Ill probably get my head bitten off but....

[_Lee_]

Firstly,although i am relatively new here, i have been collectin for a while and have been following many recent threads,both here and at other forums.The main point in this thread is basically to put my opinion out there and see how many others feel the same way.

One particular subject really bugs me,and that subject is recasting/recasters.Now i know this may infuriate many people but i am getting sick to death of reading up how so many people are getting annoyed because somebody has apparently recast their work.This is sometimes laughable at times because the so-called 'cheated' parties,have done nothing more or nothing less that the people who recasted their work or design.For crying out loud,SW costumes are copyrighted items and there is no argument for any recaster IMO.Whether it be ST,TP,CT there is no way anyone can lay claim to anything unless you are Mr Lucas.Sometimes it makes me understand why Lucas is the way he is with regards to copyright infringement,but then you get people who think they have the right to act like Lucas because they are annoyed because people are infringing their work :rolleyes

At the end of the day,if you own rights the items...moan till your heart is content,if not then stop moaning and "move along"

Lee

 

[KevVader]

.....you may want to put some salt & pepper on your head.....

 

[DaddyfromNaboo]

Originally posted by _Lee_@Jan 27 2006, 10:10 PM
Firstly,although i am relatively new here, i have been collectin for a while and have been following many recent threads,both here and at other forums.The main point in this thread is basically to put my opinion out there and see how many others feel the same way.
...

Lee

well, I guess you didn´t do it properly, because this issue really has been discussed to length. And yes, your arguments have been brought up several times.

So, KevVader is right, you better shave that head so the feast can begin :lol

Actually, I think this thread won´t last too long, since it is a bit obsolete

Michael

 

[Nexus6]

*fixes some popcorn & pulls up a chair*

 

[_Lee_]

Ok guys,sorry about that

I have only been reading up on discussions from the past month or two and havent really looked back on older threads.It just seems as though a new thread starts up every few days about recasting,and it seems i just started another :angel

 

[SethB6025]

Or hotsauce, at least it might deter a few bites. You may want to do some homework, by the COC of the RPF, casting a screen used item is okay. (This is generally accepted in the prop world) However, RE-casting that cast, is not okay. Some see a problem there, most don't. In this neck of the woods, it's like it, or lump it. Really, how would you feel if you plunked down a bunch of cash on a real prop, risked damaging or destroying it to cast it, putting endless hours into producing an accurate item (whether you sculpted from scratch or cast an expensive prop), then having some scumbag who has minimal dollar investment & minimal time investment steal your work. A re-caster rarely cares about the quality of the prop, as it is often done as a means to make some easy money. It's about respect & trust. This is supposed to be a community. Yes, the endless arguements do become tiresome, but having your work ripped off is far worse.

 

[Gigatron]

You're getting tangled up in the differences between copywriting, recasting and intellectual properties.

Noone here has recast any of LFL's property. At most, we are guilty of copywrite infringement.

Anybody here who recreates any prop or costume as seen in any LFL film, is guilty of copywrite infringement - BUT the piece they built themselves is not a recast. And if you modify the said piece in anyway so that there is a noticible difference, it becomes your intellectual property. The same way that Graflex, Inc., MPP or Sterling cannot sue LFL for infringement or theft, LFL can't sue you for making a saber.

Even if you built a saber using the same exact parts that LFL used (assuming we ever figure out what those damn grips were made from) you're safe until you try to sell them. At that point, you're infringing on both LFL and Master Replicas. But you can come up with your own design and sell those to your hearts content.

Now, there are times when we see something we like that is not commercially available. The most recent case I can think of is those Power Ranger Morphy thingies. An artist here took time to sculpt his own because none were available. He is still guilty of copywrite infringement, but because there a no available sources, they are his intellectual property. The scum on ebay who bought one and recast it, is guilty of recasting and theft of an intellectual property.

See the difference?

-Fred

 

[micdavis]

Your arguments might hold a little more water if you understand that there is no word "recasted"

Anybody that uses that word in their argument should be hence forth ignored.

 

[micdavis]

Originally posted by Gigatron@Jan 27 2006, 02:39 PM

Noone here has recast any of LFL's property.  At most, we are guilty of copywrite infringement.

This could not be farther from the truth.

I can think of a dozen people on this board who have done EXACTLY that.

All it boils down to on this board is if you are the FIRST person to recast LFL stuff it's "okay" or if you are an original sculptor of something, you are granted first "pirate" rights. As stupid as that sounds that how it stands today.

