AA/SDS recasting issue...

[Darth Mawr]

Originally posted by Trallis@Jan 9 2006, 01:34 PM
recently a member was told by mods that he could not talk about selling his clone armor here because it had parts which he bought from someone who turned out to be a recaster.
I thought this action made sense, because no one on the RPF should be interested in buying recasted stuff anyway, even if they are buying it from someone who bought it in good faith.

[snapback]1154592[/snapback]​

You over looked one inportant bit of information in this statement. The recaster in reference was a BANNED member of the RPF. He was banned as I underestand it for being a recaster.

As it's been mentioned before AA is not a member here AFAIK.

 

[CWR]

First AA was a vacume former. He didn't create or design squat. His so called helmet was the first item to raise many a red flag over the inconsistencies with any screen used helmet.
Secondly trooper suits and helmets are not recent developments.
People have been building suits for a LOOONG time. GF's first suits were sculpted by him.  GT recast his suit. GF and TE collaborated on GF's remastered suit with TE's ANH helmet. TE paid thousands for his screen used helmets and later a screen used ROTJ suit to later resculpt and offer the TE ANH.  Then there are all the others. To claim that these guys recast AA's work is laughable.

Well said,

The fact is TE and others spent a lot of time and money to bring the community more authentic helmets and armor. AA using any derivitive of this to make money is not O.K. Just because he had a vacuum forming machine and made suits off of moulds that were sculpted by someone else does not give him automatic rights to recast items that took others time and money to create.

 

[_Lee_]

Originally posted by DARKSIDE72+Jan 9 2006, 07:03 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DARKSIDE72 @ Jan 9 2006, 07:03 PM)</div>

<!--QuoteBegin-_Lee_

@Jan 9 2006, 01:32 PM
When there were people making suits and selling them,he decided the time was right and didnt want to sit back and let others make money out of something he made..the helmets inparticularly.From what i have seen AA looks to have recast a GF suit,but he is no more and no less the same as every other armor producer out there IMO.They are all guilty of the same thing...making profit from a copyrighted item.

[snapback]1154590[/snapback]​

First AA was a vacume former. He didn't create or design squat. His so called helmet was the first item to raise many a red flag over the inconsistencies with any screen used helmet.
Secondly trooper suits and helmets are not recent developments.
People have been building suits for a LOOONG time. GF's first suits were sculpted by him. GT recast his suit. GF and TE collaborated on GF's remastered suit with TE's ANH helmet. TE paid thousands for his screen used helmets and later a screen used ROTJ suit to later resculpt and offer the TE ANH. Then there are all the others. To claim that these guys recast AA's work is laughable.

[snapback]1154618[/snapback]​

[/b]

Sorry,i seem to have worded my previous post wrong.

I wasnt implying that other guys have recast AA's work.I was merely stating that many people were making money from copying the Stormtrooper design and seeing as though he worked on the originals,he wanted to step into the market himself.I understand the argument here is about AA recasting someone elses work,but i just cannot understand why people can complain when he is doing what many others have done.You could say the same about TE recasting the original helmets/suits he owns,he is still making a copyrighted item and something someone else made.Just because someone owns a screen used helmet,it doesnt give them the green-light to produce replicas of them.

Obviously the argument would be that AA has gone public with his suits and if he is proven to have copied GF's then he is in the wrong.

This is an argument that will never be settled IMO.

 

[CWR]

Originally posted by _Lee_+Jan 9 2006, 11:34 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(_Lee_ @ Jan 9 2006, 11:34 AM)</div>

Originally posted by DARKSIDE72@Jan 9 2006, 07:03 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-_Lee_

@Jan 9 2006, 01:32 PM
When there were people making suits and selling them,he decided the time was right and didnt want to sit back and let others make money out of something he made..the helmets inparticularly.From what i have seen AA looks to have recast a GF suit,but he is no more and no less the same as every other armor producer out there IMO.They are all guilty of the same thing...making profit from a copyrighted item.

