Recasting a company's doll in unavailable resin

Agreeing. Eating > Scruples when you're down that path (yes, kinda been there >_< - just be glad they're doing something useful and businessy, instead of stealing!)
Also, you're right before, most people have gone off the idea of the artistry etc, and gone into the greed area XD

Also, whoever pointed out an artist contacted the doll company and asked for permission, etc, that is fantastic that they allowed her to, with these exact limits in mind that's really great of the company. I'm kinda suprised a lot of doll companies don't already do commissions for this circumstance either, I mean they already have the moulds etc.

 

That is way more effort than I would ever be capable of doing LMAO

 

I think that if your dream doll wasn't available in the resin color you wanted and you wanted it in a specific kind of color...like clear blue or maybe you wanted it to have some translucent parts and some not...and as long as you kept it for yourself and destroyed the mold afterward, then I think it would be just fine, especially if it was for personal use only. If you were going to try to sell it...or make a bunch of them to make a profit...then it would become a problem. ^^;

 

I agree with this. ^_^

 

What if your dream doll has translucent parts? How would you do that then? ^^;

 

You could always add the transparency in photoshop (it would just be a matter of taking a photo of your setup without the doll in it, then another photo from exactly the same camera angle with the doll added to the scene, and then layering the two photos, with parts of the 'doll' layer slightly transparent).

Alternatively, if you care more about the doll itself than its appearance in photos, you could always sculpt your own parts by hand and cast them in translucent resin. Having the original parts to compare your own parts on would allow you to make something quite close to what you wanted, without infringing directly on the company's work (this gets closer to infringement if you copy something very unique to the company, like a face or a specific jointing style, but that should only really be an issue if you both a) are incredibly talented and so can make a part that is indistinguishable from the original and b) you wanted to sell the cast results as your own work).

(Also, no offense intended, but you should really quote multiple posts in one response instead of posting so many times in a row - if you open each post you want to quote in a new tab, you can copy all the quoted text into one post and write your replies in that).

 

Well...what if the person DOES care about the doll itself AND they aren't good at sculpting? And I know someone who is good at casting, just not sculpting, and they've been wanting to cast a doll in a completely abnormal resin color that no company seems to offer. I referred her to this thread. And basically told her my opinion on it. There really is no one way to solve it...I just say try to find the doll of your dreams...but if it doesn't exist in the color or resin type you want it in, fix it up yourself if you have the time, money, and materials to do so. The company wouldn't be losing money...you still have to buy the doll in order to cast it, also it is for personal use, and as long as you destroy the mold and don't use it for anything else and as long as you don't turn around and sell the doll...then it should be fine.

 

You could commission someone else to sculpt it for you - this hobby is full to the brim with talented artists willing to create things for others for a very reasonable fee. Heck, I know it's the sort of thing I'd be willing to do for just the shipping costs, because it would be an interesting project.

Or, as mentioned already in this thread, write to the company and ask them for permission to recast their work. They might well grant it to you. If they don't, you just have to accept that, as the creators of the work, you should respect their wishes.

It's not ethical. You can do it, and it's very unlikely a company would have the funds necessary to stop you, but it's still unethical. You are essentially saying that you respect the artist enough to want their work for yourself, but you don't respect the artist enough to not bootleg their work against their wishes.

It would also inevitably lead to you being ostracised on DoA, as (as I mentioned already) many people in the community are artists, and take artists rights very seriously. Photos of your doll would not be allowed, and it's quite possible you would face disapproval at dollmeets, if any artists or people who support artist's rights attend.

So, it depends greatly on your definition of 'fine'. If by 'fine', you mean that you won't get in legal trouble for it, then you may well be right. If by 'fine' you mean your bootlegged doll should be accepted on DoA, or in the BJD community at large, you might have to accept that it actually isn't 'fine' after all.

 

as many people mentionned, it would cost a lot of money to re-cast the doll. and for some reason it makes me feel it would be less wrong this way... you paid for the original AND are even willing to pay extra material to have your perfect doll..!

personnaly i would think its not worth it though... the person should dye/airbrush the doll.
but i understand how its tempting to have it cast in the color, because dye and paint often comes off of the doll (arround the joint mostly) and its anoying and less pretty :/

 

There are people who are good at sculpting, but not good at casting. Bring the two types of people together and you get interesting projects without entering some shady grey area.

 

If you go through the trouble of finding a good artist to sculpt/cast doll parts for you that will fit your doll's body just because you want to avoid doing something illegal, you might as well commission them to create, from scratch, a whole new doll for you. Essentially, resculpting a doll is as unethical as recasting the doll in the first place since they are both copies of the original. (Remember the outrage when it was discovered that Healthy Doll copied LoongSoul Doll's lower legs? Remember way back when Bobobie was new and it was discovered that they had copied Luts hands?)

