Artists Using Doll Likenesses without Crediting [Mijn Schatje discussion]

Firstly, thank you Chai_fiend and Tez - you've both put my words more succinctly than I managed myself. My questions aren't specific to Minimees - I was focusing on them simply because they were what was brought up in this thread, and what I saw a lot of people dismissing as 'completely different'. My point was that, no, Mijn is not doing anything much different to a lot of artists out there, including (but not restricted to) DIM, and I was wondering if the double-standard was justified, or if some artists simply get a free pass because some members of this forum have bought art from them and don't want to admit that (just maybe) that art is just as 'bad' as Mijn's.

Because I'm not incensed by Minimees. I'm confused why so many people are tarring Mijn with one brush, but not other artists doing the same/similar things.

I think some people are getting so caught up in this 'crusade' that they aren't reading what I'm actually saying.

If you oppose what Mijn is doing, but don't oppose other, similar cases, (fanart without permission, Minimees, whatever), you have to actually have reasons for it.

Otherwise people (like me) are going to read your arguments and get confused about what you actually stand for. I see a lot of people (not all, but quite a few) who honestly seem to be saying "I am completely fine with artistic theft that benefits me, but I am not okay with Mijn for... some reason".

That she does not credit is a reason, which is worth debating. I don't personally think it's a good reason - if someone steals my art, I certainly don't care whether they admit up front that they're stealing it from me. Those of you saying that's the difference - would you mind if I took your photos or art, posting it in my deviantart account, and sold prints, as long as I admitted it was yours? I don't think you would, which is why I don't think 'But other artists don't claim it as their work!" is an adequate defense.

The 'not all faces are the same' point honestly seems moot to me when an artist is marketing themselves as copying photos/other resources in as much detail as possible. Not to mention when they are also producing sculpts of characters owned by other companies, not just celebrities. If you ask an artist to draw you a copyrighted character's head, and then have a big collective thread collecting (copyrighted) images of that (copyrighted) character to give this artist (to copy), and then - when accused of copying that character - you claim that it's all just a big coincidence... well, that just looks silly to me.

And I guess that's part of my confusion - why is it completely acceptable for you to copy in some cases (completely without permission from any of the original copyright owners, just like Mijn), but not okay for Mijn to do it?

If Mijn hand-traced or eyeballed the images, I believe people would be just as angry, which is another reason I'm not convinced by some of the arguments presented. This isn't just because she used vectors, and it isn't just because she's not giving credit (although I do see why people think that's a slap in the face, and adds insult to injury, so to speak). This is because Mijn is using other people's art, for profit, without the permission of the original artists.

Which is all fine - but why is only Mijn getting a thread about her? Why is she so much worse than anyone else? That's what my posts are about.

(Sorry for the long post - I just find this topic very interesting. In light of Chai_fiend and Tez's posts, I've tried to make it clear that I am talking in broad terms and focusing on Mijn, not Minimees).

 

There's already another topic for that though. This is specifically to discuss what Mijn is doing, as it says in the title, otherwise it wouldn't have been broken off into it's own seperate topic by the mods.

 

radiotrash -- true, but I still think it's pretty counterproductive to lock the thread. I've been rather intrigued by different opinions myself, though I don't at all agree with some of them.

 

The problem is that there are several post that do not mention Mijn or her work at all and are only about the DIMs and there is already a thread for that. Furthermore, I think there is still yet another thread open to discuss other artists doing things similar to Minj, but it is not about Mijn herself. Many of these post seem to belong on one of these other 2 threads and that is why people are asking to have it dicussed there. I love to hear about what everyone thinks about all of these issues, but it is getting a bit confussing imo. No offense meant to anyone, I really do enjoy reading all of your opinions ^_^

 

Every other topic I've seen in the debate forum has had to have a specific question. What is the question of this thread if not 'Is what Mijn doing wrong, and why?'? And if it is that, how is "... and why isn't it wrong if other people do it" 'off topic'?

What exactly are you all 'discussing' if no one in this thread is allowed to ask any questions or raise any points? Are we only allowed to post here to say "Here here, I agree, how awful, here is a link to another site saying the same things we are saying here!"? How is that debate or discussion?

This was my point before - why is this thread in 'Dolly Debates' if we aren't allowed to actually debate anything? It's very confusing, and I kind of dislike the fact that I'm being made to feel like I'm breaking the forum rules when it's this thread that doesn't seem to be following the rules [of this subforum - I'm not saying this thread isn't appropriate, or that I want it locked/closed or anything like that].

Personally, I hope it stays open and that this discussion is allowed to continue. If people just want to collate data about what Mijn is doing, I think they should start a thread in General Discussion or News (or have this one moved there). 'Debate' implies (friendly) disagreement, and working out why people think things, not everyone sitting around agreeing with each other and repeating the same things over and over again.