[snapback]1154590[/snapback]​

First AA was a vacume former. He didn't create or design squat. His so called helmet was the first item to raise many a red flag over the inconsistencies with any screen used helmet.
Secondly trooper suits and helmets are not recent developments.
People have been building suits for a LOOONG time. GF's first suits were sculpted by him. GT recast his suit. GF and TE collaborated on GF's remastered suit with TE's ANH helmet. TE paid thousands for his screen used helmets and later a screen used ROTJ suit to later resculpt and offer the TE ANH. Then there are all the others. To claim that these guys recast AA's work is laughable.

[snapback]1154618[/snapback]​

Sorry,i seem to have worded my previous post wrong.

I wasnt implying that other guys have recast AA's work.I was merely stating that many people were making money from copying the Stormtrooper design and seeing as though he worked on the originals,he wanted to step into the market himself.I understand the argument here is about AA recasting someone elses work,but i just cannot understand why people can complain when he is doing what many others have done.You could say the same about TE recasting the original helmets/suits he owns,he is still making a copyrighted item and something someone else made.Just because someone owns a screen used helmet,it doesnt give them the green-light to produce replicas of them.

Obviously the argument would be that AA has gone public with his suits and if he is proven to have copied GF's then he is in the wrong.

This is an argument that will never be settled IMO.

[snapback]1154642[/snapback]​

[/b]

I know that no one but LFL has the right to make TK armor but I am greatful that TE and GF spent the time and money to bring the community more accurate props. What I am saying is that I think TE and GF made a difference and improved on what we had while AA just capitalized on their efforts. That is what I am not in favor of.

 

[Art Andrews]

As much as I don't like to, I have to agree with you. What AA has done is not right, but you can't bitch about what AA is doing and at the same time say how great what others have done. No matter how they try to justify it, they had no more right to copy the helmets suits that they made than AA has to copy "their" stuff. If you are going to point a finger then it has to be pointed all the way around. Nothing like a good-old double standard.

Originally posted by _Lee_+Jan 9 2006, 07:34 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(_Lee_ @ Jan 9 2006, 07:34 PM)</div>

Originally posted by DARKSIDE72@Jan 9 2006, 07:03 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-_Lee_

@Jan 9 2006, 01:32 PM
When there were people making suits and selling them,he decided the time was right and didnt want to sit back and let others make money out of something he made..the helmets inparticularly.From what i have seen AA looks to have recast a GF suit,but he is no more and no less the same as every other armor producer out there IMO.They are all guilty of the same thing...making profit from a copyrighted item.

[snapback]1154590[/snapback]​

First AA was a vacume former. He didn't create or design squat. His so called helmet was the first item to raise many a red flag over the inconsistencies with any screen used helmet.
Secondly trooper suits and helmets are not recent developments.
People have been building suits for a LOOONG time. GF's first suits were sculpted by him. GT recast his suit. GF and TE collaborated on GF's remastered suit with TE's ANH helmet. TE paid thousands for his screen used helmets and later a screen used ROTJ suit to later resculpt and offer the TE ANH. Then there are all the others. To claim that these guys recast AA's work is laughable.

[snapback]1154618[/snapback]​

Sorry,i seem to have worded my previous post wrong.

I wasnt implying that other guys have recast AA's work.I was merely stating that many people were making money from copying the Stormtrooper design and seeing as though he worked on the originals,he wanted to step into the market himself.I understand the argument here is about AA recasting someone elses work,but i just cannot understand why people can complain when he is doing what many others have done.You could say the same about TE recasting the original helmets/suits he owns,he is still making a copyrighted item and something someone else made.Just because someone owns a screen used helmet,it doesnt give them the green-light to produce replicas of them.

Obviously the argument would be that AA has gone public with his suits and if he is proven to have copied GF's then he is in the wrong.

This is an argument that will never be settled IMO.

[snapback]1154642[/snapback]​

[/b]

 

[vaderdarth]

I absolutely agree..........what's good for the goose is good for the gander. You can't ostracize one person for doing what others have already done. The original ST design didn't belong to TE or GF, they didn't do the work that made the suit they copied........so therefore......... You can't have it both ways. They are either all guilty or all innocent.

