Shapeways and "recasting"

I'm also concerned and have been for a while. I've posted in the past about this topic and have always been told we don't need policies. How would you feel, in general Megatron, if someone did something like the key, but don't he back moved the circles in a different position? Or moved the nicks around.
I think I have already hit upon that
 
Zenix, your examples are wrong. It'd be like we're both doing Boba Fett helmet and I come up with a design for the inside and you use my design for yours, then, you sell it.

This is the fundamental issue. The using of the other persons design. Gordon
Gekko disagrees for some reason and hasn't explained, but the settlers of Catan example is a very good one, and if you haven't yet, please go back and read the article.

3D Printing Settlers of Catan is Probably Not Illegal: Is This a Problem? | Public Knowledge

The reason I can't make Settlers of Catan and sell it is because one, the trademarked name, and two, the copyright of the images. i'm still allowed to use hexagons, have it work the same way, have wood blocks that are exactly the same length, have houses and cities that are the same length and height of the settlements used in the game, but what i can't copy are the exact way he wrote the words by coping the words, word for word, or using the pictures he used. That's the issue here.

Knock off Louis Vatton bags are seen to be illegal because of one: them using the name which is trademarked. two: selling on the street corner without a license - irrelevant. and three: using the logo that's printed on the bag which is trademarked. the dimensions and size of the bag are not copyrighted and you can make another bag with those same dimensions, because it's not the dimensions and shape that is copyright-able. information like that does not fall under IP laws.

Works Unprotected by Copyright Law (BitLaw)
 
Okay, Zenix is doing the "what if I move one thing one mm, is it copying?"

My question between Megatron and Zenix.

A.) Did Megatron create from his own imagination an aspect of a prop that was unseen and unknown in the original prop?

B.) Did Zenix then copy said detail ( regardless if he moved one element one mm or not)?
 
In response to Montegar,

Where does it become copying? Megatron has some circles and lines on the back of his key. Am I allowed to have different circles and lines in other positions? Larger diameter circles in the same relative position? I feel it's far too vague to simply say no copying.

There is something I designed based on pictures no one else had. Someone else took the pictures of my final design and added those details. He should be asked to remove them too?
I think you are missing the point, as you continue to bring up examples like China, other companies, and rules outside of the RPF. You need to understand that they are irrelevant to this discussion.

You yourself, directly admitted to copying the design that Megatron created himself, and now you are asking how that is copying? You are also mentioning ways that someone could try and get away with copying someone's work as an explanation as to why it's not copying.

Your original intent was to copy Megatron's design because you didn't think it was against the rules. Even if you had changed a little detail here and there, you still intended to copy his original creation. You didn't come up with it on your own. Again, before anyone decides to throw out the "he didn't come up with it either" argument, yes he did. We are talking about details that are Megatron's own creation. This is the single most unambiguous part of our rules.

It is very true that if you change certain details it does make it harder to tell what is a copy and what you came up with yourself, and we might not be able to do anything about it. But if it really is someone's intent to continue to copy the work of other members, it will probably only be a matter of time before it becomes apparent.

The following is not directed a you, as I believe that you are trying to understand how we do things here, but more of a way giving you background on what we have noticed when dealing with these arguments over the years.

Unfortunately, individuals that don't like or agree with our rules, will always attempt to muddy the waters with every possible extemporaneous thought or possibility, attempting to create as much confusion as possible. They hope this confusion will help them explain why they are not breaking the rules or worse yet, why the rules don't apply to begin with.
 
Last edited:
if we're coming back to talk specifically about the tardis key again, then... my understanding is that the detail on the back is the Constellation of Kasterborous...which isn't Megatrons design either. It was just his idea (or was it the community's) to put it on the back of the key, since it's also on the back of some of the other Tardis keys.

Which brings me back to my point.. the only copying I did was the copying of the IDEA to put the constellation on the back of the key, too. As I said... I liked the idea. not sure why you called me dishonest, Gekko.
 
This is the fundamental issue. The using of the other persons design. Gordon
Gekko disagrees for some reason and hasn't explained, but the settlers of Catan example is a very good one, and if you haven't yet, please go back and read the article.

You're talking about the world at large, I'm talking about the RPF and the way we operate and hopefully respect each other.

My only question is: Did you copy your design from Megatron (and I understood from your previous posts that you did)?

