Buyer beware DavetheDane

[GINO]

There you go. You ruin a perfectly good post with a last line that is frankly, bonkers.
Many learned people, myself included just dont believe that YOU have these rights.

Let me illustrate a point.

Remember when you defended yourself against brutal attacks for disputing the following:

- That the SDS helmets matched the screen used helmets.

- That the HDPE trooper helmets were prototypes that were for GL approval.

- That all or most of the stunt trooper helmets were made in white ABS, instead of khaki HDPE.

- That Andrew Ainsworth used THE original 1976 molds to make his new helmets.

- That Andrew Ainsworth sculpted the stormtrooper helmet and armor.


Wait a tick.
That was ME! Not you.
I must be bonkers.

That WAS me who was disputing those points. And it was YOU who tirelessly and aggressively lead the (and dare I say -biased) charge against what I was saying.
Did you learn anything from me, or did you come to those conclusions on your own?
The way you talk about them now, it's like you never thought otherwise.


Please excuse my sarcasm. I just wanted to illustrate the irony in Jez's comments directed at me.

.

 

[GINO]

GINO, just curious, but is there proof out there TE recasted the GF parts or could it have been parts he had not sold? It would't make what he did right by any means but would explain some of the the doubt.

It sounds very much like the debate over a banned member from FL's clone trooper armor thats currently being argued over in the 501st and the legitmacy of it.

I highly encourage you (or anyone else who wants to know) to PM GF.


.

 

[Jumpin Jax]

Its illogical to assume that just because WE don't agree with YOUR slightly-skewed (and dare I say -biased?) view, that "we're for recasting anarchy".

Many learned people, myself included just dont believe that YOU have these rights. Hence in our view you dont have any more "rights" than Tony/TE2, AP, GF, CO, RT or a number of other "legitimate armour makers".

Sorry Gino but you haven't done enough to warrant peoples blind faith in believing your version of events.

Man............scary is that I agree with Jez.

"GINO, just curious, but is there proof out there TE recasted the GF parts or could it have been parts he had not sold? It would't make what he did right by any means but would explain some of the the doubt."

Not a thing.
I know for a fact where the TE2 molds came from. It was a copy of Matt's ROTJ revised molds, his old warhorse set. I was there in the room when Matt formed several parts with the sole intent of handing them to Dan Laws, also in the room, when he explained to me the next phase. he then handed the stack of parts to Dan, who went back to Oregon.
Dan modified the daylights out of them as he is an excellent sculptor over months of work.
I recall when I first saw the set; it looked amazing and Dan looked exhausted. He made them, he made them, he made them.
I am a witness to his work. I am whenever I'm in the neighborhood.
Gino can accuse all he wants, he has nothing to corroborate the accusations. Dan made the TE2 molds. I am an eyewitness to these events, there is nothing else to the TE2 mold story.

GF was not recast for the TE2, and for the REAL story...? I suggest interested parties look up Dan's responses here: http://forum.whitearmor.net/index.php?showtopic=1503&hl=

 

[GINO]

I don't deny that Dan made the TE2 molds.
But the stuff Dan was given by Matt was GF recast.

For the thousandth time. Ask GF.


.

 

[Jumpin Jax]

I don't deny that Dan made the TE2 molds.
But the stuff Dan was given by Matt was GF recast.

For the thousandth time. Ask GF.


.

He's a member here. Please do ask him to comment in public, as everyone else has.

And I'm going to quote myself here, as you never did answer my challenge.

"So either show something that proves SOMETHING you've said, or lay it to rest. You have repeatedly said that you can PROVE where the TE2 molds come from that conflicts with the facts of the matter.

So do it.
Now.
Don't post ONE more thing until you have proved that Dan did not make the TE2 molds using old ROTJs at his disposal.
The burden is on you now, you keep saying you can prove it. DO IT.
NOW.
Prove where the TE2 molds came from,
NOW. Not one more complaint, insult, or allegation. Because if you say one more thing about people being liars and thieves or ripping someone off without ponying up what you have been "threatening" to let loose, everyone here will be able to see in high definition that you are not telling the truth.

