Artists Using Doll Likenesses without Crediting [Mijn Schatje discussion]

If you used the doll as inspiration or like how you use those wooden mannequins, then yeah, that would be fine. However, if you're using someone else's doll as the inspiration, it would be nice to note it somewhere. By doing so you're covering yourself, and the owner of the doll would feel really good. :3 But if it's your doll, then you can pretty much do whatever. If you want to note the type of doll used, then so be it.

 

I don't think they were purposely being rude. I think people should also realize that these companies know already and that while it may or may not be helpful that they continue to flood the inboxes of these companies, it's also very distracting when they are trying to answer emails regarding business (i.e.-product orders, problems with the product when it arrives....) and they've heard it who knows how many times.
Sometimes, even if someone means well, they hurt the situation instead of help it.
Somewhat of a side note: wasn't there some sort of mutual agreement (and I use that very loosely) earlier that one person would contact these companies and then we'd see what happens? Why are they still being hounded? I know that we all want answers but haven't we already talked about how as much as we want them, it jeopardizes the case too much to do so?

 

I've been following this story relatively closely for some time. It appalls me that her theft has taken her so far. Magazine deals, gallery gigs, thousands of dollars... It's upsetting to know that someone who steals got so far in the art world, while the real artists who take the time to create their own work get left in the shadows.
I'm wondering if someone else ever spoke up about this, other than the BJD community?

 

If I remember correctly most companies have said something... along the lines of no permission was granted and they asked her to remove/stop.

 

I thought that was the case as well -- either that one person was doing the contacting, or that there would be a list of which companies had been contacted to avoid hounding them to death about an issue they were already aware of.

I dunno, I can imagine that company reps might be a little bit short if they're investigating the issue but are still getting dogged about it despite their efforts.

 

What has happened in this case seems that the individual involved has put more effort into marketing of their work than the actual excecution, and has taken short-cuts that have come back to bite them back - hard.

Remember that when an artists' work is sold in a gallery at thousands of dollars, it is highly unlikely that even half or even a quarter of that ends up with the artist. Even the most successful artists usually take up teaching positions or the like to maintain some kind of steady income.

I think one of the key problems in this case is the failure to realize how much dolls, and BJD in particular, are 'art' and requiring the same respect when handling their images as any other contemporary art piece (as opposed to a 'historical' piece which has different considerations). BJD also adds a new wrinkle as one image can have many co-creators: the doll sculptor, the company that produced it, doll owner, face-up artist, photographer, etc. It's one of the things that makes them so interesting, but it also makes 'acknowledging the creator' a bit of a muddle.

Of course, I feel the need to point out (again, sorry for being tiresome) people just don't support 'good' artists with anywhere near the same investment or energy that they do in denouncing the transgressors. I know, it's human nature, but...
:: sighs ::

 

There's a list on the first post this thread.

 

That's what I thought. Thanks, radio.

 

I found someone today on LJ using an icon with Mijn art - I commented on one of her posts and linked the radiotrash site. She said basically she doesn't think it "applies" to her icon, and she's keeping it, and also she doesn't believe Mijn copied at all.

Annnd now I'm aggravated! Here is the link if anyone wants to say anything further (since I'm pretty sure without looking at the site that her icon is indeed of a doll)

http://uniquewonders.livejournal.com/

 

Please don't go after people on their Livejournals or websites; it doesn't really help anything and looks bad originating from our forum.

 

To be honest, I believe this thread is here to spread information about Mijn's theft of others photographs for her art, not to convince other people who use her are that they're wrong. Sure, you can provide evidence, and they can decide for themselves if they want to support her artwork, but directing a forum of already aggravated people towards one person is unnecessary.

 

then they could politley say "thank you we are aware of the situation and are looking into it" or they could say nothing at all. It actually takes some effort to attack the messenger, so that is never an acceptable response, imo. (the specific case I was referring to was unrelated to the notifications going on in this thread, so I was not stepping on any toes with my inquiry).

 

Yeah but can you imagine how many emails they get daily, about that AND regular doll order questions? I can see where after a while they'd get frustrated and seem like they're being short tempered, when really they're just trying to be efficient. It doesn't mean they don't care or they're being rude, they just have a lot on their plate and not enough time to write long individual emails to everyone who inquires.

 

I think it's pretty petty to after people who use icons from icon communities that rip images of the internet to make icons out of them and distribute those for free. Mijn Schatje is not getting paid for those icons and going after people who rip off Mijn Schatje's work is not stopping Mijn Schatje from taking other people's work. Strangely enough Blastmilk is credited too in the icon's description.

You can inform people of Radiotrash’s webpage, but you can’t force them to do what you want.

 

No, I know, actually all I did was show her a link and left it at that. I didn't reply to her and I didn't intend to.

 

Linking someone's livejournal and suggesting others could go and add to your comments, is crossing the line into petty. You advised her & gave her the link that's good enough. No need for this board to be used as the angry villagers going after people in other venues that aren't even selling anything or trying to profit from her work.

 

Okay. I get it. xD Today is a new day.

Anyway, dA news post has over 100 favs, so that's good! I wish that one smily face icon person would quit with the God comments, though.

 

There's no reference at all to the dolls?

I feel sorry for the people who paid so much money for the prints.

 

oh my gosh....I was already disgusted by her 'work' and how she totally denies knowing anything about BJDs, but now she is making an animated film and planning on making money off of that as well! This makes me so angry! I don't see how she could even call herself an artist. And has anyone noticed that the parts she didn't copy, like the bodies and scenes, are usually quite unattractive? This is just what I think...