When Is It OK to Accuse a Company of Copying?

I agree--I didn't know there was any kind of resolution either, and I did follow that debate for awhile.

 

I think this is exactly why we have to be so careful with accusing companies of copying. We're in a hobby with members who are so passionate about their dolls (and often so passionate about the concept of 'originality') that an accusation carries a lot of emotional weight; it changes how a member might think about an artist, a company, and a set of doll owners. Even an 'official' proclamation of innocence can seldom undo an owner's hard feelings if she thinks that a company she loves has been cheated.

Even if a resolution clears a company and many members agree it was correct, many other members will remember the (interesting) drama and not the (far less interesting) positive outcome. I wonder if copying threads might operate under the same rules as 'news' threads--substantive information only, no discussion? That might alleviate some of the drama, and therefore some of the lasting damage to the community.

 

Perhaps there need to be a heavily modded subsection in the News Thread about the issues of copying. (sorry to throw more work at the mods) Something were the posts must be read by a mod before hand and approved before going up. Of course this may not be actually feesable.

And maybe there should be a sticky with the "results/outcomes/current status" of such disputes. I remember the Dollmore/Dollshe thread was in hot debate when I first joined and my first reaction was "Dollmore must be bad". However I now own 2 Dollmore dolls. I did some seraches and asked questions about their quality and received responses saying they were very good. BUT I had no idea how their case was shaping up and the thread dropped out of sight.

I think we are going to run around damaging companies we also need to take the time and resposibility to REPAIR damages done. (In a thread that won't drop off the map)

I was very dismayed to read Wotan's post were a Dollmore owner gave up their doll just because of the Dollmore/Dollshe dispute.

 

I was going to stay out of this really, but I feel the need to pop in long enough to agree with Mellie.

If posters aren't going to have consideration for the reputation of BJD companies, perhaps they need to stop and consider their own reputations. Shiz's accusations were unfounded, they were based entirely on what she saw in some really shotty photography of a doll she had never seen in real life. Her actions in posting the thread, along with her subsequent actions of blindly continuing to defend herself and refusing to even consider she just flat out made a stupid and ignorant choice (especially after it was proven this doll was indeed not a copy at all)... has entirely ruined any chance she may of had of me ever respecting or taking her opinion seriously.

And I'm sure, Shiz will read this and think. So what? Who are you? Why do I care if you listen to me or respect me? As one person, my opinion doesn't mean a whole hell of a lot to this community most likely.

But consider this Shiz...

The community you 'love'. The one you were trying so hard to 'save' from their own 'bad' buying choices? I'm sure more than a few have lost what respect they might have had for you because of your actions, and your failing to take responsibility for them.

I don't believe their should be an all out ban on copying threads. Part of the good of this community is to keep each other informed. Whether it's about new companies, new releases, scammers or doll companies with immoral business practices.

I do firmly believe there need to be some sort of guidelines laid out. Some sort of criteria for posting threads of this nature.

And I hope in the future, if members of the forum cannot be considerate enough to care about the false accusations they make towards companies, and the diservice they do to this community by making such accusations... maybe the thought of tarnishing their own reputation will at least make them hesitate before tossing out such groundless claims.

 

Okay, for the last time: sleep_pattern and others who are repeatedly stating that I made my statements based on photographs alone: When I first posted, I posted photographs AND measurements of the Teeny that were, apparently, exactly the same as the measurements I took of my own Yo-SD.

It's exactly this type of statement that convinces me that one of the biggest problems is that people just don't bother to read things all the way through or very carefully at all, and then leap around saying things like this over and over again.

For the love of little green apples and for that matter, big red apples too, people. I saw photos that looked suspicious to me. I asked in private for more info from the owner, and received it: more nude photographs and measurements that were the same as the Yo measurements. There were a couple of odd little quirks that both dolls had that convinced us there could be a problem. I discussed with other people, the other owner included. Together, with the owner, we decided to make this post, and I was the one who posted.

