Company's taking costume ideas?

Yes, skwerlie is right, you cannot copyright the design of clothing. People make lots of money making knock offs of designer clothing all the time. Think of all the prom dresses every year that are almost direct knock offs of celebrity red carpet looks. It is different, of course, if you copy the design exactly and try to pass it off as as a real item, but you even see purses in department stores that look ALMOST like Coach but have a different logo.

The pink dress from Dollmore does look like an exact copy, but I think the others are significantly different enough to say that they were only "inspired" by the looks from the manga.

 

I think they do that on purpose of cosplaying dolls.
They do pullips that are exactly the same, not only the clothes.

 

The difference is that the Pullip/Taeyang/Dals from the Kuroshitsuji line were official collaborations (just like the various Pullip x Angelic Pretty/Pullip x H.Naoto releases). So, they are exact because they are legitimately supposed to be that way.

I think the prior discussion is on companies which make replica outfits/similar concepts without having the status of being an official collab. I think this is an important distinction to make.

 

I can understand the frustration of someone using what seems like others ideas for their own profit without giving credit where it is due, but in the end as long at it is not a direct copy, its hardly a knock off. I believe there is a big difference between knock offs and looks inspired by other looks. The hard and cold truth of the world is that there are no new ideas, only new way to retell old ones. Just because a one look is similar to another does not make it a knock off. I use clothes from fashion magazines all the time for inspiration for my illustrations. They will retain some of the originals designs but are changed enough to be my own. All art works this way, taking old ideas and building them up into new ones, but you can always see some of the older ideas at the core. Everyone copies everyone else. Original ideas? Ha! Everything you think you came up with on your own, or you think someone else came up with all on their own, was simple a product of something seen done by someone else. And all these original ideas some people assume were stolen from from other artists, you don't know where those artist originally got there ideas/influence for this outfit or that outfit in the first place. If being similar is all that it takes to be a knock off then really, in the end we are all thieves. But as my favorite painting professor once told me, "If it's a good idea, take it." And by that he meant if someone does something that you like, go ahead and use it, but make it your own. Art and ideas are meant to be shared.

 

Wow, its true 0_o But maybe it is intentionally, sometimes. "Here our BJD version of Ciel Phantomhive", for exemple.

 

I remember seeing those pictures and wondering if whether or not they were based on Kuroshitsuji! xD
Their tactic does work, because as a crazed fan of the series, I expressed more internet in those dolls than I usually would.

Is it "o.k." for them? Well... In this case, I feel that it would be hard for them to pass it off as their own because people like us instantly recognize it, which I think is their goal. So then the product will appeal more to the people who recognize it.

If they were trying to pass it off as their own, it would be smarter for them to use a less-known series.

Isn't it like online-made cosplays? Those cosplay stores charge 100+ for costumes they didn't really design, and the makers of the series didn't get paid for that. Same thing with commissioners of cosplays.

 

Well, the first thing I have to say is that Asia has far different copyright laws than we have in the states. I know many companies are getting rights for these outfits, while others do not say if they are or aren't. It is through these same unusual laws that Doujinshi are legal to be sold as fan art. The US has little to no tolerance for derivative works of existing IPs, where as Asia seems to have much looser laws in this regard.

So, while it may be unfair to not give credit, though most places I've browsed do, it may not be illegal where they are.

There is a pearl of truth in this, though as a costumer on commission, I feel I should speak up a little here.

I do not, in any way, agree with people who mass-produce costumes for an anime (In really cheap and crappy materials) and market it with any official logos. If not licensed, it should not be marketed as such. I, however, make costumes on commission. In short, someone asks me what it would cost for me to make them X costume, I quote them a price based on cost of materials (And I use REALLY nice stuff that LASTS) and the time it will take me to make it at current skilled labor rates. I don't take credit for the design, just the execution and textile realization of it as I was the one who took a drawing and made a dress. The payment I receive is only for materials and time. I make $0 actual profit.

I agree that people who do mass production should obtain rights to do so, but are you saying I should be paying thousands of dollars for manufacturing rights for a costume I'll make once or twice?

