Really, Dollmore? Blatant Kuroshitsuji rip-off

Wow. That is totally Ciel's dress.

But...er...might i point out that Dollmore may not be the first to take Ciel's look and use it? Try AngelReigon's "True Friends Seio", in which the boy is...erm....very much Ciel without an eyepatch. And teh girl jumped at me as being a grumpy Lizzy, but thats not as obvious. (She's got the pink dress, and blond curly hair and cute look, but the dress isnt obviously something Lizzy wears to my knowledge)...and no one grumped about this ^^;


I'm really not too keen on the idea of any company using the image of an anime character or game/movie/whatever character without permission, but i'm not sure if theres any legal issues, unless that drawing of Ciel in that dress, and the style of that dress are copyrighted. Its a bit offsetting that dollmore didnt say that they based the concept on Kuroshitsuji at all.

I also agree with everyone who pointed out doujins, cosplay, independant seamstresses, and the like.

Perhaps someone should ask if they used the kuroshitsuji pics as inspiration, though, if only to see how they would react ^^;

 

Perhaps they actually did receive permission of some kind... Something to think about. I think the outfit is adorable.

 

I'd still buy it.

I honestly don't think it matters terribly, I mean, I would prefer if they said "Got this from XXXX" but I don't really care, if I know where it comes from (and I didn't actually until someone pointed it out, I'm not familiar with that series.) then if I happen to want it for my boys, I'll buy it. No questions asked. Honestly I don't care.

 

I very much doubt that Dollmore got "permission" for this and their other anime inspired outfits, but I really don't see what the problem is. Besides the matter of copyright that has been brought up, there's loads of seamstresses selling cosplay outfits for both dolls and humans, and some of the human cosplay sellers are actually pretty big businesses. And I don't think people get upset about that.

Also, consider that the anime owners in all likelihood have absolutely no interest in making official cosplay outfits specifically for asian ball joint dolls. So its not like Dollmore is taking business away from them; if anything, they're promoting the anime, albeit indirectly since they can't use the name.

Just my two cents!

 

I think it would be pretty awesome if they did do doll cosplay outfits :3

 

Actually, it makes me pretty sad....
What makes me even more upset is they are trying to hide the fact they make a copy of Ciel and said it is inspire by the fair lady.


To me, Cosplay is more a cutume you wear with no business involved. Not something you use as a selling products.

Yes, that is what I feel about.
I start to afraid that one day, companies would copy each other companies character's clothes(such as soul doll MD...) and stated that they are inspire about other unrelated story....

 

Sadly copyright laws in Japan are pretty sketchy. My friends and I met a woman named Helen Mccarthy who is one of top experts in anime and manga (and from the UK XD) and she was telling us about how hard it was to get permission to reproduce manga images for her latest book.
The copyrights for artwork often get passed from person to person. They sometimes go around several different companies before they just expire after the series is no longer popular.
My point is that even if you wanted to report this, you would have one hell of a battle though a complex legal system to find the person or company that owns the rights to the design. More often than not the Japanese don't want to know or can't be bothered with this sort of thing unless it's something really major that will eat into their profits. Even if you spoke perfect 'polite' Japanese your cries would fall upon deaf ears.

As far as I'm concerened I don't see an issue with it. If it was a copy of an existing product by a licensed company then I would be worried but since it isn't... I really don't care

 

Personally I think that ripping off a doll is a big deal because you're taking one physical doll and making another to look like it.

Turning a drawing(/animation) into an outfit is just that. Taking a drawing (and not always of a full outfit. In some cases drawings only show a front, side, not whole thing) and turning it into it's own physical thing.
You're not stealing someone else's physical, 3D work and making your own by copying it inch by inch.
You can't say "Look even the seams are the same!" between a dress and a drawing of it like you can with seam lines on a doll.
The placement of drawn in seams may be the same as sewn in one but they can not possibly be the same. One is sewn and the other is drawn. One is a real seam the other is an artists rendering of one.