 

[Apollo]

If you survive this you will have taken a step into a larger world, that is IF you survive this

 

[RedTwoX]

Just to add to Gigatron's excellent post: No one is claiming any rights or owner ship of the design. If I make a sculpt of Darth Vader's helmet from scratch, I have no claim to the image of Darth Vader. However, this is my Darth Vader helmet. It is my representation of this design which belongs to Lucas Film Ltd. I put in the effort. I researched, and I invested the time and money to make it. The problem with recasters is that they do not put in the effort to create the master work. They take someone elses scratch built master, dump some mold material over it, and start turning them out to sell.

Now, you do have an argument that the sculptor of the master has no license to sell duplicates of his creation. The intellectual property and copyright belongs to Lucas Film Ltd. and they have not given him permission to sell or distribute that likeness. It is up to LFL if they want to do anything about it.

However, two wrongs do not make a right. The fact that the sculptor of the master work did not have a disrtibuion agreement LFL does make it okay for someone to buy a copy, dump mold material over it, and start compeating with the master sculptor with his own sculpt. The Recaster made no investment of time, money, effort, and tallent in creating the piece. That is what we have a problem with. Again, no one is questioning ownership of the intellectual property or copyright. It is the ownership and usage of the master work that is in question. I for one agree with RPF opinion that recasters are the scum of the Earth.

 

[_Lee_]

Originally posted by micdavis@Jan 27 2006, 10:46 PM
Your arguments might hold a little more water if you understand that there is no word "recasted"

Anybody that uses that word in their argument should be hence forth ignored.

[snapback]1169918[/snapback]​

So i should be ignored because i simply stated an incorrect meaning? For crying out loud,i am just stating an opinion.

 

[slave1pilot]

If you really want to avoid getting YOUR work recast, keep it to yourself.
As soon as it hits the streets, it'll be recast (if it's any good)
The reason copyright infringement exists is because the person who has the copyright on an item,does not want anyone else to make money off of that item.
Same thing applies here.
When someone recasts "original" work, it is normally done to sell & make money.
The "creator" misses out on extra cash.
That's my opinion, & I'm kinda hard-headed, so I'll probably not be swayed .


BTW- I don't recast, heck I don't even cast.

_LEE_, after they get done with yours, the can chew my head off for dessert.

 

[_Lee_]

Originally posted by Seth B@Jan 27 2006, 10:28 PM
Or hotsauce, at least it might deter a few bites.  You may want to do some homework, by the COC of the RPF, casting a screen used item is okay. (This is generally accepted in the prop world) However, RE-casting that cast, is not okay.  Some see a problem there, most don't.  In this neck of the woods, it's like it, or lump it.  Really, how would you feel if you plunked down a bunch of cash on a real prop, risked damaging or destroying it to cast it, putting endless hours into producing an accurate item (whether you sculpted from scratch or cast an expensive prop), then having some scumbag who has minimal dollar investment & minimal time investment steal your work.  A re-caster rarely cares about the quality of the prop, as it is often done as a means to make some easy money.  It's about respect & trust.  This is supposed to be a community.  Yes, the endless arguements do become tiresome, but having your work ripped off is far worse.

[snapback]1169909[/snapback]​

So if someone owns a screen used item,it gives them the green light to start churning out replicas? Just because you own the an item,it doesnt mean you have the right to recast it.

Put it this way,i would be more that happy to own a screen used OT Star Wars prop,and would never even think about recasting it.

 

[KevVader]

So if someone owns a screen used item,it gives them the green light to start churning out replicas?

...and THAT is the $100 question....

 

[Apollo]

Originally posted by _Lee_@Jan 27 2006, 06:14 PM
So if someone owns a screen used item,it gives them the green light to start churning out replicas?

[snapback]1169952[/snapback]​

Only untill you get a C & D.

 

[voice in the crowd]

Lee I think the point you are making about screen used props that are cast by some of the prop making community seems to be a grey area to you. Just remember that the people who have went out and got screen used props have spent a hell of a lot of money getting them and a hell of a lot of time and effort to recreate them. These people also put their heads on the chopping block as they can be taken to court and hammered by the people who own the copyright to them (take the GF case as the prime example of LFL flexing their muscle).

As an example if it wasn't for people like TE or GH we would never have anything close to what we wanted for the ANH Stormtrooper or ANH Vader. These guys have been recast ten times over but without their efforts these props wouldn't have seen the light of day.

