profit as the licensee.

Wait, AA is a scumbag, but fans should have protected him?

Treadwell said:

Wait, AA is a scumbag, but fans should have protected him?

Click to expand...

I know there are fans who STILL think highly of him and defend him.

Yep, sad is'nt it.

Qui-Gonzalez said:

I know there are fans who STILL think highly of him and defend him.

Click to expand...

Eh...it is sad what he is doing to the legacy of those who have actually done the sculpting, Liz and Brian. As far as his sycophants go...even sharks have remora hanging onto them.

defstartrooper said:

And did LFL present any facts pertaining to the stormtrooper design being artistic or industrial ?

Click to expand...

It's copyright protected and thus aesthetic or artistic, the US won't grant copyright protection to utilitarian designs unless they have aesthetic features that separate them from generic utilitarian designs and thus making them aesthetic and granted copyright protection as aesthetic designs... If it was pure utilitarian it would only be eligible for patent protections, once it's granted copyright protection it's considered an aesthetic design...

Copyright protection was enforced in the US judgment against AA, thus the design is copyright protected or an aesthetic design in the US as far as the courts are concerned...

Of important note in the US...

Chosun Int’l, Inc. v. Chrisha Creations, Ltd., 413 F.3d 324 (2nd Cir. 2005)

Read the above conclusion on appeal... Costumes are granted Copyright protected in the US, because they not only serve a utilitarian purpose of 'covering the body' but have a separable aesthetic function of portraying an appearance...

"A costume's utility is in allowing the wearer to pretend to be something else--often a caricature of something else--and it is the artistic choices made in designing the costume that determine its saleability. It is impossible to say whether the utilitarian predominates over the artistic, or vice versa."

"It is at least possible that elements of Chosun's plush sculpted animal costumes are separable from the overall design of the costume, and hence eligible for protection under the Copyright Act. It might, for example, be the case that the sculpted "heads" of these designs are physically separable from the overall costume, in that they could be removed from the costume without adversely impacting the wearer's ability to cover his or her body."

"Similarly, it could be that the sculpted "heads" (and perhaps "hands") are conceptually separable. That is, Chosun may be able to show that they invoke in the viewer a concept separate from that of the costume's "clothing" function, and that their addition to the costume was not motivated by a desire to enhance the costume's functionality qua clothing."


Other cases that are noteworthy...

Mazerv. Stein, 347 U.S. at 218. “We find nothing in the copyright statute to support the argument that the intended use or use in industry of an article eligible for copyright bars or invalidates its registration.”

Nimmer on Copyright§ 2.08(B) at 2-101. “Conceptual separability exists where there is any substantial likelihood that even if the article had no utilitarian use, it would still be marketable to some significant segment of the community simply because of its aesthetic qualities.”

Pivot Point Int’l, Inc. v. Charlene Prods., Inc., 372 F.3d 913 (7th Cir. 2004)

Superior Form Builders, Inc. v. Dan Chase Taxidermy Supply Co., Inc., 74 F.3d 488 (4th Cir. 1996)

All of that case law is nice, but it likely bears ZERO weight on the UK court rulings here. Now, if there were UK cases like this prior to this, that would make more sense to include in this discussion.

Qui-Gonzalez said:

All of that case law is nice, but it likely bears ZERO weight on the UK court rulings here. Now, if there were UK cases like this prior to this, that would make more sense to include in this discussion.

Click to expand...

Yeah I know it has no bearing on the UK ruling, but there is a splinter topic going on in this thread in regards to the US status of the design... Refer to post 120, all my US case law is pertinent to that splinter topic...

You have to follow along

I read that and I thought Gary was making a point about the default judgment. Short answer would be no, LFL did not present that information because it was not needed.

Qui-Gonzalez said:

Short answer would be no, LFL did not present that information because it was not needed.

Click to expand...

No it wasn't presented because there is existing case law that grants the design aesthetic copyright protection, thus the relevance of my case law post...

The UK court also found that AA would likely not be able to succeed on a utilitarian defense against the US copyright claims and thus ruled against him and upheld the US copyright infringement claims, but refused to enforce the judgment against him due to jurisdiction...

Re: Lucasfilm to Strike Back March 7th

........

Re: Lucasfilm to Strike Back March 7th

defstartrooper said:

Carsten AA was producing stormtroopers long before MR ever did and certainly way before eFX did it didn't stop either company paying for a license and producing stormtrooper helmets.
You are underestimating the selling power of an official license.

Quite honestly i find it hypocritical to the point of being ludicrous that a site created by and full of bootleggers that anyone here can condemn another person for bootlegging.
Actually they're condemning him for producing goods within the law of his country as it now stands, so we have illegal bootleggers condemning a legal producer how insane does that sound ?

I condemn AA's business practices personally on the grounds of his actions regarding his continued lies to take away credit for work other artists created and his recasting of fan produced parts and i thoroughly hope nobody ever purchases said goods but i can't condemn him for producing them, i can only condemn the way he does it.

Click to expand...

I think you will find most here are condemning him as a thief. He is stealing credit from really talented people. He has also misrepresented his work as being from the "original molds". There is more than enough evidence to show that is not the case.

I cannot speak for others, but my distaste for the guy stems from the lying. Sell troopers, who cares? Don't try and **** all over the work of real artists when you KNOW you could not sculpt your way out of a paper bag. My opinion of him is he is an opportunist. The guys who talked to him opened his eyes to a business opportunity. He did not have to pad it with lies.

Re: Lucasfilm to Strike Back March 7th

Qui-Gonzalez said:

I cannot speak for others, but my distaste for the guy stems from the lying. Sell troopers, who cares? Don't try and **** all over the work of real artists when you KNOW you could not sculpt your way out of a paper bag. My opinion of him is he is an opportunist. The guys who talked to him opened his eyes to a business opportunity. He did not have to pad it with lies.

Click to expand...

From the few quotes I have seen come out of this new hearing he is still trying to pound home the blatant lie that it was his design...

Andrew Ainsworth said:

“The stormtroopers are now fighting their master. I designed and made this [stormtrooper helmet]. I made it for my own development as an industrial designer.”

Click to expand...

Simply deplorable...

You mean this lie?

Eventually, if you keep telling the lie, you will start to believe it yourself.

Right?

Do you guys know anything more about these two photographs from Jason's site:





Jason - hope it's okay to repost here.

LFL, Ainsworth, Stormtrooper Helmets : The Original Prop Blog – Jason DeBord's TV and Movie Prop Memorabilia Resource

http://www.originalprop.com/blog/2008/06/24/star-wars-prototype-stormtrooper-helmets/

So Andrew is claiming he sculpted what Lucas is looking at in the above photo?