Angell-Studio's Gabriel & Lucifer Discussion

I agree... I am a huge Kaori Yuki and Angel Sanctuary fan. But I wouldn't feel right buying unlicensed merchandise. If I'm going to spend money on something based off Kaori Yuki's work, I want to know that it was authorized by her. I just wouldn't enjoy the doll otherwise... Then again, I have a rather overdeveloped sense of guilt, and tend to be bothered by many things other people consider minor. =P

That being said, they really are beautiful dolls, and beautiful outfits.

 

Ohhh I love Angel Sanctuary *__*

Gabriel is the first girl doll I have ever wanted...so tempting~!

 

No, No, No, of course they didn't got authorization from Kaori Yuki. Go check the website, have they worte anything to explain the outfit is from "Angel Sanctuary"? Have they ever mention about Kaori Yuki?
Besides, there already a doll owner claim about the outfit for Lucifer is COPY her work, she've made a outfit for her boy cosplay as Luficer (Angel Sanctuary).

BTW, is there anyone check their new Baby doll?
http://www.angell-studio.com/shop/index.php?gOo=goods_details.dwt&goodsid=245&productname=

http://www.angell-studio.com/shop/index.php?gOo=goods_details.dwt&goodsid=244&productname=

Now, let's take a look at DOD
http://www.ecinter.net/frontstore/I...0&mart_id=hoo933&level=&mother_catalog_num=85

 

BTW AS 1/3 and their 1/4 dolls are BOTH french resin. I have a friend who owns a cain. They use a pretty good stabilizer because from what she says, she's had him for about a year and he still hasnt yellowed.

Im getting a Cain in the next few weeks hopefully. My little bishie boy. :3

and the reason why their so cheap is because its chinese. their money is worth less then ours. look at DZ and AOD as examples of chinesse companies who have "cheaper" dolls. Its all a matter of conversion...because the qaulity is still superb!

 

O_O.......
Are they based on yuki kaori's characters??? Even the tattoo on lucifer's arm and eye are the same....

catas have also pointed out that their new baby doll have similar outfit as DOD's elf pitt and yen D: .....

I really wonder if they have gotten permission for yuki kaori's characters.....

 

*nods nods* Even if I've just made a new thread for the tinies, I'm unsure now... Seems like two of their tinies also had similar resemblance to the DOC outfits...

It's copyright! I wonder how they'll deal with it... >_>

 

As I'm a huge Kaori Yuki fan like many of you, I find this news terribly depressing, especially since Lilith [Gabriel] is one of the few female dolls I like, and I've been waiting for an open-eyed version of her to come out. But now that I know that the AS outfits are being copied off of, I'm not sure how I feel about getting Gabriel. TT_TT

 

I'm not saying it's ok to have copied the outfits, but they're not selling them - from the text, the dolls come with pyjamas not the outfits pictured. People do copy and make outfits as replicas even amongst the groups and DoA. I'm quite sure not all of them get permission either, I wouldn't instantly condemn them because they're photographed in the outfit. They don't appear to be planning to sell it with the doll. I remember someone on DoA just auctioned an Anakin with star wars outfit and no-one criticised her for copyright violation, until I saw this thread, I hadn't even thought about it. I'm guessing these pictures are a similar thing.

 

I guess i have to agree with Hobbysue... we must clarify things first before we make our judgement.

this thread feels like a debate already... i hope we could enjoy these dolls without all the worries and hope that everything would be clarified.

 

If you read with attention, the message from DOD about copying and such, is from september, and has nothing to do with this.
Anyway, the outfit of that doll seems to be too similar, but DOD said nothing about it.

 

Eh, I knew there was reason to be a bit iffy..I love the dolls and all (especially Lucifer) but know that I read through this thread it seems a bit shakey to me. The only reason I was cautious was the pricing..I mean $200 somethign for a 61cm beauty? ._.

 

The low price on their SD dolls is part of an offer that started this summer (basically, they will sell 50 SD dolls each month at half price, for 6 months). I know of a few people, from the french BJD board (Materiel Celeste), who ordered from AS and received their orders in no time. All of them seem very happy with their purchases ^^

Now, about the copyright infringement (or lack of, what do I know?) on the clothes design, I must admit I find it quite disturbing.

 

Quite possibly it's another 'Engrish' slip by the company, where the Fashion Design person is whoever made the clothes, not the person who actually designed the clothes from scratch. Has anyone asked at the website about the Angel Sanctuary references? Problem could be solved with a quick question. Until they actually sell the clothes while claiming that it's their own design, it's all speculation now.

Curiously, how do people view seamstresses who sell cosplay outfits for humans or dolls when they don't have the artist's authorization?