So please, stop saying that I posted based on "shotty photos" alone. I didn't. There were measurements that came out exactly the same, Teeny to Yo. It wasn't my own private personal sole speculation; I had the agreement of other people. Yes, they're similarly sized dolls, but having the exact same measurements in the same areas is unusual, particularly if they already seem to look similar and have some similar quirks of feature that had, before, seemed unique to a doll. And yes, later, it came out that those were the "official" measurements given by the company, and when the owner took her own measurements, they turned out different from the official measurements--but by this time the thread had already been posted.

Are we clear on this point now?

I was personally suspicious, yes, mellie, and I asked for more information. Mostly I received a flood of angry responses from people who didn't like the fact that I was asking for more information.

In fact, I'm more disappointed by the fact that people couldn't keep their responses polite than anything else. There were a lot of veiled insults and more than a fair share of snide commentary. There were some people who simply said, "I don't think this is a copy because of this," and kept their heads about it.

I knew even before I posted that I would get a lot of flak for posting something unpopular, but I was still surprised by the amount of veiled venom in some of the responses.

How would you recommend I take responsibility? I updated the thread title and the top information so that people could see there was no problem. I have yet to see anywhere people trashing Soom under the misconception that they copied Volks--which would have been their own misconception.


In general in this thread, I see a lot of suspicion = implied accusation = wrong. Therefore suspicion = wrong. You can add all the addendums you want of "but as long as there's proof--" or "only if they've done their homework--" but it boils right down to: if you're suspicious and can't provide proof of why you're suspicious, you're in the wrong. It seems like some people want cold hard proof up front or else shut up and keep your thoughts to yourself--these people don't want evidence or even to hear about evidence, no matter how compelling, because only proof does it for them.

You know, if somebody posts a thread that says, "I think this looks like it could be a copy of this," you don't have to say anything--and if you feel like you have to, a simple, "No, I don't think so, here's why," would suffice, instead of reply after reply full of angry comments.

 

I think people aren't mentioning the measurements because honestly... it plays very little factor. Look at CP's regular Delfs and Senior Delfs. They have several measurements in common... yet are clearly not copies of each other.

If I remember correctly the SOOM and CP bodies also share some measurements in common.

Doll measurements aren't standard, but there are some pretty common measurements across the board in terms of tinies, minis and larger dolls.

It's not a matter of people not reading, it's a matter of some of your 'proof' being even more faulty and irrelevent than the photographs.

I'm sorry but... why should I, or anyone else for that matter, say nothing when we honestly believe there is a problem with posts like yours?

Excuse me if I feel there is a problem here and I want to speak out about it instead of keeping my mouth shut just to keep you happy.

This debate has already shown that people do not always keep up to date with these things. The Dollshe/Dollmore debate and people (myself including) being absolutely unaware of the verdict, but know the accusations, is just one more example of why these sorts of posts are not always useful to this community.

 

Shiz said
"Gayle, my response is the same as Wotan's--that's the first I've heard about there being a legal standoff between Dollshe and Dollmore. Was there another thread somewhere or an official statement or something that had this information that I could link to, or shall I just link to your post?"

That information has not been officially shared. I asked Hyon if I could share it and she said that was fine given that there had been no "official" update.

Neither company will make (according to Hyon) any more official statements regarding the issue until it has been fully resolved. It's only in the first stages, and currently in a stand-off, which I shared, as per Hyon's suggested verbage.

Take it as you will.

 

Shizalent: What you are experiancing now with a lack of trust by other board members is exactly what a company facing accusations of copying would be.
This is the damage that can be done even when those acusations are later proven false.
This is why people are asking for stricter guidelines, or indeed, any at all when it comes to posting copy threads.

 

Thanks, Gayle. I have updated the informational post with links to your posts.

Tro-chan, I actually think a list of guidelines of things to look for would be very helpful, regardless of whether or not there are rules created that must be adhered to when posting.

 

If they have identical flaws and engravings as the originals, then I'd say they're copies. Like in that (what was it?) DollShe copying incident was it?

 

Interestingly enough, you've just proven the point that a number of people have made in this thread: accusations stick, and most of us tend to remember the "dirt" whether it's proven or not.

In this case, though, there is new information; you might want to read this whole thread to be fully informed, or at least just read Post #28.

http://www.denofangels.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2229336&postcount=28

 

You may want to go back and read the thread, Wolfie Pie.