Dave

Originally posted by Brak's Buddy@Jan 9 2006, 04:15 PM
As much as I don't like to, I have to agree with you.  What AA has done is not right, but you can't bitch about what AA is doing and at the same time say how great what others have done.  No matter how they try to justify it, they had no more right to copy the helmets suits that they made than AA has to copy "their" stuff.  If you are going to point a finger then it has to be pointed all the way around.  Nothing like a good-old double standard. 

Originally posted by _Lee_+Jan 9 2006, 07:34 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(_Lee_ @ Jan 9 2006, 07:34 PM)

Originally posted by DARKSIDE72@Jan 9 2006, 07:03 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-_Lee_

@Jan 9 2006, 01:32 PM
When there were people making suits and selling them,he decided the time was right and didnt want to sit back and let others make money out of something he made..the helmets inparticularly.From what i have seen AA looks to have recast a GF suit,but he is no more and no less the same as every other armor producer out there IMO.They are all guilty of the same thing...making profit from a copyrighted item.

[snapback]1154590[/snapback]​

First AA was a vacume former. He didn't create or design squat. His so called helmet was the first item to raise many a red flag over the inconsistencies with any screen used helmet.
Secondly trooper suits and helmets are not recent developments.
People have been building suits for a LOOONG time. GF's first suits were sculpted by him. GT recast his suit. GF and TE collaborated on GF's remastered suit with TE's ANH helmet. TE paid thousands for his screen used helmets and later a screen used ROTJ suit to later resculpt and offer the TE ANH. Then there are all the others. To claim that these guys recast AA's work is laughable.

[snapback]1154618[/snapback]​

Sorry,i seem to have worded my previous post wrong.

I wasnt implying that other guys have recast AA's work.I was merely stating that many people were making money from copying the Stormtrooper design and seeing as though he worked on the originals,he wanted to step into the market himself.I understand the argument here is about AA recasting someone elses work,but i just cannot understand why people can complain when he is doing what many others have done.You could say the same about TE recasting the original helmets/suits he owns,he is still making a copyrighted item and something someone else made.Just because someone owns a screen used helmet,it doesnt give them the green-light to produce replicas of them.

Obviously the argument would be that AA has gone public with his suits and if he is proven to have copied GF's then he is in the wrong.

This is an argument that will never be settled IMO.

[snapback]1154642[/snapback]​

[snapback]1154689[/snapback]​

[/b][/quote]

 

[CWR]

I don't think I would think badly of AA if he had an original suit and was the first to bring that level of authenticity to the community. The fact is TE, GF, and others improved on what we had before and AA has not. If AA would have made a screen accurate ANH suit that was clearly on a Jedi or TE/GF recast, I don't think we would be discussing this. The helmets though not entirely screen accurate could be said to have been derived from some assemblance of original moulds but clearly the armor was not. Everyone that has made TK armor has violated the law to some extent but we are discussing the law within our own prop community not federal or local state laws. The question is what should or can be done about the violations within the RPF community?

 

[DARKSIDE72]

Originally posted by Brak's Buddy@Jan 9 2006, 03:15 PM
As much as I don't like to, I have to agree with you.  What AA has done is not right, but you can't bitch about what AA is doing and at the same time say how great what others have done.  No matter how they try to justify it, they had no more right to copy the helmets suits that they made than AA has to copy "their" stuff.  If you are going to point a finger then it has to be pointed all the way around.  Nothing like a good-old double standard. 

Of course no one can justify what they have copyed without a license to do so. The difference between GF,TE , and "the others" is they were for the most part low key in their sales. Fans selling to fans quietly. AA poped up with a big fancy website and blatantly spouted off "buy the original helmets from the original molds etc etc" (debunked) $800 a pop etc and now the same with this armor recast off of fans work. Advertising all over the place, slapping LFL and the prop licence holders dirrectly in the face. There is a big difference.