 

I view them as unauthorized derivative works (that has legal ramifications, but I'm not going to go into that). However, a general legal principle is that you aren't liable if you aren't sued, so if the original creator doesn't choose to send a cease & desist letter or something, the seamstress is free to continue. That said, I think there comes a point where morality kicks in. The seamstress who sells OOAK costumes? No problem unless the creator her/him-self has a problem with it. A company that uses professionally made costumes to sell its dolls? That bothers me a lot more, even if the creator never hears about it or doesn't react.

 

Lots of seamstresses don't sell OOAK costumes. I'm pretty sure there are many who sell by commission. As long as someone wants, they'll make. Many of them sell on the reputation that their costumes are very well made, if not professionally made.

I'm guessing that a number of companies have one or two seamstresses, not a whole hoard of them (I can't imagine it would be profitable for one doll company to hire so many). Between the lone seamstress and the company with one seamstress, selling their outfits at the same price, what's the difference? Honestly, I'm curious. Because to me, the line is very indistinct indeed.

 

I think it's worth pointing out, just on general principles, that the IP ("IP" = "Intellectual Property") standards for the fashion industry... of which cosplay is a fringe part... are a legally a bit different from the IP standards for the music industry or the art world.

That's why design houses and retail manufacturers can copy each other's outfits and styles constantly without ever running into copyright infringement issues. Unless Department Store X actually tries to sell its Armani-inspired outfit *as* an Armani (Which would be misuse of TRADEMARK, not Copyright-), there's nothing actionable in making a suit that looks just like one of Giorgio's sketches or runway offerings.

So, how does that translate into doll costume designs adapted from a manga? 'Hard to say. It depends on rather the legal authority in Japan or China is more willing to consider doll costuming "Fashion" or "Art".

Either way, they'd probably be in for a lot more trouble if they actually claimed that the dolls were Angel Sanctuary characters, since the title and character likenesses are almost certainly trademarked.

 

I hadn't thought about the copyright v. trademark thing, thanks for bringing it up.

For me, I have absolutely no problem with knockoffs. And I also don't have a moral issue with games/cartoons/toys/other "intellectual property" being knocked off. Kimba the White Lion and The Lion King, Bug's Life and Antz, this new Disney Wizards tv series conveniently following after the end of Harry Potter...that's all pretty much cool with me.

Originality is generally considered a serious and sensitive issue on DoA. To me, not so much...but everyone decides for themselves where to draw the line.

 

Brightfires brings up a good point. There are many flaws that I saw with the Lucifer outfit, and I don't think the bottom of Gabriel's dress was ever even drawn. (though it might be in the manga. I don't have mine with me to check)

I'm not sure really where I stand on the issue. I commissioned someone to paint my Kohya's face to look like Lucifer. If I ever decided to sell him for more than I originally paid, would that make me a criminal?

All that aside, Gabriel is lovely. I don't need another Lucifer doll, but I would seriously consider buying her to go along with my collection.

 

First, copyright infringement is generally (not always, but usually) a civil matter. You're unlikely to be a criminal for customizing your doll, don't worry about that aspect ^_^ There is an argument for civil liability, but I doubt anyone would waste the money paying a lawyer to go after one doll owner selling one doll.

However, the standard is not different for any one industry--Japanese law is like U.S. law in that there seems to be one copyright infringement test for all industries (http://www.cas.go.jp/jp/seisaku/hourei/data/CA.pdf is an English copy of the Copyright Act; see Section 3, Subsection 3). Not having read the cases, I don't know what that test IS, but I'd bet it's there. Anyway, the reason the fashion industry seems "different" in America is that human clothing is considered a "useful article," which means that only separable creative elements can be copyrighted (which rarely happens with clothes). Brightfires is correct that clothing companies can generally only rely on trademark law to police the use of their designs; there's not even that much trade dress protection for clothes, so it's basically only using the name (although there's a case where similar stitching on jeans was considered infringing). Doll clothing is different; although the Copyright Office says it's useful, at least one court has disapproved of that policy and declined to apply it. That all said, I can't find a "useful article" provision in the Japanese copyright law. In fact, their definition of "artistic work" is broader than ours.

That point is moot here, though, because the target that is being copied is a manga drawing, which unquestionably has protection. Thus, under Japanese law, any "derivative work" of that drawing (clothing based on it, for example) can be enjoined unless it was authorized by the copyright holder. (it is possible that Chinese law would be applied, but Angell-Studio's sales to Japan most likely open it up to jurisdiction there).

I was drawing a moral distinction between someone who infringes occasionally and a company that infringes as a business practice. They are both legal infringers--but I would buy from an individual long, long before I'd buy from a company. Especially when it's not even a clothing company; Angell-Studio is using the clothing to sell the dolls, which is kind of sad in a way. They need someone ELSE'S work to sell their own?

(NOTE: Because I specifically talked about people and their liability, I'm required to tell you that I'm not a lawyer yet, and you can't rely on anything I say if someone actually sues you. Then again, you should never take legal advice from random people on the internet).