Artists Using Doll Likenesses without Crediting [Mijn Schatje discussion]

Let's face it, we could argue the intricacies and legalities of what they do till we're all blue in the face but that wasn't my original point.

I'm not saying what DIM do and what Mijn has is exactly the same thing or even on the same level, because it's not and I'll freely admit that. Though at the same time it's not dissimilar either.
I'm afraid I don't see how acknowledging your sources effects it either way though, even if DIM do it they still make the conscious decision to accept money for recreating someone else' hardwork. Which when put that way, does sound an awful lot like what Mijn does, doesn't it?

Either way DIM know what it's like to have the shoe on the other foot now. They have every right to defend their work, just as anyone else does but I'd hope that getting ripped off like they have would have given them reason to pause and think about what they do with the minimees because ultimately, they ARE profiting from someone else' work (we're all -I would hope- intelligent people, so let's not treat each other like idiots and pretend we don't know that when they make a doll of which ever character, it's intended for all intents and purposes to BE that character)... how does the old saying go? Do unto others...

 

I think the difference between DIM is even though they do use others' drawings and photos for reference in creating Minimee requests, it is really just the sculpting service they are providing, that's all, not an original creation of their own minds unlike in Mijn Schatje's case.

 

Discussions are all well and good but there's a whole other thread for DiM Minimee discussions, I'm sure. At the same time, this feels almost like DiM is being castigated for speaking out against Mijn Schatje.

While it has been said, "Nono, I totally support that they take action against Mijn Schatje," the way this point was first raised and then the continuous comparison in this thread just reads like they should have sat on their hands and kept quiet.

In short, regardless of intention, this is like punishing the guys for speaking out against Mijn Schatje.

 

I'm not so surprised that Minimee had to be dragged to this conversation, but at the same time I kind of wished that it would not happened, because honestly, Mijn and DIM are still opposite of eacthothers. Dim never EVER claims that the sculpt is their design, and they don't sell the heads off 1000$ plus more. DIM does copy the facial structures from the image they are given, but they do them only for private use, and they don't sell the heads around the 100 and more bjd markets. That is only the owners decission, if s/he wants to sell the head on second market. They don't also copy hair, eyes, clothes, shoes etc from the original picture. There is a fine line what is acceptable, and what not. I'm sure that in this thread many have stated it before,but Mijn has claimed all the images originally come from her magical wonderland, and she first DENIED knowing anything about bjd's. When this subject came up and many people started to question her about the bjd problem, she accidentally happened to know about them.
Mijn is an art theft, there is no question about that. There is not only copying from bjd's, but copying from Audrey Kawasaki who is a very well known and respected artist around the WORLD. And the Totoro from Ghibli studio, and the list continues. I have honestly saying stopped thinking that there's nothing original in her works, except the hair which is a line beside another. This is just my opinion, but many art galleries, magazines and private people HAVE NOT appreciated it what Mijn has done.
And believe me, there's nothing more odd than claim that she has put effort and very much time on each pictures. Tracing obviously does take time too, and it's possible to do with every single illustration program there is nowadays.

And edit; Just to add, I don't think that dim is 100% right on what they do. I have always thought that it would've been better if they just concentrate on making mini me's and people's original characters, not anime/rock star etc characters to be exact.
And I agree with LJK what she said.

 

I have to wonder; why the DIM Minimee service actually got tangled up and being compared with Mijn Schatje? What the fraud artist is doing is different from what DIM is doing, as in, she used other people's works, saying it's from her own wild imagination and then selling off her works in thousands of dollars.

DIM is just offering service to actually scuplt the heads out, but the heads would not be 100% accurate to the supposed characters or of a famous celebrity. They are actually sculpting using references which the customer provided, and based on the pictures, they scuplt all the way and somtimes check back on the customer during the progress.

Like most people had said here, putting DIM's Minimee service in here is irrelevant. I support what DIM is doing now, and I hope Leeke, Volks and the erst of the doll companies who Mijn had used their pictures without permission would take action

It just disgusts that Mijn is still trying the 'I have permission!' excuse when she actually didn't. Then when she got caught, she asked for permission but when rejected, she twisted the words. Or telling the companies that she really wasn't selling the works based on their creations. It's simply sad on how she's digging herself more deeper and deeper.

 

People are objecting to the fact that Mijn is making money off the back of other people's work and DIM's Minimees also make money off the back of other people's faces. Ultimately it matters little if DIM say the face is from their own imagination or not, we all know that Minimees are based on photographs or drawings of someone else's face, someone who may not have given permission for their likeness to be sculpted and cast in resin to be made in doll form. I don't believe that the existence of Minimees should limit the amount of public support DIM should have over the Mijn scandal though. Mijn copied their legitimately produced original work and they have every right to protect that.

 

There is a huge difference between sculpting based on a series of pictures and only aiming for 80% accuracy (Minimee) and flat out overlaying an image and tracing it (Mijn). One actually takes talent. If Mijn had just been referencing photos of BJDs instead of tracing, I doubt we'd have this problem.