(Oh, and when I make a costume, it usually costs significantly more than $100)

 

The thing about this, that if you don't call a dress or design by its original name, then the designers / company really can't pin you on any legal ground. That's why you see so many knock off purses and jeans out there that are legally sold. For example, if I put out a green tunic with cap and boots, and called it 'forest elf tunic', almost everybody here would know what it was. Nintendo, however, could not get me on grounds of it being infringement on any copyright or trademark, because I'm not copying the design 100% and calling it "Link's Tunic". It's a shaky way of doing things, but that's how people manage to copy dress and character ides and get away with it. Also, in some cases, people can bring up free use clauses for pieces of art (claiming it is parody or for commentary). It doesn't work so well with dress designs unless it is under a specific label. So yes, you probably will see a lot of replicas of the Ouran uniform. It's easily recognizable, but nobody can really say anything about it.

Does it bother me that people make and sell these anime-inspired clothes? Not really, but then again it does. Personally, if I had spent hours designing a dress for one of my own characters only to have somebody rip it off and sell it for tons of money, I'd be horrified.

 

When I spend alot of my personal time designing, drafting, creating & sewing an outfit for one of bjd's, photograph it, then share the images of the outfit on the internet, and a bjd clothing company decides it will sell for them & they copy it, then sell it on the internet, there is nothing I can do. I don't have the time, the money or an attorney to write a cease & stop letter, or even sue to stop the company. All the bjd clothing has to do is change one thing (the color, one aspect of the design, trim, etc.,) & make me look like "sour grapes" on the internet. If I give the outfit, clothing ensemble, a name, the bjd company will change one word, the spelling of a word, & I called "sour grapes" again.

It happens every season with the fashion designers, they steal from each other. This is why a fashion designer is only as famous, popular, or even known as their last fashion design.

The key is to be forward-thinking, being inventive, to change the next clothing/outfit design, work on something new, use hard to find materials, because the companies that copy others' designs are using the cheapest way to create copies in quantity. The originals should always be the best quality.

 

oh how I wish I knew just a bit more about anime to contribute more to this thread.

But I actually remember ringdoll releasing an LE named "judges" that looking strikingly a lot like a black butler character I recognized with red hair, red glasses, and a red coat. He even had green eyes and the exact same outfit and face shape

I remember wondering if they gave credit to the animators or not. Does it offend me? Well. if it were my character, I would most certainly be offended. Does it offend me as a consumer? No. Not really.

 

I'm rather up in the air about this topic because of the cosplay aspect. I think DJSailorC said a lot of it, both referring to Asian vs. American copyright and fair usage laws, as well as the mass-produced cosplay aspect. I think making cosplay costumes for dolls or people is fair use, but I do agree that if that is what you are doing, you should at least label it "inspired by X." This at least says that you have drawn on a certain source, but that you have made your own take. I would say similar things in the human cosplay realm would be Goth-Loli dresses inspired by Superhero costumes, for example.

 

RingDoll Judges right? At first he was going to be an optional default for Spencer ( as RingDoll no longer produces the military uniforms that most of their sculpts wear in their full set pictures, so new full sets will probably have to be designed for each of those sculpts in the future) but after complaints Judges became a limited, and then was completely discontinued and removed from the site after more complaints from possible customers.

Yes, he had a red wig, glasses, painted on sharp teeth and a red coat, but as an owner of the full set doll and a cosplayer, I can tell you that Judges was quite un-Grell-like. The facial sculpt was Spencer, and as I own a default RingDoll Spencer, I can tell you he isn't Grell. He's gorgeous ( I love the Spencer sculpt to death) but it really doesn't much resemble Grell. The eyes are too down-turned and the nose a bit off for Grell, not to mention his mouth isn't nearly open enough for that Grell cheshire-like grin. Want to know a doll that unintentionally resembles a Black Butler Character? Illusion Spirit Adrian is a near dead-ringer for Sebastian, and I'm of the opinion that Luts Bory is a near dead ringer for Ciel. But because of the Spencer sculpt, really it looks like a Spencer is cosplaying Grell at best ( not that I minded as I bought him to be an original character of mine so not looking like Grell was cool with me!)

The jacket was pretty close I admit, but the rest of the costume was done very differently (original has a mandarin collar for the shirt while Judges does not, different colored vest, different pant design, different shoes used, hair style for Grell is more spiked and fluffed on the top as well as slightly wavy , Judges wig is long and straight, etc.) Judges didn't even come with the chainsaw he was pictured with( That item was with a different doll, Jessica), and that had to be bought extra if the buyer wanted it.