ETA: And just to (hopefully) keep things clear - I don't care about DIM. My posts are not intended to be about DIM. Once I realised that my mentioning DIM was what was confusing the issue, I started talking in broader terms. My question is "how is what Mijn doing wrong when other artists are allowed to do it, and even embraced by the same people in this thread for doing it? Why is some plagerism accepted by this community when others aren't, and how can we expect to be taken seriously if we refuse to discuss it?". I don't think this is at all off-topic for this thread as long as it's in the debate forum (which actually specifically says in its subforum rules that some topic-drift is expected).

 

I think the work in question is boring, vacuous, and overpriced. I can't believe anyone in the art-buying mileu would give them a second glance when there are so many artists who are producing interesting work to be found. As I've stated elsewhere, the only reason I could see anyone buying one of these 'things' is 'coz it matched their couch

What bothers me about the hullaballoo surrounding the allegations of plagiarism is this: it gives Mein Schmenkle (or whatever her name is) and her work something it never had before: meaning and content. Is being a glaring example of odious plagiarism better than being nothing? I guess so, in a world where the only measure of publicity is in inches; it doesn't matter that the attention this stuff is attracting is negative: it's attention, and quite a lot of it.

It saddens me that no matter how amazing a piece of art that depicts ABJD might be, it will never, ever attract 60+ pages of opinion and commentary. It's tiresome, too, because the whole 'image appropriation' jive was so over more than a decade ago (whatever happened to Jeff Koons, anyway?).

The only upside I can see is that it is putting dolls forward as an artform in their own right, demonstrating that they are as much a creative concept as consumable product - one of the things that makes them so interesting as an artform, the blurring of the roles of 'creator' and 'consumer'.

The question of copyright as per Minimees is an entirely different issue. It is not a matter of 'copy>paste' as this (seems) to be.

 

Um, I think there have been several people who have stated differing opinions and debated the topic at hand, but what has happened is OTHER debate topics that already have threads are being brought here and at points this debate has turned into those debates. No one is saying you can not debate, they are just asking for it to be done in the debate thread created for that topic.

EDIT: sharnofshade: I wanted to add that I do not think people (well at least me) are pointing to you directly, there are several other poster who have ventured off of the topic as well on to the other debate topic. I think you have stuck closer to the main topic in your post, but the problem is that the whole thread was steering into a different direction than what this thread was meant for...hence the urge to continue your debate in the appropriate debate thread.

 

I mean this in the nicest way possible, but these posts are really derailing the rest of the thread and leading it down a path that could end in a lock. We'd prefer not to do that. As the topic says, this thread is about Mijn Schatje, not MiniMee or other artists; there are other threads for those topics.

Please take discussion of MiniMee to the MiniMee thread, and generic thoughts about what sort of "appropriation" is acceptable to the other threads in question. They're great questions, but not quite suited to a more focused thread like this one.

Thanks!

 

Okies, I was wondering if someone could please post me a link to her facebook page ( I wanna see the "updated info")? Also, do we have a link to the gallery that will be showing her work in LA? I like to see how it is being advertised and I also like to see how long it is running. I am possibly going there this fall or winter and I want to see the work for myself in person (I do not like her work, but I want to see how she labels her pieces and if she has been forced to ake any down by then).

Furthermore, how do you feel about going to see her work in person? Is it wrong? Does what we are doing create hype and make more people want to go see it even if they do not like it?

 

No disrespect meant (I'll stop debating it all in this topic, now that I know it's definitely off-topic), but could you please clarify for me what is being debated here?

I'd like to contribute to this thread (as my interest is Mijn, not anything classified as off-topic), but I obviously am having a great deal of trouble working out what is actually being debated here, and no one has actually clarified that for me so far. I'd really appreciate a mod-clarification, if it's at all possible.

I hope this isn't seen as trouble-making - I just want to discuss, but I'm slightly unnerved that I now am unsure of what the debate is actually about. I usually like to consider all 'sides' in a discussion, but there only seems to be one 'side' in this thread...?

 

You could always debate the question I just asked??

Is it ok to go see her work at a gallery even if you think what she is doing is wrong? Is what we are doing (spreading the word about her plagiarism) creating hype and possibly making her more attractive to galleries (or more popular in general)?

I think those are relevant questions to debate...but I could just have lame ideas too...I really like to know what you guys think as I am debating on going to see her work if I get a chance.

 

What are the copyright laws concerning this? Tell me if I'm wrong, but according to my understanding, it isn't plagarism if 4 elements are changed in an image creating a new work of art.

