Molds, ownership, and casting.
- Thread starter SithLord
- Start date
lonepigeon
Master Member
I consider copying a studio original casting, not recasting. 1st generation is casting, 2nd generation and on is recasting.
The whole point of replicating props is to get it as close to the original as possible - cast from screen used is the best option.
Building your own from scratch is just as illegal as copying the screen used so is that not "reprehensible"?
Reinventing the wheel might make you feel better, but it's no less morally "right".
The whole point of replicating props is to get it as close to the original as possible - cast from screen used is the best option.
Building your own from scratch is just as illegal as copying the screen used so is that not "reprehensible"?
Reinventing the wheel might make you feel better, but it's no less morally "right".
Too Much Garlic
Master Member
There is the accepted illegality of the hobby and then there is what is not accepted.
People disagree especially on the recasting of screen used pieces, but we all agree on the recasting of other members' and even in part licensed vendors' products.
Though cast from screen used is recasting, it is in part accepted and protected from and distinguished from other recasting, as you are recasting the movie studio holding the license and not a licensee or prop-maker outside the license. Without this form of recasting, then there would be no accurate cast Star Wars helmets - no trooper armor, no Vader armor, nothing, and we'd be left with fan sculpts like FX and licensed Vader and trooper helmets. YIKES. (TrooperMaster excluded from the YIKES factor of scratch built armor).
I dunno... it's all infringing... but regardless of whether you accept and agree on cast from screen used being allowed... a recast of a recast surely shouldn't be accepted any less, in the end - which is the excuse many recasters of original "producers" of cast from screen used use: that the original guy recast, so that means I can recast his stuff as well. Can only say: "bah" to that excuse! By any logic two wrongs doesn't make a right. If you don't agree on cast from screen used, then don't buy it... and don't think recasting it would be okay. Not accepting cast from screen used as "allowed" and yet recasting it just makes you a hypocrite.
We accept fanmade props - yet it's all illegal/infringing and maker has no rights other than what the community bestows upon them - the same with cast from screen used makers. At least I do.
GINO
Sr Member
Certainly true. But the attitude that comes from the perception that copying studio originals isn't any worse is ridiculous. Yes, generally accepted here. That doesn't make it any more right.
Too Much Garlic
Master Member
Don't think anyone is arguing that. It's still recasting, yet "accepted" within the community. Just as infringing fan made props are accepted and protected.
lonepigeon
Master Member
Neither is scratchbuilding or sculpting something that is not your own original idea by those standards.
The entire hobby is "wrong" so defining copying a studio original as recasting serves no purpose within the hobby.
Defining copies of fan made pieces as recasting does serve a purpose so that you know an item's quality and lineage. It also expose one's character within the hobby if they're willing to steal from their fellow hobbyist.
Honor among thieves.
Last edited:
Here´s another question for you guys...
What if a let´s say 2nd gen. cast is owned by a person.
This person borrows said item to another prop/ costume maker to be molded/ cast for his own needs...not to make a run.
An agreement is made that a specific number of casts will be returned to the owner along with the original item as some kind of compensation.
What´s been returned in the end are ALL new -in this case 3rd gen.- casts, not the 2nd gen. cast the mold was taken from.
What´d you do?
Markus
What if a let´s say 2nd gen. cast is owned by a person.
This person borrows said item to another prop/ costume maker to be molded/ cast for his own needs...not to make a run.
An agreement is made that a specific number of casts will be returned to the owner along with the original item as some kind of compensation.
What´s been returned in the end are ALL new -in this case 3rd gen.- casts, not the 2nd gen. cast the mold was taken from.
What´d you do?
Markus
GINO
Sr Member
I would say the 2nd gen casting (meaning the casting taken from the original item) and all the 3rd gen castings and associated 'rights' are still governed by the owner of the 2nd gen casting.
That is unless that original 2nd gen casting was given to that person with stipulations.
Honor amongst thieves code basically HAS to ignore the studios rights, or it could not exist.
If you can't get past that notion, you should not be in the hobby if your goal is to collect cast from original pieces. If you can accept that notion, then continue...
'Rights' within our hobby under that code reside with the person who either originally acquired the screen used piece/production casting. Those 'rights' can be transferred through trade, $, or other special arrangement to others.
.
That is unless that original 2nd gen casting was given to that person with stipulations.
Honor amongst thieves code basically HAS to ignore the studios rights, or it could not exist.
If you can't get past that notion, you should not be in the hobby if your goal is to collect cast from original pieces. If you can accept that notion, then continue...
'Rights' within our hobby under that code reside with the person who either originally acquired the screen used piece/production casting. Those 'rights' can be transferred through trade, $, or other special arrangement to others.
.
Last edited:
What´d you consider the withhold of the 2nd cast...fraud, theft?
(if the owner didn´t get back the "master" the molds were taken from, but casts only)
Markus
Last edited:
Newbie Doobie
Well-Known Member
Micdavis is right! There is NO honour among thieves! Recasting is when you take one persons' cast of an original part,then make a cast of it! Even if this is from a screen used piece! I understand if you wish for an original piece that is exactly like the one used in the movie-who doesn't?!! But the legality of this greatly outweights the morality of it! Sure we'd all love to have something that was screen used,or a piece that was cast from it,but this is what licensing is. This is cast by the licensee to exacting standards of the original,especially when it has to be accurate,and scaled down from the original piece! Many times when an item is cast by a licensee,it's made from original drawings,and specifications,this is how a license is granted! It MUST be within the original parameters of the copyright holders licensing agreement! There are the occasional kids toys - The Bearbrick,and galactic heros(which are horrible deformaties of the starwars characters)that are exceptions,but these are designed for kids! Otherwise,the copyright owner grants the licnesee to make an original,or make a cast of the original,as they are commissioned to do this,and therefore are not recasting illegally!
rolleyes
GINO
Sr Member
You are living in a dreamworld.
Licensees don't get to cast original props (as far as SW goes).
Direct casting is the ONLY way to get an exact duplicate.
Not taking measurements, not digital scanning.
Even IF they could make direct castings (which they can't) they would change them and ruin it for the purists.
.
Newbie Doobie
Well-Known Member
Correct!
I thought you put me on your ignore list.
sskunky
Sr Member
Hi Gino,
Now I understand the ethics for this hobby!
I honestly have never had it explained to me in black and white before, what is deemed OK within "replica communities". I have had this discussion many times before but was never told this. I always looked at it as a legal thing, and based my thoughts on what is right and wrong on that.
As I said at the beginning i am a newbie to the hole prop community thing, please accept my apologies if I came across confusingly.
Mark
Now I understand the ethics for this hobby!
I honestly have never had it explained to me in black and white before, what is deemed OK within "replica communities". I have had this discussion many times before but was never told this. I always looked at it as a legal thing, and based my thoughts on what is right and wrong on that.
As I said at the beginning i am a newbie to the hole prop community thing, please accept my apologies if I came across confusingly.
Mark
Similar threads