PONY UP YOUR INFORMATION, or drop it.
J

 

[Amish Trooper]

Ok so this is off topic..:angel

 

[Jumpin Jax]

Ok so this is off topic..:angel

That it is, but there's catharsis in them thar hills.
Could happen

 

[BDK]

Its probably better that GF isn't posting any thread regarding trooper armor, theres a whole nightmare of crap he probably doesnt want to go through again.

 

[GINO]

He's a member here. Please do ask him to comment in public, as everyone else has.

Too timid to PM GF huh?

.

 

[Jumpin Jax]

Too timid to PM GF huh?

.

And there it is, as expected. Nothing to show.

Case dismissed.

 

[Star Wars Helmets]

Nice smokescreen Gino!

The key issue here is (and you keep evading this point) that a lot of other people here cant get their head around how YOU seem to believe that YOU "own" these rights.

1) Who bought and paid for the moulds from Matt? My understanding is that Dave G stumped up 100%, you 0%

2) Assuming you did paid nothing, I presume theres an agreement from Dave G granting you these exclusive "rights"?

3) For the transaction with Matt/TE, was a contract agreed that said all "rights" for every set of moulds (and derivatives of them) passed exclusively to Dave. Were you even mentioned?

I'm assuming you have 1-3 covered. If you do and your case is so water-tight then...

Q - How come you've not sued Matt/TE for breach of contract?

A - Because you don't have a case! Your "rights" to manufacture are as feeble as those you seek to call "recaster".

I keep saying it Gino - from where most people in the hobby sit - you own Jack and really shouldnt be continually pointing the finger at others.

Thats the only problem I have with you

Cheers

Jez

 

[GINO]

1) Who bought and paid for the moulds from Matt? My understanding is that Dave G stumped up 100%, you 0%

Dave was the money guy, I was the hands on guy. But it was our joint project.

2) Assuming you did paid nothing, I presume theres an agreement from Dave G granting you these exclusive "rights"?

Yes, Dave left the hobby and all that remains of our project resides with me.

3) For the transaction with Matt/TE, was a contract agreed that said all "rights" for every set of moulds (and derivatives of them) passed exclusively to Dave. Were you even mentioned?

Contract? Are you kidding me.
No one draws up a written contract over a prop deal.
Were there tons of emails corroborating things I've said. Of course, but that was almost 10 years ago. Regardless of that, just use logic. Why would anyone pay that kind of money without exclusivity? We didn't.

Q - How come you've not sued Matt/TE for breach of contract?

OMG, why didn't I think of that before? :rolleyes

A - Because you don't have a case! Your "rights" to manufacture are as feeble as those you seek to call "recaster".

You are right. We don't have real legal rights.
So you are suggesting because we (or any other prop maker for that matter) don't have legal rights, we shouldn't complain when we get recast?

That sounds very much like pro-recasting rhetoric.
In fact, if you believe what you typed, then you ARE pro-recasting whether you realize it (or want to admit it) or not.

But what is rich is that you feel it was okay when Andrew Ainsworth recast the fan armor.
Even though he had nothing to do with sculpting it. :unsure



.

 

[Star Wars Helmets]

Gino, a very good friend of mine recently bought an Aston Martin DB9

- I drove him to the garage
- He used my Waterman fountain pen to sign the purchase agreement
- I’ve helped him set the car up for his own driving style
- Hell Ive even borrowed it on a couple of occasions.

But at no point have I ever considered that car “mine”

I'm off to bed. Night night.

Cheers

Jez

 

[GINO]

What is it that you consider the car in reference to my trooper situation?
My part in the joint Dave/Gino venture? Or just troopers in general?

Either way, you're wrong on both counts.
Dave and I went into the project together. He had lots of $, I had the experience and know how. We owned them together until he left the hobby.

If you are referring to troopers in general, well then that is the same thing as saying that anyone who doesn't have a license is fair game for recasting (which is basically what you've said multiple times).
That argument is deplorable and the basis for all the people who are pro-recasting.

.