Also. My other thought is:
Doll company makes money selling dolls. If one is ripped off they can loose that money.
Anime artist makes money making that art. Not the physical outfit. No loss for them.

 

Actually I was more focus on the clothes itself (like Volks fairy story one)...
For example, they can copy Iris and Johana clothes and state that they inspried by
Snow White story...

I cannot really agree with your other thought... If it is true, then maybe it is more acceptable if other Limited dolls that is impossible to produce?...(since it is quite off topic, I will stop here.)
Anyway, I am not a fan of this animation, so....

 

I have to admit that I also am not an anime fan for the most part. >.> I don't know if that really effects my thoughts though. If it were a copy of an outfit from something I was a fan of? I'd buy it. I'd totally buy it.
I also have a different thought on copies as a whole but THAT is another topic so uh. I'll stop now >.<

 

I don't see it any different than bootlegging a doll, but then I think craftsmen of all trades deserve equal respect in regards to their product.

Legally they should have license it - and if it was it would say so in the fine print. If they didn't want to be bothered to do that - then they should have made it look different enough from the original.

Mistreating other's is enough reason for me to spend my money else where.

What Dollheart outfits are bootlegged? That's sad as I love the quality and designs of their clothing.

 

I'd always assumed that they had managed to make the clothing 'different' enough that they wouldn't get in trouble.

Then again, I don't know Korea's laws. Or Japan's, for that matter. :/

The Suigintou 'rip' has been mentioned a couple times, and just from a cursory glance I can tell that there are significant differences; the straps, the lack of roses, the lack of bows. . .

 

Well, if a doll company has been copied by someone selling cheap imitations of their sculpts, that can really hurt their business. If someone had stolen an artist's drawing and claimed it for their own their would be a problem. Likewise, if the Dollmore outfit had been a rip off of another company's doll outfit, it would be more of an issue. However, this is a dress inspired by a manga illustration that was in turn inspired by My Fair Lady. The situations aren't really the same and the way fashion design works isn't necessarily the same as dolls or 2-D artwork.

If it bothers people the best thing to do is not buy it, but personally I just can't get that worked up about the whole thing--it's not that I don't respect artists. It's just that if there's any infraction at all it's pretty minor--more a matter of principle than someone's business being damaged.

 

Ha. I saw this on the Kuroshitsuji LJ comm (and the reaction there is far more pleasant, oddly enough).

This is nothing new. And it sure as hell isn't unique to Dollmore.
Also, clothing design rip-off =/= doll mold pirating. I think the comparison is completely absurd.
On one hand, you have someone making a cosplay for dolls, on the other, you have blatant copies of someone else's original mold.
I don't see this as any different from the non-licensed cosplay for humans you find on eBay or Y!J

This is also very common in lolita.
Certain companies such as, Fan Plus Friend (who have also made that Ciel dress, btw) and Bodyline, rip off popular loli brands all the time.
And let's not forget the many companies that ripped off the popular rocking horse shoes originally designed by Vivienne Westwood.

People are going to make what they know sells.
Considering the popularity of Kuroshitsuji right now, this isn't all too surprising.


Btw, there is a title picture in the manga where Ciel is wearing a dress that is one of the same dresses worn by Christina Ricci's character in Sleepy Hollow.
So... yeah.

 

It's up to the original copyright holder to chase down an intellectual property violation. And costume-design/fair-use only doubles the slipperiness of the slope of any claim involved. Good luck doing that under Asian law, huh?

I personally have a bitch of a time telling one lolita-fluff outfit from the next, at any given time, but there you go. That is why god created fan-watchdogs, to alert the original artists & see if they care. (And, judging by Onihime's post above, it doesn't sound like much of the LJ-fan-watchdog community gives a crap either.)

--which was never actually proven. So, like JonBenet Ramsey's parents & O.J. Simpson, they're still innocent. Except in the gallows of people's minds.

So, vote with your dollar. Or don't. Next case!

 

Nope.
In fact, a lot of the comments there express frustration that the outfit isn't even more accurate.