To reiterate what so many others have said, I don't see what's so horrible about recasting a doll if it's for your own personal use (not a bootleg if you aren't selling it) and the company refuses to cast their own dolls in that super special resin tone you want. It's only "bad" if you plan to sell your recasted doll to make a quick buck like so many bootleggers do.

 

Loz64, recast dolls are still bootlegs whether you sell them on or not. Bootleg is just another word for counterfeit, and all recast dolls are counterfeits.

Recasting harms the company's ability to put money towards innovation and renewing their own sculpting and casting facilities. If the hobby allowed free-rein to bootlegging, the original companies wouldn't be getting money for their hard work and they wouldn't be able to pay their sculptors, casters, face-up artists... without these essential people, there wouldn't be dolls for us to enjoy in the first place. It's more important to reward these people financially than it is to put money into the hands of rip-off merchants.

Recasting a doll for your own personal use is still a bad thing because there is always the temptation to sell the doll you've knocked-off...and who could be trusted to verify you'd destroyed the moulds and will never make another copy? If I knew that someone had recast a doll, whether it was for their own personal use or not, I would never buy from them or sell to them. I don't want to reward or facilitate a recaster.

 

Personally, I see this question somewhat equal to sculpting minimees (no offense), but without the profit. You'd be creating a bjd minimee which you could even show off right beside the original one.

I don't see any problem with recasting a doll, as long as you bought the original, and keep it after the process. I'm totally against it if the original doll is going to be neglected, sold, thrown away, or it's not your property (i.e., you borrowed your friend's doll).

I don't see a problem with posting pics, either, as long as you give credit to the original company and possibly post a warning that it's not an official doll, but a recast you did yourself for entertaining purposes and personal use. I guess that would open a whole new off-topic concept, seeing as it would be a bjd, but not exactly like the others.

Of course, there's always the possibility of writing to the company, and seeing if they'd create the doll in the color you want for an extra... Not that I believe that to be exactly possible ^^;;;;;

Someone pointed out the chance of sculpting your own head. Wellllll... I'm doing exactly that, because I couldn't find a head similar enough to our tastes (mine and my mom's). I can draw, though not very well, and I didn't know if I could sculpt (you can see the progress at my deviantart profile, sorelina.deviantart.com). But not everybody can. Not everybody can mod, either, and people might prefer trying to recast themselves instead of sending heads off to be modded.

What I don't agree with, at all, is bitting someone's head off because they recasted a sculpt they already own. Everybody has the right to do whatever they want with the things they own. I think a polite warning is okay, and depending on the answer of the owner in question, anything from "Ah, okay, I just wanted to make sure you [insert explanation]" to "BanHammer!"...

 

A recast is a recast is a recast. There's no getting around it. They should not be tolerated. If your dream doll is a blue skinned SD17 Williams....either buy a legitimate one and dye/paint it blue or learn to accept that your dream doll is just that. A dream and does not exist. Having your dream doll is not a right guaranteed to you. My dream doll is a white skinned Michele. They don't exist. I am extremely happy to own my normal skinned Michele in his stead.

I am not even sure why someone would want to own a doll they would not be allowed to share on the internet, post pictures of, or take to doll meets without ostracism. You can't consider it part of a collection because it's a counterfeit item.

 

Your argument still doesn't address why it's bad for a person to recast a doll for their own private use with no plans to sell it (someone who is able quite easily to resist the "temptation"). The company already made money when that person bought the original doll. It's not like they will starve if I recast my doll once in a color they refuse to offer.

It is only bad if a person makes money off of their recasted doll. I am totally against bootlegs for profit, but for personal use, it's no big deal!

Kim: Acceptance isn't the be-all, end-all for a lot of people. There are quite a few DOA members who own off-topic dolls and even recasts who get by just fine without showing them off. Heck, I own some dolls I've never taken photos of or brought to meetups (who are legit, mind you). If a person gets into the hobby just to be accepted by others, they're in for a world of disappointment.

 

Aside from the legal, moral and ethical issues associated with a recast, even for personal use, I don't think I could ever re-cast a doll. To me, it seems cheap. I'd always know this doll, even with a special skintone, was just a knockoff of someone else's work.

As for the moral and ethical reasons...I understand that you've got to do what you've got to do, sometimes, to get what you need. But...dolls are not a need. These are luxury items, and they are sometimes pretty high-end luxury items. Yes, people use them for therapy purposes (myself included!), people use them to create clothes and jewelry for profit...but at the end of the day, if you can't buy the doll you want because it comes down to eating or having the doll, you will live without that doll.

In the end, people are free to do whatever they feel like, I suppose. But I'm also free to refuse to buy from someone I know has recast a doll, even just for personal use. I cannot be assured that their personal doll is their only recast. I've seen too many people who have good feedback and excellent customer service suddenly turn out to be completely insane to trust "Oh, she's a good person, totally trustworthy!" when it comes to something like this.