 

[Lord Abaddon]

Originally posted by CWR@Jan 9 2006, 03:33 PM
I don't think I would think badly of AA if he had an original suit and was the first to bring that level of authenticity to the community.  The fact is TE, GF, and others improved on what we had before and AA has not.  If AA would have made a screen accurate ANH suit that was clearly on a Jedi or TE/GF recast, I don't think we would be discussing this.  The helmets though not entirely screen accurate could be said to have been derived from some assemblance of original moulds but clearly the armor was not.  Everyone that has made TK armor has violated the law to some extent but we are discussing the law within our own prop community not federal or local state laws.  The question is what should or can be done about the violations within the RPF community?

[snapback]1154705[/snapback]​

I would say that AA has indeed helped improve upon what already existed...his products show more definitively what some of the ANH helmets had to them, and possibly some of the armor.

Remember, in that thread only a few pieces were alleged to have been copied. Some were already being suspected as original ANH. Others were yet to be determined by those here.

I think in it's own controversial way, we are ALL way better educated to the crazy nuances, changes, differences, and diversity of TK armor because AA came out of the closet and decided to go out there with his stuff.

 

[voice in the crowd]

Originally posted by DARKSIDE72@Jan 9 2006, 07:03 PM
First AA was a vacume former. He didn't create or design squat.

This statement is not fact it is a belief of some people on this board. Until this point is proven it cannot be stated as a fact as you have used it DARKSIDE72. Andrew Ainsworth has stated he sculpted the original stormtrooper pieces and vacuum formed them for the movie it may or may not be true but there is no evidence yet that he didn't. When that evidence comes along please use it until then this comment is misleading to anyone reading this thread.


Sory for digressing anyway back on topic in my opinion here is what should happen if AA is proven 100% to have recast / stolen other peoples work -

If AA has recast GF pieces in his sculpt then he cannot obviously be banned as he isn't a member here.

However his products should then not be discussed or shown on this forum the same way any other recaster is treated. Showing and discussing recast props if effectively an advertisement to the unscrupulous. GF is a member of this board and if his work has been used regardless if he made his sculpts based on AA's original work it is still recasting his work.

If AA has recast TE pieces the treatment should still be dished out the same as to any other recaster even though TE is no longer a member of this forum. Because someone has left it should not diminish their rights to be protected by the COC.

I don't think there is anything in the COC about people who have left the boards but I still don't think it fair that if someone leaves that it is then fair game to recast their work. Maybe the MODs have something to say on this unusual issue of a former members work being stolen. Possibly something could be added to the COC.

One thing for certain recasting must be proven 100% without doubt before action is taken.

In reality there doesn't really seem to be any course of action that will make any difference to AA/SDS if proven guilty (in the high court of the RPF ).

What are peoples suggestions if AA/SDS proven guilty?
Boycott products (the people who argue against SDS don't buy his products anyway so it will make no difference), no discussion of SDS products thus limiting advertising to potential customers who frequent these boards, burn him at the stake...... What?

I just don't know what people want to happen if these allegations are proven to be true. The MODs should possibly step in to decide what should be done about this situation.


Cheers Chris.

 

[Lord Abaddon]

Originally posted by DARKSIDE72+Jan 9 2006, 03:43 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DARKSIDE72 @ Jan 9 2006, 03:43 PM)</div>

<!--QuoteBegin-Brak's Buddy

@Jan 9 2006, 03:15 PM
As much as I don't like to, I have to agree with you.  What AA has done is not right, but you can't bitch about what AA is doing and at the same time say how great what others have done.  No matter how they try to justify it, they had no more right to copy the helmets suits that they made than AA has to copy "their" stuff.  If you are going to point a finger then it has to be pointed all the way around.  Nothing like a good-old double standard. 

Of course no one can justify what they have copyed without a license to do so. The difference between GF,TE , and "the others" is they were for the most part low key in their sales. Fans selling to fans quietly. AA poped up with a big fancy website and blatantly spouted off "buy the original helmets from the original molds etc etc" (debunked) $800 a pop etc and now the same with this armor recast off of fans work. Advertising all over the place, slapping LFL and the prop licence holders dirrectly in the face. There is a big difference.