On the other hand you have guys like Chewie15 who make the most amazing scratch built sculpts and without their work the boards would be a lot less colourful. Recasting them is less of a grey area for people to understand but both crimes are the same.

There is also no coincidence that a lot of recasters are notoriously unreliable and untrustworthy scammers on top of stealing peoples work.

Recasters are basically people who want to make money without putting in any effort they want an easy path to cash and don't care how they do it.

Cheers Chris.

 

[_Lee_]

Originally posted by voice in the crowd@Jan 27 2006, 11:43 PM
Lee I think the point you are making about screen used props that are cast by some of the prop making community seems to be a grey area to you. Just remember that the people who have went out and got screen used props have spent a hell of a lot of money getting them and a hell of a lot of time and effort to recreate them. These people also put their heads on the chopping block as they can be taken to court and hammered by the people who own the copyright to them (take the GF case as the prime example of LFL flexing their muscle).

As an example if it wasn't for people like TE or GH we would never have anything close to what we wanted for the ANH Stormtrooper or ANH Vader. These guys have been recast ten times over but without their efforts these props wouldn't have seen the light of day.

On the other hand you have guys like Chewie15 who make the most amazing scratch built sculpts and without their work the boards would be a lot less colourful. Recasting them is less of a grey area for people to understand but both crimes are the same.

There is also no coincidence that a lot of recasters are notoriously unreliable and untrustworthy scammers on top of stealing peoples work.

Recasters are basically people who want to make money without putting in any effort they want an easy path to cash and don't care how they do it.

Cheers Chris.

[snapback]1169980[/snapback]​

Thanks for the reply Chris

I respectfully agree with the points you made.I think some of the things i said about screen used items were stated incorrectly.I was moreso trying to direct this feeling towards those who buy such props(which as we know are very hard to come by and reach astronomical prices)with the intent of churning out recasts.Some would only make enough to cover the cost of the original prop,but others keep knocking them out left right and center.

Sorry if ive jumped into the deep end with this thread,but i just wanted to get more an insight into everyones thoughts.

 

[ReelManiac]

I don't think the numerous threads about recasting were regarding legalities- pretty much everybody here would agree that this hobby is full of illegal practices. I think the majority of gripes are about ethics within a community. Intentionally screwing another person over by recasting their work, knowing they can't do anything about it- that's just being an ass and people like that need to be called out.

 

[Stormtrooper]

Originally posted by Seth B@Jan 27 2006, 10:28 PM
Really, how would you feel if you plunked down a bunch of cash on a real prop, risked damaging or destroying it to cast it, putting endless hours into producing an accurate item (whether you sculpted from scratch or cast an expensive prop), then having some scumbag who has minimal dollar investment & minimal time investment steal your work. 

[snapback]1169909[/snapback]​

Well said Seth B....

I wouldn't be foolish enough to claim any intelluctual right to the design of the ESB 'stunt' Stormtrooper blaster, yet I have spent a small fortune in order to offer other fans the opportunity to own a replica blaster cast from an original prop.
Did I do this as a profit-making exercise? No way... I bought the blaster along with the original ROTJ Stormtrooper costume for several thousand £££'s for my own personal collection.
I was contacted by a number of RPF'ers about the possibility of producing an original-cast replica of the ESB 'stunt'' blaster, and I put up a considerable amount of my own money to get professional moulds made from the original prop.
And as Seth B pointed out, this was at risk of destroying or damaging it... it took a lot of soul-searching before I decided to go ahead with it... if part of the original resin blaster snapped off in the silicone rubber mould then I would have destroyed a valuable OT Star Wars prop, and still not be able to produce replicas.
Of course I will make *some* money from it... I'm not a saint :angel
BUT... the driving force behind my project was to alllow Stormtrooper fans the chance to get their hands on a blaster replica *cast from an original prop* - if someone else had been producing these replicas from an original prop I would've been first in line for one

Now I'm not completely niave, and I realise that sooner or later someone will recast my ESB 'stunt' blaster, BUT....

a.) It won't be cast from moulds which were made from an original prop as mine is

b.) I've made minute 'tell-tale signs' in each and every replica I've produced so far... whoever recasts it will be identified and 'outed' from this community

I've always been disgusted by recasters, but I didn't fully understand the extent of their actions before I embarked upon this project :angry

Cheers,
John