I'm not supporting or defending her work, here...just seeking the answer to the question.

 

That's wrong and people who teach that should be shot (not you, I mean art teachers), the courts and the jury decide if its plagiarism or not as far as I'm aware.

 

sharnofshade - This is what I don't get, I understand your want to debate this, have SOMEONE play devil's advocate because, let's face it, this is a DEBATE thread and is a bit strange not to have a DEBATE but more of a discussion. HOWEVER! My big thing is this: The title of this thread. It's "Artist Using Doll Likenesses Without Crediting" it is already established that Mijn doesn't and DIM does. So let's kill that here and necro up the old DIM MNM thread.


PLEASE, let's stay on the topic of 2-D artists in order to STAY ON TOPIC (let's stay in the same medium in other words. I find PHOTOGRAPHS and PAINTINGS as the same medium because they are flat, printable things.)


Note about Mijn and posting that "Dolls! Dolls! Dolls!" album on her myspace: why is it so difficult to understand that she needs to credit the SCULPTOR not just the OWNER?

 

*sigh* For the benefit of the latecomers who aren't reading through the earlier posts on this thread before posting, I'll quote Witchylana again:

It doesn't matter how many elements you change; if your work is derivative of someone else's work and you do not have their permission to do so, what you have done is plagiarism. End of. There is no mythical "4 elements" or "10%" or whatever other figure you may have heard.

 

Thank you, Arklady. (you are right...I skimmed through the thread.) I'm happy to see how the law protects the original artist! As an artist myself, I couldn't use any part of anyone's work and feel right about it...in any way. The whole point of art to me is SELF expression. To use anyone elses vision to me would constitute a lie..from the basic element.
I always felt that the law (as it was explained to me originally) didn't protect the Artist...and the integrity of all ART.
I'm glad to see that at least there is a measure of protection by law even if it is difficult financially for most artists to pursue legal action.

 

I think this is a very salient point - why I refuse to even call her by her correct name, in fact (well, that and being too lazy to look the spelling up :P ) I figure the fewer number of times it is mentioned, the fewer 'hits' will come up on search engines.

Looking at her work in the context of other work in a gallery could be informative; you might even want to have a word with the gallery owner/manager regarding the allegations of plagiarism. But anything that could cause more attention? Doupleplusungood - totally.

The question I am pondering -particularly in regards to where the line is drawn between 'reference' and 'plagiarism'- if there is no amount of 'degrees of seperation' that are acceptable, where is the line drawn? It could be very easy to accidentally make a face wholly from imagination that pointedly resembles a doll; in fact, I have a multiple drawings of a character that is a dead ringer for a certain sculpt (fortunately, the drawing predates the doll by a couple of years )

 

The "Debate" subforum is for both topics that have debatable sides and topics that might be offensive or uncomfortable to some portion of the general membership. It is also different from GD in that it is a members-only section, so people are not able to peruse unless they are members (which helps stave off rubberneckers and trolls).

This thread was split off from a broader question which addressed the general topic of artists using images without crediting. The "debate" centered on 1) if artists could legally use doll images without crediting, 2) if there was a moral or legal difference between "crediting" and "acquiring permission" and 3) if anyone really cared. The Mijn Schatje example rapidly took over the thread, which is why it was moved into its own focused topic.

The debate portion of the thread has mostly passed, and at this point people have moved on to updates and discussion. (The thread will probably die naturally until there is news or other information added to the thread).

Your questions that seem to specifically focus on DIM really could go into the originating thread (Using Artist Likenesses without Crediting) which is about a more generic discussion... or it could go into the DIM MiniMee legality thread. That would be completely appropriate there... but unfortunately, though it is not your intent, your posts seem to be coming off as finger-wagging in the context of this particular thread.

 

The debate started about if whether or not what Mijn is doing is wrong and people were finding more and more examples of her copying. Since then it was split off onto it's own topic so that members could find more examples of her theft, places where she's exhibited, publications where she's mentioned so that all the information would be available in one place and we could be sure that late comers weren't contacting people that have already been contacted. (And because there were people that would pop in in support of her and the debate would continue.) Since then most of the people seem to be on the same side regarding her works. So no, probably at this point it's not so much of a debate as it is a thread to report on and discuss any updates that are happening with this case. This is precisely why it was split off from the other topic and into it's own topic about this particular artist.

ETA: Pfft too slow. Armeleia's explanation is much better anyway.

 

It's a debate about profiting from the direct copying/tracing of other people's (often stolen) images. If the mods tell you that you are out of the scope for this debate, then you are. They often step in to keep a debate thread on topic (or split it into different threads), though normally people respect their requests and aren't combative or petulant about it.