[snapback]1154716[/snapback]​

[/b]

We won't know what is "debunked" until the courts come out with the information, otherwise that is all speculation and supposition.

As for the difference you talk about in being "low key"...Marco was not. GF was not. FX Armor was not. Wookie Cantina was definitely not. And now AA is not. GF paid, unfortunately, for that. From what I know Marco, FX, and WC were C&D and that was the end of them. So you can't say AA is the first one. He might be the loudest, but he is also the only one with original ties to SW and, allegedly, a legal leg to stand on in his and his legal team's viewpoint. There in lies the BIG difference.

 

[CWR]

Originally posted by Lord Abaddon+Jan 9 2006, 12:44 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Lord Abaddon @ Jan 9 2006, 12:44 PM)</div>

<!--QuoteBegin-CWR

@Jan 9 2006, 03:33 PM
I don't think I would think badly of AA if he had an original suit and was the first to bring that level of authenticity to the community.  The fact is TE, GF, and others improved on what we had before and AA has not.  If AA would have made a screen accurate ANH suit that was clearly on a Jedi or TE/GF recast, I don't think we would be discussing this.  The helmets though not entirely screen accurate could be said to have been derived from some assemblance of original moulds but clearly the armor was not.  Everyone that has made TK armor has violated the law to some extent but we are discussing the law within our own prop community not federal or local state laws.  The question is what should or can be done about the violations within the RPF community?

[snapback]1154705[/snapback]​

I would say that AA has indeed helped improve upon what already existed...his products show more definitively what some of the ANH helmets had to them, and possibly some of the armor.

Remember, in that thread only a few pieces were alleged to have been copied. Some were already being suspected as original ANH. Others were yet to be determined by those here.

I think in it's own controversial way, we are ALL way better educated to the crazy nuances, changes, differences, and diversity of TK armor because AA came out of the closet and decided to go out there with his stuff.

[snapback]1154718[/snapback]​

[/b]

I agree that some of us have become more educated about TK armor in general while discussing AA's work but my opinion is that the products themselves have not improved on what GF or TE were offering prior. It may be that a couple of parts were cast from original masters but that has still yet to be proven.

 

[RKW]

Originally posted by _Lee_@Jan 9 2006, 07:34 PM
Obviously the argument would be that AA has gone public with his suits and if he is proven to have copied GF's then he is in the wrong.

This is an argument that will never be settled IMO.

[snapback]1154642[/snapback]​

Well if you read the SDS thread you should have worked out for yourself that AA has copied another members work, atleast 80% of it.

He was also found to have recasted MR's helmet stand although personally I couldn't give a rats ass over a stand but its something else to consider.

Now the moral/ethical dilema of how he produced his new armour put a side the real issue is that he continues to falsely advertise his product, even to customers who ask directly. So it's simply an issue of whether the RPF should be condoning such behavior.

 

[DARKSIDE72]

What you can't grasp is the concept of accuracy which can be measured. (and has been over and over) It isn't speculative.

The original molds tout has been debunked along with every other claim AA has made. AA is a liar and technically a thief. Lets not forget the brazen recast of MR's remote stand. And now recast armor sculpted by a fan GF.

 

[Art Andrews]

darkside, I am not against you here, and I am certainly not in favor of AA, but lets not give too much credit where it is not due. GF didn't "sculpt" the whole or even the majority of the suit he sold. He simply recast (by permission) one of TE's suits and then cleaned it up. Yes, he did work to it, but I think you are giving the false impression (unintentionally) that AA has recast GF's sculpt. That simply isn't true. In fact, I am not even entirely sure that is a GF piece at all. Looks more like one of TE's older pieces to me. Either way, two wrongs never make a right and in my opinion AA is wrong to use these pieces but lets not lead people to believe that AA "recast armor sculpted by a fan." He didn't. IF it is GF armor he recast (and not TE) then he recast a set of RotJ armor that had been cleaned up by a fan. Doesn't make it any more right but I think there IS a difference between this and recasting a custom sculpt.