Judges was an inspired by doll. Similar, but very different to the original design. Because of this, legally he was conceptually different from the character in question. Much like the chanel and gucci knock off purses or inspired by red carpet dresses. No one stole the Black Butler design outright, they looked at it and decided they liked the dandy-ish style and made something that had a similar feel to it is all. Now, if they had 100% copied the design of the outfit like was done with Blythe/Pullip I'd expect it to be an official deal, but inspired by knock offs I hold no qualms with because really they aren't the same thing. Kind of like how a Bobobie doll just isn't a Volks doll. Yeah, they're both BJDs and they're both really nice, and to the untrained eye they're the same thing, but no one who does even the slightest bit of research would ever mistake the two from company photos.

By the way, didn't mean to pick on Volks and Bobobie there, both have lovely dolls, I was just using them as a metaphor due to the price differences and major aesthetic differences between the two companies.

So, with that said..

Yes, some companies do flat out take design ideas from other sources, and some people commission outfits for dolls that are based on other sources. However, I feel like more often than not,the designs that get all the attention are not design copies, but inspired by pieces that tend to be considered "spot-on" when really they are maybe similar in color or general style. Like has been said in this thread before, there are cosplay websites that sell exact replicas of costumes, hundreds of them, but no one cares, yet when a doll company does it suddenly it's a big issue. I'm not offended by the concept of selling doll cosplay at all. If human cosplay companies can get away with it, then why can't doll companies do it as well? People make character based dolls all the time, so it's no surprise that doll companies would want to offer costumes that would sell well.

 

I see the positive and negative part of this issue =/ but I have to say that the red AS suit, as pinkbunnygirl pointed out, doesn't look much as Ciels at all. Maybe the color and the pose look the similar but if they would have display the picture Without the skull and that pose, I would have never even think about kuroshitsuji.

idt the entire Picture(including the lineart) was a fanart. =/ The first time I saw this picture was when I was reading the actual manga online http://www.mangareader.net/102-2022-1/kuroshitsuji/chapter-13.html
Correct me if I'm wrong but I think the picture you saw were probably just colored versions of the original chapter 13 cover of Black Butler. People do it all the time for Naruto and other manga. =)

 

there's another aspect that hasn't been mentioned here. I don't know how it works for Japanese copyright law, but in the US, even if clothing designs were protected by copyright, this 2D-to-3D transformation would fall under Fair Use for being a Derivative Work.

Likewise, if someone cites a source of inspiration, then they might actually be liable for trademark misuse (using the name), which does prohibit a lot of companies from even mentioning their design inspirations.

And how many artists and designers have come up with something completely out of the blue, only to find that someone else did something almost completely identical 5 years before you did? Not saying that's the case with the examples here, but it can and does happen.

 

Welp, unfortunately if you LOVE a certain style and come across a supplier willing to create it, people who want it will buy it. I know if i found someone who creates a suit from my favorite artist i would most likely jump at the chance to buy it. Sure the artist doesnt get any credit or compensation, but really, what can be done? Lawsuites or whatever it takes would definitely be a route to take, but there is just too much paperwork and time involved. =S

 

The way I see it, yes all of them are copies, but just like cosplay, people do sell outfits of another person's designs. It happens. They should at least market them as Black Butler, because it might actually gain even more popularity :3

 

I wonder if this has been added to the list.

if you're a supernatural, castiel, or misha fan you'll understand.
If it is out there somewhere can someone direct me to it? and possibly a sock monkey hat as well. thank you!

 

this post made my night. The Grell pullip is a dream doll of mine.

 

Hm, the way I see it, Angell Studio/Luts/etc are selling doll clothes, while the creator of Kuroshitsuji are selling images. They aren't really competing for sales, Angell Studio isn't stealing Kuroshitsuji's customers... They are offering something that people would otherwise have to commission or make themselves. If the makers of Kuroshitsuji also made and sold costumes for dolls, it would be a different matter, I think.

 

Sadly, no matter how much it bothers you as the artist, it is fully legal to copy someone's work as long as you change it by 10% the original artist cannot sue for copyright infringement. I have a friend who designs pottery and one of her designs was being sold by Target, but because they changed three lines (Causing th 10% change) she couldn't get any money, or sue Target for it. Going from a concept drawing to a three dimensional fabric construction is more than 10%

It sucks, horribly, and as a consumer you can choose not to help those who do this by boycotting the articles and getting others to boycott as well. If enough of their profits are lost because of the customer's reactions then the companies will stop doing it.