If you did, refer above to Montagars post. It's not considered bad form, it's not allowed on the RPF.
 
Did I put circles and lines on the back of my key in the Constellation of Kasterborous pattern too, just like megatron did, and just like were there on the back of several of the other tardis keys?
 
Okay, Zenix is doing the "what if I move one thing one mm, is it copying?"

My question between Megatron and Zenix.

A.) Did Megatron create from his own imagination an aspect of a prop that was unseen and unknown in the original prop?

B.) Did Zenix then copy said detail ( regardless if he moved one element one mm or not)?


Like all the works I do here it is a group effort and I put what the groups wants on the item..They say we want this on it or maybe add this spot too. Then everyone agrees on the final out come and then I make it. That's why its called the RPF version. I have the input of those that want to contribute.
 
Like all the works I do here it is a group effort and I put what the groups wants on the item..They say we want this on it or maybe add this spot too. Then everyone agrees on the final out come and then I make it. That's why its called the RPF version. I have the input of those that want to contribute.

interesting...


Anyway....

I'm packing now for a cruise and leaving soon. I can't continue this until return, which will be over a week from now.


I understand that it is the rpf's belief that people shouldn't sculpt something on their own that looks like something someone else did. For this particular issue, I've removed the listing and it won't be back until the details are more accurate.

I do think laser scanning issues should be discussed, as well as more on 3d models.
 
not sure why you called me dishonest, Gekko.

I said Intellectually dishonest, there's a difference.

Montagar was crystal clear in what the rules regarding this issue on the RPF are, and yet you continue to try to run rings around the issue.

Montagar is still giving you the benefit of the doubt, but to me, you are putting up defenses to your copying that we have seen many times in the past from recasters.
 
Like all the works I do here it is a group effort and I put what the groups wants on the item..They say we want this on it or maybe add this spot too. Then everyone agrees on the final out come and then I make it. That's why its called the RPF version. I have the input of those that want to contribute.

Regardless if it's group think or not, it is still something you initiated and clearly falls under what Montager posted about "no copying of members" work.
 
As to the Key I have already stated it has been recasted before in another thread and the items seen on ebay.
The RPF's asked to have the Constellation on the back as at the time and still for now no one knows what on the real ones. Most other versions are double sided of the front.
The RPF version was done many years ago.
 
Zenix hits on a very good point I think. Indeed if it isn't Megatron's design but only an idea then how is that recasting? I'm just wamting clarification on that
 
There are a lot of issues going on here...

Let's say one person instigates the creation of a replica prop, does all the research necessary to create a replica (whether or not that research is provided by the community is irrelevant) and then makes a replica available for sale.

Now another person comes along and says "hey I can make that too and sell it" or "I can do that for less" and uses the work of the previous person as a reference without making significant changes to the replica where it could not possibly be confused with the work of the previous person- that's a no no.

If you were to scan another board member's prop to use as a reference for your 3D model without their consent and based your new work on that prop then you are in violation of the rules. If you want to scan a Han in carbonite you better have access to the original. The method you use to copy or reproduce the work of another board member is irrelevant.

Since I publish a lot of tutorials I often use Creative Commons Licenses. When I write a tutorial for my work I may have intentions of selling I release it under a Creative Commons Non-Commercial Share-Alike License. That means that you are free to duplicate, re use or remix the work of another individual for personal use but you must always credit the source if you publish it. Attempting to commercialize the work is not allowed without the consent of the original creator. If I use the work of another individual as part of my work then I am bound by the license under which their work was released- in this case I am required to release my work under the same type of license. If I have no intentions of commercializing my original work (or I simply don't care if someone else commercializes it) then the tutorial is released under a Share-Alike License so anyone else can do whatever they want with it- but they still must credit the original source.

Ultimately when we are talking about making accurate replica props as more information becomes available the more individual replicas will look like each other- it is inevitable and since we all want accurate replicas of what we see on the silver screen or TV that is the ultimate goal. The sharing of information that allows us to achieve that goal is why we are all here. What matters is if you took the information and work of another board member as a source for your work. The method of your work matters not- what matters is that it is your own work from the beginning, especially if you are going to commercialize it.