DiM is making money off of other people's creations, but only because people ask them to. I'm sure if a company found out and asked them to not allow minimees of certain people/characers/trademarks that they would comply. They are at least being open and honest about what they do.

 

This is 'can of worms' territory. I'll take the Devil's Advocate position; If someone asked a company to recast a doll they liked in a different colour...would that make it ok? Because someone else asked them to do it, the company doesn't have to take responsibility for their product? I don't think so. DIM produces Minimees because it makes them money. If it didn't it wouldn't be worth putting their sculptors and research and development time into producing them. Minimees are a very grey area. There have been heads produced of actors who are well-known for being uncomfortable with fan intrusion in their lives, actors who would rather not have 1/3 scale dolls in their likeness, yet DIM has still produced these heads. Devil's Advocate over and out.

Let's not dilute the Mijn Schatje problem, guys. She is a big enough issue and it seems that only DIM are prepared to do anything about it, let's not attack them for that now, it's counter-productive. Mijn isn't producing fan art or fan works, she's using someone else's work to produce something that will make her a lot of money...I've never known anyone use a Minimee head to produce a fan doll and make a thousand dollars from that doll.

 

Agreed, agreed. If all parties are done saying their piece, perhaps we can let this off-shoot die off in peace in this thread.

 

Isn't it almost similar like some artists draw fanarts, doujinshi, booksmarks and the sort using popular characters and then selling them? Though of course they will claim they are not the true creator of the characters.

But yes, I think we all should concentrate on the real issue which involved Mijn and maybe we could continue the discussion in the DIM Minimee debate thread.

 

She needs to add a description for her works up for sale "The owners/sculptors/creators who worked so hard on such a beautiful doll will never see a single cent of the from the thasands of dollars you give to me nor will they ever receive any proper recognition"

I wonder would any art appreciators buy her work with a description like that?

edit:
Sorry
Whoops, i had been rather behind with this thread, not going with the flow of everything going on here now that i have sorta caught up

 

I came late to this whole thing and have just spent a few exhausting days trawling through this thread (well, work was rather boring ) and the various links and the websites - had a feeling at some point that the issue of DIM and their minimees would come into it at some point.

Anyway you look at it, comparing what DIM does and what this person has done are two completely different things. DIM, fanart, doujinshi, fanfiction etc, while in a very shady grey area legality wise, they tend to make no bones about where they are getting their inspiration from, whether it be games, anime, books, comics anything, and tend not be done for profit (dim and the dj's non withstanding - again grey area....). As such, as the source is clearly known, I really don't think they are entirely relevant to this situation. I think it would be pretty rare for someone to buy a dim/ fanart without knowing either through experience or through being told by the seller themselves what the source of the subject was.

For me, and as other posters have already said, the biggest issue in all of this was that she was passing off and selling her art as something completely original. I dont care if it was a photo, painting, piece of pottery, whatever, if you have made something that copies it closely (esp when easily recognizable without much effort) and then pass it off as your own work without acknowledging the original, its just common plagiarsm.

Once you add into that the very underhanded ways in which she has gone about things, trying to cover her own back, the whole asking permission for one thing and then taking everything, its just gets appalling. I think that if you had honestly mistaken the permission, what was infringing on copywrite etc, you would own up to it and try to rectify the issue - in some cases she has in regards to taking the pics related to blastmilks work down - but I feel that was done since it was something she couldn't wriggle her way out of, not because she honestly felt that she should - if that was the case, why not take down all her works at the outset and then repost them once it had been verified that the content was legit.

It will be interesting to see how this all does play out though and what the end result will be. Glad to see the companies getting into it.

... Reminds me of something I saw a couple of years back as well - was on www.worth1000.com a couple of years back and was looking through the posts for one of their graphic comps - think the topic was turn a celebrity into a toy or something - and looking through the posts and seeing one that was supposed to be beyonce - I was fairly new to bjd's at the time but felt that it looked familiar. Since there hadn't been many tanned dolls I'd seen at that point pretty quickly found cocori on souldoll - the pic that had been used in the comp had been lifted completely from the company website and virtually nothing had been changed except for a few minor details like jewellery (going from memory here) - it was close enough though for me to feel uncomfortable about seeing it as an entry as their work that I ended up emailing the worth1000's about it giving them to the link to souldoll and the pics. Don't think it was ever taken down though. Will need to have a look I think.

When I remember that and see this, it makes me wonder just how many other lesser known hobbies may be unknowingly exploited like this. It took a couple of years to find this one. The whole thing just makes me feel very uneasy about it all.

....Uh, sorry for the ramble just felt the need to get it off my chest

 

Minimee is a commission service. The heads are sculptures made to the customer's specification. You are not paying for the rights to any character when you order a Minimee. You are essentially paying for the work of sculpting a head to your exact specifications, whatever those specifications are.