 

I agree with this.

When is it OK to accuse a company of copying? When you have hard proof. When is it OK to raise the suspicion that a doll may be a copy? The standard should surely be less than that of "hard proof", maybe something like "a real possibility or likelihood".

As a doll buyer, I want to know when a doll I'm considering buying could be a copy, just so I can wait and see how the issue is resolved before I give money to a company that may not deserve it. Maybe some people don't care when they buy copies, but I do, and I respect anyone who cares enough to 1) make a comparison and 2) post that comparison for our consideration (NOT as a rant or accusation).

I'd like to think that most of us have the discernment to distinguish between a post that simply flags an issue to keep us informed, and one that declares that a company is a copycat. If a post does the latter without proof, I would fully agree with telling off the author for jumping to conclusions.

But if a post merely informs the community and mentions the possibility of a copy while conceding the lack of hard evidence at the present time, jumping on that poster is stifling the commendable instinct to raise or report the issue of copying, even when the copying is a real possibility. I know I for one would not like copying to go unreported and for copycats to profit from what they didn't work for (beyond the work of recasting). If the issue turns out to be unfounded, well and good, I won't think any less of the company or of the original author (I'd thank them for caring enough to flag the issue, though, even if they were mistaken).

I'm also pretty sure that there were people who weren't even aware of the new Soom Teeny Gems until this issue popped up (e.g. me). And now that the issue is resolved, they will quite happily be giving Soom business, in the form of buying these dolls, that they wouldn't have before, when they didn't even know about them. Don't discount that sort of free publicity, too.

(All that said, if the mods decide that the criteria should admit of "hard proof" only i.e. more than "a real possibility", I'd be happy to respect that decision on DoA.)

 

Hmmm....I thought they were not allowed because of the resin issue. That seems like a more legit reason for disallowing them. It must have been decided this way because the issue was so ambiguous. But then again, there were other instances that were equally ambiguous as well. So yes, I agree there needs to be a more consistent way of handling this. Side by side images are really essential unless the copying is REALLY blatant (like DZ Lyn and lolidoll).

 

I got upset by the tone of the post. I don't collect the tinies, but they all look fairly similar to me ditto a lot of the large SD also. Originally the argument was used that shizalent measured with a piece of string and found that both dolls were identical, then the teeny gem owner posted that she had only worked off the Soom website's measurements and that when she measured with string, the measurements were quite different, which would appear to indicate that the sculpts were not copies. Yet her comments were totally ignored. A lot of people can be loyal to companies, I know I'm a huge fan of Soom after buying their Mecha Angel. I really felt the whole thread was too premature and people talking of emailing Soom and asking them to verify that the doll they had created was their own work was rude. There are a number of doll artists on the forum here. Can anyone imagine how they would feel to get an email saying can you prove that's your own work? Maybe my attitude is unfair, but unlike newer companies, Soom has been around and doing their own original work for quite a while. I would have though that fact would have generated a certain amount of leeway, at least a little lead-time to gather evidence. I also felt that considering the huge amount of damage to the company's reputation and sales that could have been generated, Shizalent's comments like "my spider senses are tingling" were really quite badly phrased and appeared inappropriate for the thread. I probably took it the wrong way and it's just the way she 'speaks', but when the Dollshe/Dollmore fiasco happened, I was head over heels in love with both dolls and happy to buy both. I now own a Kyle after many months of debating but haven't really done much with him because I hadn't heard anything else about the copying issues. I tend not to post much about him because I'm wary of the issues being brought up. I'd like to get a Hound but lost a lot of enthusiasm with all the drama. I think Shizalent posted the thread with the best of intentions and only wanted to warn doll owners, but faced with the majority of comments, which I read as saying that it was too early to discuss copying as the dolls hadn't been compared sided to side, Shizalent just got defensive and determined to support her stance. It happens. I think though that people should also focus on the fact that this is a public forum and they can be held legally liable for any comments they make. I know a Soom rep posts updates in the news threads and has also posted in the Mecha Angel discussion thread. There is a very real possibility that the company may see your thread and decide to take action should they feel their reputation has been damaged. That fact alone should prompt a lot of care and tact in the way these threads are handled.