If you are going to sell a prop then you have to do the research to know what is the difference between the actual prop and what is another board member's interpretation of the actual prop based on all available references at the time of creation. Never assume that another board member's replica is accurate to the original and that by using it as a reference you are not technically copying their work. A great percentage of the time there are many details of the actual prop that are unclear or simply unavailable and that is where personal interpretation comes into play. Duplication and subsequent selling of that personal interpretation is what can get you into trouble.
 
Last edited:
if we're coming back to talk specifically about the tardis key again, then... my understanding is that the detail on the back is the Constellation of Kasterborous...which isn't Megatrons design either. It was just his idea (or was it the community's) to put it on the back of the key, since it's also on the back of some of the other Tardis keys.

Which brings me back to my point.. the only copying I did was the copying of the IDEA to put the constellation on the back of the key, too. As I said... I liked the idea. not sure why you called me dishonest, Gekko.

Did I put circles and lines on the back of my key in the Constellation of Kasterborous pattern too, just like megatron did, and just like were there on the back of several of the other tardis keys?


Oh if only it was just about the details of the constellation.


Actually Zenix, it's more than just the constellation on the back. There's several details that originated with Megatrons key that ONLY appear on his key and not even on the screen used key. A direct recast available on eBay and the Utopia Base McMoy key (both a copy of the megatron key) that you also copied off Megatrons key. Only one McCoy key maker I know of made their own original design totally devoid of these details based entirely on photos of the screen used key.

There's the detail that the bottom stick (the one that would be put into the lock) is the same thickness of the main body as is the seal of Rassilon which is also in the same width. Both details originated on the original Megatron McCoy key run. there's the fact that the side wings are stepped only on the front but it's flat across the back to make more room for the constellation, both of which originated on the Megatron key. Even the recasts have stepped wings on both sides as they only double cast the front of the key twice. Even the four strings on the front of they key that typically have the beads on them are present on yours, another detail that originated on the Megatron key though yours is minus the beads. Only copies of the Megatron key, direct recasts and Utopia Bases cleaner remolded copy of Megatrons key use these details taken from the Megatron keys, all details originated by the Megatron key but only yours used all of those details originated by Megatron minus the beads on the front. Only one other maker I know of doesn't use those details and that is Mooncrest Models who completely originated their own sculpt based only off screen used key pictures which are posted in Megatrons interest thread that members found for Megatron online and feature none of the details only found on Megatrons sculpt. Considering the availability of screen used key pictures that show other details and the details on your key that aren't on the screen used key that were originated by Megatrons key run it is pretty clear where you got your details from and what you based your key on.


Now is the time I have to say that I brought this to Megatrons attention. I ordinarily wouldn't have but when I looked closer and found the details on this Shapeways piece matched almost perfectly to Megatrons details, I thought I would bring it to his attention. I'm not trying to stir up a bees nest and I'm not trying to get someone in trouble or brown nose to Megatron and if it were just a case of the constellation on the back I wouldn't have said anything but there's more details than that which I have pointed out that originate ONLY with Megatrons keys and known recasts and copies of that particular key and ONLY Megatrons key has ALL of them at once. I realize there are people that will say "it is just a McCoy key and that's what it looks like" and skip those details but those are tells. They are fingerprints of Megatrons style which we have already seen copied and are only on known recasts and copies. If this Shapeways piece were based off the screen used key pictures those details wouldn't be there. Hell even if he based the key off a recast the flat back wouldn't be there because ONLY Megatrons key has that. Considering Megatrons interest thread features a full turn around photo of his prototype from the last run I would say it's pretty easy to see the details match.

Screen Used:
2054l50.jpg


Megatron Prototype:
14waqf6.jpg


Recast:
33ylx6s.jpg


Shapeways:
2j9j5v.jpg

vhrm1z.jpg


And for the hell of it, the Mooncrest Models original sculpt based only on screen used key pictures:
2llj413.jpg


If someone can tell me that the key that was being sold on Shapeways is based solely on the screen used key I will eat my hat without salt.
 
If taking details from reference pictures of creations of others is not allowed then the rules on the rpf should be more clear on this. I understand now the general feeling expressed by Montegar, but I'm juts saying, and I know that Megatron agrees, we should have a policy describing this for new members. I first modeled that key last summer, just a couple months after joining, and sure, since the member guidelines dont even mention digital recasting aside from paper props, it's unclear.
 
Last edited:
This thread is more than 12 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top