I'm not going to comment on whether its right to do or not, but what DIM does is very, very different from Mijn Shatje's outright tracing.

 

To bring the discussion back to Mijn, note that the DA news article Larien put up is now the highest scoring "happenings" story. Lots of positive feedback/s.

Here is the link for those who missed it:

http://news.deviantart.com/article/82633/

The story is getting out, and that's a good thing!

 

So if someone commissioned Mijn, you'd be fine with it? If someone sent her a photo of a doll (or two dozen photos of a doll) and specifically asked her to make them a picture that was 'only' 80% similar, there'd be no complaints?

I'm sorry, I personally think that the only reason people are defending DIM is because they make something we all like - dolls. And I think the defenses are pretty tatty and transparent too, to be honest.

If I designed a character, and you took my design to DIM and said "make me this", you can bet I would have the legal right to prosecute both you and DIM for infringing on my rights. You for taking my design, and DIM for failing to ensure that you owned the rights to replicate that design.

I mean, let's be honest here - if I said "after seeing the discussion about contacting the victims of Mijn's 'referencing', to see whether they actually realise that she's profiting from using their art, I've realised that I should possibly extend the same courtesy to the companies that DIM is 'referencing' in their Minimees", there would be a riot, and it would have absolutely nothing to do with 'morality' or 'fairness'. I would be seen as 'being a spoilsport' and 'being unfair' - which is exactly the way Mijn's fans feel about us.

And what happened to all the earlier points about how 'transferring' art from one medium to another (puppy photo -> blue puppy sculpture) doesn't get around copyright? Why was that something great to use against Mijn ("Hah, photos -> vectors won't save you!") but suddenly forgotten when it comes to DIM (who are... taking photos and turning them into 'sculptures', exactly like that other artist who lost the copyright suit brought against him)?

Minimees are no different than what Mijn is doing. It's just a matter of degree. There's nothing wrong with saying "I am fine with this activity up to this point, but no further, and these are my reasons for it", but trying to pretend that these are actually different things is completely disingenuous. If you're going to support theft of creative/intellectual propertly (which Mijn and Minimees both are), then at least admit that that is what you are doing.

 

Though the comments on the article are mostly discussing how 'creepy' dolls are and how the link to radiotrash's site is posted in the title of the article, not the article itself.

 

Can we save the Minimee debate for the Minimee debate thread?

It's just going to detract from the matter in hand if we discuss it here.

 

TWO (2!) commenters mentioned "how creepy" the dolls are. Just two, and one was obviously a troll and labeled as such. The other was willing to have a conversation about his feelings, and agreed that Mijn's work is plagiarism.

On the other hand 96 people are listed as "loving the article" and only four as "rejecting" it. That's what I was referring to.

If you are concerned about the nature of the comments, why not log on and leave a positive one about the article?

 

Actually? I haven't seen the legalese on the first part of that quote, but I suspect it is not as cut and dried as you present it. Translation from medium to medium, from my understanding of it, is more frequently a case of trademark, likeness rights, or trade dress law, and this is not the same thing as copyright. The issues should not be confused for one another because while the finer points are harder to nail down, they are absolutely not the same thing. In the case of anime/game characters, the appearance of a character based on its style guides may be protected, but the law is a little different. It's likely a matter of trade dress. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_dress) In the case of persons, likeness rights. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Likeness_rights)

Copyright has more to do with incorporating actual -elements- of existing work to copy it directly or create derivatives than it does with the broader category of protecting an idea under the umbrella of intellectual property rights, in fact it's not possible to -copyright- an idea, because an idea is not a fixed, published, completed work. That's why those other laws exist. Translation without direct incorporation of elements of the existing work may or may not be considered a derivative and may or may not be a copyright issue; it is more likely to be a problem under one of those other legal categories.

It really isn't the same thing. It may appear to be at a glance, but it isn't; for better or worse the law is substantially more complicated than that. In some cases, that's a great thing, in others, it's really horrible. The commission factor isn't especially relevant, either.

Anyway, can this all go to its own thread? Please? Because it's been mentioned before that there is one, and there really are differences that we non-lawyers probably shouldn't be claiming we're all-wise in regard to.

*Yeah, I know wikipedia is far from the be-all end-all source, but it is a quick overview.

 

The Minimee debate thread (at least, the only one I've found) is long dead and buried (last posted in in October of last year), so we can't really discuss it there. I don't actually see how it's off-topic, either. How can you oppose Mijn but support DIM (neither of whom have explicit permission from the people they are copying)?

I'm actually surprised so many people seem so unwilling to discuss this similarity, especially with the evidence earlier in this thread that transferring photos to sculptures is considered to be exactly the same, legally, as what Mijn is doing.

There's no real point refusing to discuss it - you can bet Mijn will bring this up (if she's clever), or one of her fans will. If you are really intent on making a concerted, public effort to bring to light Mijn's theft, you should consider the effect that might have on other artists, like DIM.