This is why I'm holding out hope that Volks jumps the Kuro bandwagon.
Hell, the people that work at the LA Sumika are absolutely giddy over Kuro.

 

*Shrugs* It's nothing new, I mean HZ made the Rozen Maiden outfits as well, and I've seen several outfits copied and sold on eBay, just change a few things around and maybe you can slide buy it. It all comes off as A) Don't buy if you don't like the idea that they are copying everything or B) Buy because as long as the producers of the anime aren't complaining then why bother?

@Onihime.
I must agree, I don't really care. xD I just think "Oh look they liked Kuro, that's cool." Plus I'm going to buy that dress because it's adorable whether it is or isn't exact. x'D;;

 

Perhaps this is because clothing styles to a great degree are copied from the most popular designer styles every season. We're all very used to seeing some fabulous Chloe dress or purse and then 15233 variants of it, with just minor changes, in the same general style and even similar color, materials, etc. I only get uptight about that if someone sells it as "Chloe" and charges a high price when it's not genuine Chloe. If it's just "Chloe-inspired" then that's normal. The clothing designers come out with a whole new line in a couple months, or even have one out already, and the whole process starts all over again. This process is more or less accepted in the clothing industry in a way that copying is not accepted in other forms of art, probably because the lifespan of a clothing style is so short anyway it's not worth quibbling about most of the copying because the styles move too fast.

 

Haha! You go, Judge Jenny!

 

I can't speak for the situation in other countries, but in Japan at least the copyright laws are really not that much looser than they are in the U.S.; doujinshi are, strictly speaking, totally infringing and illegal, and there *have* been highprofile cases in the past where creators or publishers have been sued for their copyright infringement. The big difference, and the reason Comiket still exists and is totally above-ground, is that there is currently a sort of gentleman's-agreement between the copyright-holders and the fan creators; doujinshi creators are expected to play by a set of unspoken rules that will ensure their works are not directly competing with the legitimate media, or made to look like they are "official" products -- they are produced in limited print runs, distributed in special events or directly by the DJ-ka, not brought out by big publishers and sold on Amazon.jp or other mainstream booksellers alongside the original works. The current attitude seems to be that so long as the doujinshi makers aren't overstepping their bounds, it's more helpful than hurtful to the legitimate properties because it helps keep up the interest of fans, helps develop a talent pool that may produce the next generation of pro artists, etc.; there are some very interesting articles on the subject here:

http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/magazine/15-11/ff_manga
http://www.otaku2.com/articleView.php?item=243

On the costuming/cosplay vendors/etc. front, I'm not sure what the specific laws are in Japan, China, and so forth, but the situation in the U.S., as folks have noted, is that fashion designs are currently specifically exempted from copyright protection because they are considered "useful articles", and only design elements that can be separated from the utilitarian garment are copyrightable. You can copyright a fabric print that you've designed, for instance, but once you've made that fabric into a dress, you probably won't get anywhere trying to sue someone who's made a similar-looking dress out of a similar-looking fabric, as long as the fabric print isn't an EXACT copy of yours. That said, the designer's NAME, recognizable trademarks like the entwined Chanel C's or the "LV" monogram on Louis Vuitton handbags, the little embroidered Izod alligator or the Ralph Lauren polo player, are all protected, which is why knockoffs trying to stay on the safe side of the law will instead embroider some other little animal on the chest of their polo shirts, use a different monogram on their imitation-designer purses, and so on. In the case of the Halloween costumes posted earlier, they'd risk getting sued up the wazoo if they used the name "Rainbow Brite" without permission, but as long as they stay away from using any of the trademarked names or official character art, they're safe...in the U.S., at least; even in other Western countries, copyright protection and intellectual property law about fashion issues varies pretty wildly. If you don't mind dense legal-speak, there's a fascinating article focusing on the U.S. issues but briefly noting the different legal situations in the U.K. and France here: http://leda.law.harvard.edu/leda/data/36/MAGDO.html