 

[Davy Jones]

Jumpin Jax;
I am curious to know how your version of events goes. According to you Dave just forked over **,*** bucks for a set of molds with the knowledge that Matt was going to continue making and selling suits? Make your side of the story make sense to me.
Lets see Matt's records of the event. Surely he must have a copy of the legal contract and finacial records between Dave and Matt too? Post em up. If not we can assume the molds were beamed to Dave's house because thats the only thing that is able to be proved with solid facts.

Jez, why do you find it so hard to belive Gino? You know what Matt is like and you know what Gino is like. You really trust Matt's word over Gino's? Please.
You are saying Dave owns the molds and not Gino (ignoring the fact that they were partners) because Dave paid the money for them not Gino. So Dave owns the rights too then? Is he then considered the legitimate owner of the rights and able to pass those rights on to Gino? But I forgot. We must see a legal contract on the matter. Please.

Lets use your car example. Suppose your friend decided to move to Italy and he left the car with you. He told you he was giving it to you for you to use and handed you the keys. Now along comes one of his other friends and demands that you show proof of ownership or he is going to take it for himself. Neither of these imaginary people "own" the car. But one of them has the "rights" to the car.

 

[runnriottt]

Semi Civil. :angel:thumbsup

Oh yea... PT recast TE2. :cry

 

[Davy Jones]

That is a shame. TE2 is a nice man and does not deserve to be recast.
He owns a set of his own molds that he bought from Matt with the rights to produce. Well at least thats his story. I think before I believe that I need to see a copy of the contract.

Also the molds and rights had been sold to Dave a long time before.

I echo what Gino says of TE2 being an innocent in the armor rights history. He was not involved enough to know the history or Matt's reputation. So he gets a pass just as GF did when Matt sold molds and rights to him. Beginning to see a pattern here? Someone buys the molds from Matt with the rights and then is legitimate. Because this happened more than once the problem becomes apparent. Matt is a liar and sold many different people something there was supposed to be only one of. There can only be one set of molds and when those have been sold to someone with the rights to make parts from them, anything sold after that is the result of Matt making a new set of molds and selling them to a new person.

Because this PT person never bought a set of molds from any of the people who were sold the rights to make armor or obtained permission "rights" to recast the armor made be TE2, he is clearly a recaster and nothing more.

Now back to the car example. I had said the man left his car in one persons possesion when he moved to Italy. That first person has the "rights" to the car. Even after several other people laid claim to it. Now imagine the car was stolen and the police ask, "Who does the car belong to? Not any of you? Well then you have no more right to the car then the person who stole it from you." Does that seem fair? Any intelligent person can quickly spot the person who "owns" that car.

 

[wooten]

Now back to the car example. I had said the man left his car in one persons possesion when he moved to Italy. That first person has the "rights" to the car. Even after several other people laid claim to it. Now imagine the car was stolen and the police ask, "Who does the car belong to? Not any of you? Well then you have no more right to the car then the person who stole it from you." Does that seem fair? Any intelligent person can quickly spot the person who "owns" that car.

I feel like I'm in third grade again muddling away on story problems on my math exam. :^)

 

[defstartrooper]

To be fair Gino at least as far as i've ever read it he doesn't claim he has the sole rights to produce trooper helmets or armour, what he does claim is he and his partner paid for the moulds and the rights to use those moulds, he made a deal with TE for those moulds with the understanding that no other copies of those moulds were made or anyone else including TE would produce armour or helmets that derive from those moulds.
TE sold parts and casting rights to GF at the same time who was also under the impression he had sole rights to reproduce them.
Gino and GF discussed this amongst themselves after the fact and made an agreement they would both carry on producing stuff,GF later sold onto AP.

Now it seems to me that some people think Gino lays claim to all things stormtrooper but he's not he's laying claim to trooper stuff that derives from that source, a source he paid for sole casting rights to, and he has every right to be pissed that,copies from that source were made and remade and sold and resold as would anyone else here.
Hell he's not even pissed at the people that bought those copies he has no issue with GF,AP,TE2 his issue is with the person that sold those copies TE.

I tend to find myself disagreeing with Gino on more than a few things but on this i can't fault him, and i defy anyone here to say they would not be angry if they were in his shoes on this subject.

 

[GINO]

You nailed it.