 

[DARKSIDE72]

I see where your coming from Braks, and I stand corrected on the TE,GF suit origin. Matt owned the ROTJ suit and turned it into an ANH suit. He turned his property into something different. So it is a custom sculpt is it not?

 

[Trallis]

Originally posted by Darth Mawr+Jan 9 2006, 02:14 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Darth Mawr @ Jan 9 2006, 02:14 PM)</div>

<!--QuoteBegin-Trallis

@Jan 9 2006, 01:34 PM
recently a member was told by mods that he could not talk about selling his clone armor here because it had parts which he bought from someone who turned out to be a recaster.
I thought this action made sense, because no one on the RPF should be interested in buying recasted stuff anyway, even if they are buying it from someone who bought it in good faith.

[snapback]1154592[/snapback]​

You over looked one inportant bit of information in this statement. The recaster in reference was a BANNED member of the RPF. He was banned as I underestand it for being a recaster.

As it's been mentioned before AA is not a member here AFAIK.

[snapback]1154628[/snapback]​

[/b]

I realize that, but why should that matter? That's what this thread is asking. Should AA be treated like nothing is wrong with what he is doing simply because he has never signed up for a membership. The rpf can have a position on non-rpf members even if we never banned them. This is because it's not whether we banned them that matters, it is what they did. And what AA did was this: recast someone elses work, lie that it was his original mould, and sold it to members here under those false premises.

 

[exoray]

Originally posted by vaderdarth@Jan 9 2006, 10:05 AM
Oh and for those that keep implying they have connections to the LFL legal team against AA and continuously provide us with a play by play of "inside information regarding this case"......it is not only improper to "leak" information you have to the RPF,  it's against the law.   The LFL legal team knows this full well.  This could be grounds to have the case dismissed.  Just a word to the wise.

[snapback]1154440[/snapback]​

If this was directed towards me (since I am the only one that has entered any legal facts into this thread) I have no connections at all to either side, but I did do the foot work to request, pay for, scan in and then publish for all (free of charge) all the current public domain and 100% legal files on the court record for the LFL v SDS court case... I have never seen anyone on any forum leak any "inside" information on the case, so please stop trying to play up what has been released on the court case as tainted...

**EDIT I would also like to clarify that I did not obtain all the documents I posted some of the earlier ones were paid for and obtained by The One We Are Not Allowed To Speak Of

What I said about the RPF as well as members of the RPF now being part of this legal issue is fact positive, and public domain information, and I stand by saying it...

Originally posted by Brak's Buddy@Jan 9 2006, 04:32 PM
GF didn't "sculpt" the whole or even the majority of the suit he sold.  He simply recast (by permission) one of TE's suits and then cleaned it up.  Yes, he did work to it, but I think you are giving the false impression (unintentionally) that AA has recast GF's sculpt.  That simply isn't true.

[snapback]1154760[/snapback]​

The parts that I'm most bothered with is the AB plate that is an original GF sculpt not an original part...

 

[Apollo]

Well I am voting with my wallet.

I was going to get a set of Armour but after the Helmet Fiasco I decided to wait and see what he put out.

Needless to say I am extremely disapointed with AA and he will not be seeing anymore of my money.

 

[Darth Mawr]

I so want to believe AA. I don't know why, other than I empathise with his situation. I try to stay on the fence in reference to AA but even I realise that if he had original molds then there would be no need for a 'prototype' suit prior to his final suit that he his offering.

I don't know why everyone is so quick to judge now that AA has been taken to court. I see a lot of people who tout thier opinions as fact. They post pics and say that 'proves' this or that.

I could see the debate in the days prior to LFL's law suit but now that it's in the hands of a judge I tend to shy away from absolutes as though I know something that everyone else does not.

Even common facts do not matter here, only what the court see's as facts. There is no guaranty of justice in a courtroom. That is usually left for movies and TV. The judge will rule and then the real debating begins.