 

It is wrong because it is illegal. It is wrong because it disrespects the original artist, who spent the time creating the thing you are thoughtlessly copying. It is wrong because it disrepects the company, who sold you one doll, not the rights to recreate the dolls.

You try commissioning artwork sometime, and you'll see that there is a huge difference between buying the rights to one copy of the work, versus buying the rights to recreate that work yourself.

It's also wrong because it marks you out as a person who does not care about social morals, and is quite happy to do something considered immoral to get what you want. Most people will not want to deal with someone who publicly states that they have no qualms with doing immoral, illegal things.

The company has made money from you for one doll. They have not sold you the rights to recreate that doll (rights which, if they were to sell them to you, would be worth many thousands of dollars).

It is bad if you knowingly and intentionally break the law and disrespect an artists wishes, just to get something that you could easily get for much less money without breaking the law.

People in this thread are specifically mentioning that the community should accept bootlegs, and that they should be able to share photos of bootlegs without being judged for it. Kim is pointing out that, without some radical shift from it's current stance, this will not happen. Bootlegged dolls are banned from DoA, and will be a point of contention with many people in the community (affecting more than just showing off the doll - many people in this thread have already stated that they would not buy/sell/trade with a bootlegger, and I'd imagine companies would feel the same if alerted to the activity).

 

Tell that to post-modern artists who make money selling art that's basically someone else's art with few things (or nothing at all) tweaked to make it their own creation. Sure it's "illegal", but still, accepted in the art world because they've done something unique with it or are trying to make a poignant statement with it. Not to say that some artists don't shun this kind of art, but it was apparently significant enough for someone to place it in a history book and explain what their vision was so I could learn it and form my own opinion.

That being said, I will refer to Mjin S., who is accused of tracing doll company photos. I do believe what she is doing is wrong, but at the same time I think of her work as collage rather than something truly original, and collages are a respectable form of art. If she were to reference the original photos, would her "collages" still be considered "wrong?"

Well, sorry I'll be missing out on dealing with you. Just because someone isn't against recasting for personal use doesn't mean they are someone who will copy everything they buy and try to sell it for their own profit.

If that's your thinking, tell me where I can get a SD17 Williams with transparent blue resin without breaking the law (and for a good price) and without resorting to Photoshopping.

Again, it's not fair to label people as bad sellers/buyers just because they have a different opinion than you. Actions speak louder and clearer than words.

 

Those post-modern artists were breaking the law to make a point. Bootleggers are breaking the law for their own personal gain. It is a completely different thing. No one here is talking about recasting a Volks doll to make a statement about the breakdown between the meaning of a BJD and the symbol of a BJD. People are talking about breaking the law so they can have a hunk of resin that better fits their ideal of a hunk of resin.

Also, there's no reason to put illegal in quotation marks. It is illegal to bootleg. There's no grey area (even post-modern artists get sued and deal with controversy - that's actually part of the art).

People in this thread are not talking about 'making a poignant statement' about anything. Bringing up post-modern artists is a complete red-herring.

Yes, yes it would. Unless Mjin took her own photos and traced those, she is profiting of someone else's work. The sculptor of the doll, but also - and arguably, more importantly - the photographer of the doll, who worked out the composition, the colour-balance, and the lighting of the original piece.

Mjin is a thief. The fact that she is also a liar and a coward is incidental.

No, but it means that you may be more likely to back out of a deal if someone offers you a better deal, or more likely to charge me for better shipping than you provide, or that you may not disclose the condition of your things as well as you could.

You might not. But you've already admitted to being immoral in one aspect, so why should people take the risk of dealing with you in other aspects?

Pay someone talented to sculpt you one, and cast him in blue resin. It will cost you a few thousand dollars, which is 100% reasonable for a one of a kind, commissioned to specific design, hand-cast, SD doll.

Even if you aren't willing or able to pay that, breaking the law is breaking the law, and bootlegging dolls is still immoral and wrong.

Yes, and you (and others in this thread) have taken the action of publicly admitting that you care more about getting something you want illegally than you do about following the law or following social rules. You can't complain that people judge you on 'words not actions' when posting that you see nothing wrong with breaking the law is an action you have chosen to take.

If you don't want people to infer that you are immoral, don't post about how you see no problem illegally infringing on a company's intellectual property.

 

I can't speak for anyone else, but I can speak for me. And it's not a matter of someone being a bad seller, or a bad buyer -- it's a matter of me being uncomfortable spending the money one does in this hobby when this person has recast a doll in their past, and I've only got their word to go on that THIS product is not recast. That is not labelling them. I'm using the facts I have to determine my personal comfort level with this purchase. Labelling would be going to their feedback thread and their sales threads and posting BOOTLEGGER DO NOT BUY FROM everywhere.