 

For the whole first part of your post, Shiz, I'm simply going to say this:

Measurements do not matter. Period. If measurements were anything other than a guide to help you figure out what size clothing your doll wears, perhaps they would matter, but they are not solid proof. If someone murders someone else, and there's a size 9 female footprint at the scene, is every woman with a size 9 going to be a suspect? No. This is the same thing. The numbers could be the same, but in the preliminary steps of gathering information, they mean nothing.

Of COURSE you're going to receive a flood of angry responses. I can't believe you'd actually think you wouldn't. You say you know you'd get a lot of flak, but then you were surprised by it? No no. It's not fair for you to make a shot at people who couldn't "keep their responses polite" when you went out and ACCUSED another company of copying. Is that polite? Is PMing another member to tell her that her doll may be a copy polite? This is part of the reason why I will never trust your judgement again. If someone PMed me and told me my doll was probably a copy based upon the pictures I posted, I would be pretty angry. Not only would I be angry, I'd probably find the PM to be harassment, and I'd report it as being such.

How about apologizing to the community for posting a baseless accusation? How about standing back and looking at this objectively and seeing just how badly your accusation has hurt other people, hurt Soom (whether people have said anything about it or not, you have planted the idea in people's heads that Soom copies, which is NOT their own misconception, it's yours), and hurt yourself?

Lizzard was right about this. No one is saying suspicion = implied accusation = wrong. We're saying suspicion is NOT worth anything. Suspicion simply isn't good enough proof in the real world. It gets you in trouble. If you suspect someone of stealing something from you, and you take them to court without concrete proof, you're going to be the one who's ruined by the experience, not the one you accused.

As for your little thing about saying people don't have to say anything, it comes full circle. When you suspect someone, you don't HAVE to say anything, either. It is not your job to do the policing for these companies. And if you DO say something, you open yourself up for all the criticism that you're receiving right now.

 

The DollShe/Dollmore debate is *not* over, and stating that it is, without access to this 'private' information, is probably not a good idea. Whether or not it can be proved IN COURT (in other words, according to international legal standards, which may or may not have anything to do with the actuality of the case), it is still open until further evidence is provided *here.*

Since we have still not received a response from CP/Luts or Happydoll, I'm not convinced that the Phantomdoll case should count as "confirmed copying" -- there's definitely an ambiguity there.

I'm honestly not sure it's our place to "decide that something is a copy" without feedback from the company themselves . . . in the case of Lolidoll and DZ, Volks and Luts got involved. In the DollShe/Dollmore debate, it was Mr. Dollshe (whose given name I'm spacing on) who made the accusation.

I've seen more cases pop up and be shot down than these, too -- someone was claiming that one of the first Angel of Dream molds was a copy of Volks Jun Tachibana (she wasn't), and there have been other brief kerfluffles that have been rapidly retracted once additional photos of the doll in question came up.

The mods do take copying accusations very seriously, and each time, we've researched independently to try to confirm/deny the accusation. Sometimes, we have to wait for the company to return our e-mails, which delays a public response (we don't e-mail the companies EVERY time, but when it seems indicated, we do get in touch with them.)

Please be assured, though, that the mods are VERY anti-copying, and we don't want to encourage copiers to sell dolls . . . but these things can be very hard to prove if you don't have the dolls to examine in person, and we don't want to ban innocent companies or owners from DoA without VERY conclusive proof.

-- A

 

Ashbet said
"The DollShe/Dollmore debate is *not* over, and stating that it is, without access to this 'private' information, is probably not a good idea. Whether or not it can be proved IN COURT (in other words, according to international legal standards, which may or may not have anything to do with the actuality of the case), it is still open until further evidence is provided *here.*"

Granted, the private information is just that, private information. And, agreed, everything isn't fully resolved yet. However, progress has been made, and given the damage to Dollmore's good will by the allegations, I felt it was fruitful to provide what little info I DO know and am allowed to share with Hyon's permission, in the hope that it might put to rest some of those unwarranted and continued speculations.

Again, take it as you will.