Recasting a company's doll in unavailable resin

haha. Morality is so very, VERY skewed. And happiness is expensive.

 

Sorry for bringing this up when this is now on page 6 and this reply was on page 3. Just felt I had to justify myself.

What I said was basically an acknowledgment of a previous poster's reasoning for copying artwork. I've seen it done with paintings and sculpture. Personally, I don't think it's exactly A-OK. But in this case, by "copying" it, they're learning the technique of that master painter, which does, in a way, constitute respect of that technique. I said "I suppose I can support it for the sake of learning" in respect toward other people's reasons.

It's much harder to control such "smaller items" as it's simply so much easier to "copy." Such as doujinshi. Not exactly with rights, but it's allowed and sold. But with dolls, making such a copy would require such a degree of artistic ability and so much work, that it becomes harder to understand. I can easily say I've doodled anime characters, but I can definitely say that I haven't bought resin, made molds, and recast a company-produced doll.

If it can be done, and the person isn't making a monetary gain, I suppose there's nothing stopping them. To be honest, this is a hobby, and we're all in it because it makes us happy. Personally, I would never do this. It would feel disrespectful and impolite, and just wrong, but if that doesn't stop you, and it makes you happy, there's really nothing I can do or say.

 

You're supposed to copy the works of the masters to learn their technique, but you're not supposed to try to sell those works or pass them off as the originals.

 

Morally, I think it's wrong. Speaking as an artist, it just gives me a bad feeling to think about it (and that usually means it's probably ethically wrong).

Legally, you'd have to do a lawyer's research to look up similar cases, find similarities, and even then you can't really determine anything until a judge decides on that specific case. You can guess at it, but unless you've done all that research (and it's a /lot/.. you wonder why lawyers get paid so much?) there's no way to be completely sure. It depends on what the law defines the doll as-- sculpt, materials, or both? etc etc.

Anyway.. it's not always about profit, but profit is easier to define legally than 'hurt feelings', and that's why it goes to court more often (yes, there's emotional damages, but that's still extremely vague and it wouldn't be good to let people take other people to court every time they got butthurt).

I guess just think of it like you were that sculptor/company. It's not always about the money...

 

i agree with this statement. i often download music and mangas and other things from the net. some people might bash me for it (including my dad) but i'm not selling them on as my own stuff; they're for personal use only.

to be honest, i wouldn't bash someone for re-casting a doll. i come from the part of town where knock-offs are frequently sold on the market, i'm used to seeing 'fakie' clothing, shoes, ornaments, DVDs, etc. etc. i totally understand how it affects the companies. i know if someone recast a doll I HAD MADE, i wouldn't be very happy about it. i guess i'm a bit laid-back where everyone else gets up in arms about stuff.

 

This doesn't make much sense to me. Of course you're not reselling them; books and music are not for sale so people can resell them. The purchase price of these items is for personal use and ownership rights. If you really want the right to use these things without payment, use a radio and a library. In exchange for the free price, you don't have as much control over access or playlists, but still, it's a readily available free option that doesn't involve bootlegging.

Sometimes I wonder if people are even trying to find other options?

 

I personally would be a little bothered to see a re-cast of a limited that I went to great lengths to acquire. (My dolls are pretty standards, so this is just as if I had rare dolls)
If you want an OOAK resin and mold, why not sculpt it yourself?

However, I think that as the hobby becomes more popular, it will happen. I have seen copy of Volks dolls already being sold on EBAY. To me, it wouldn't be the same to own a copy.
~Gus

 

After reading through the thread I'm getting the feeling that everyone is leaping to the assumption that either the re-cast will eventually be sold, or multiple re-casts will be made for profit.

I'm not going to equate what someone does for their own personal use/education/enjoyment as corrupt, especially since they've already paid the company for the object.

Now, should they start selling knockoffs on eBay, I'll happily bring out my pitchfork. Until such time, I really don't have the right to dictate to anyone how they treat their possessions nor impose my moral code.

Yes, they're making something using someone else's creation as a basis, but I think that's rather par for the course. If you look at classical music it's riddled with Variations on a theme, i.e. composers re-working the compositions of others at will. Andy Warhol used Campbell's Soup labels and publicity photos (which I'm positive he didn't own the copyright to) in his art. And leaf through a Master's art book sometime and you'll say a lot of pictures that look eerily similar. The technology of this age makes it easier to "copy" than it used to be, but my point is that it's been going on for centuries.

People often choose the path of least resistance. Why have to go to a library, search to see if they have something, wait weeks if it's checked-out, when in less clicks than it took me to write this sentence they can download it off of limewire or some other questionable site?

Me, I happily support my local library, and if dolls have taught me nothing else it's that patience is a virtue, so I don't mind waiting. But I've been told I'm a fool by many people for not going the easy, insta-click route. To each their own.

 

I don't have the right to dictate how others treat their posessions, but I see no need to pretend that I support something that I flat-out do not. I'm not the type to impose my moral code, but I will certainly use it to evaluate and decide who I respect.

I also stand by what I said, which is that the copyist paid the company for that object, not that object + one. If you have permission to recast, go for it. And some companies will give permission if you ask nice (a friend recently got permission to recast a highly modified head, and I believe MiniMee allows recasting of heads made after YOUR face or drawings).

 

Several of my art teachers have said, "Copy all you want for a learning experience - just don't sell those." Or, I would imagine, display them as "one's own work" even if not for sale. I think that's a very sound approach and one I espouse.

This particular hobby often seems to be so much about selling and public display that I think we lose sight of the fact that some people do it for personal enjoyment or growth without wanting or needing to show off to the group or care about anyone else's opinion/respect. Presumably, someone who did some recasts as a learning experience would move on to doing original work that could be shown and sold. I couldn't care less what people are recasting in their basements.

I recently took an entire casting class that was mostly recasting other objects, some of which had been man-made by some other artist. The point was to learn casting techniques and see how multiples of an item could be recreated in different ways, with different types of resin products and so on. Nothing to be ashamed of in exploring something like that, in my opinion, especially if it's not going to be sold or shown.

 

I don't see why it would be bad to recast a doll you paid for for your personal use... You aren't selling it or getting money for it or anything of the sort.
And it isn't like casting your own dolls is a simple easy thing that anyone and everyone can do. If you are using your doll to learn and cast your own I don't see how learning to do something is bad.
If I go out and buy a piece of art from a well known artist then copy the style of the art so I can hang it on my wall no one would care, but if I am into casting and am learning off a doll I have it is completely unacceptable? Or what if I am playing popular music to learn to write my own or just get better at playing an instrument? People learn and make better things by taking what they have apart and studying and remaking their own.
I guess I don't think anything that helps you grow artistically that isn't being sold is a bad thing.

 

I don't think its right, its someone elses work and is disrespectful to the artist who created the original, and probably could get you in hot water with the company. Its better to dye or (I would just blush him with a lot of pastels) Recasting is not modding, or fan art, it is making a fake of the original.

Another though in years to come, what happens to your dolls when you die? even a healthy person could be in an accident and be gone tomorrow. Unless the dolls are buried with you someones going to inherit them, and that recast fake could end up for sale, well your not there to say dont sell this its a FAKE, it ends up in the market either with your relative labeled as a scammer, or some unsuspecting noob walking off with a fake not knowing until too late.

If a leg is damaged in customs, I would contact the company, that is something shipping insurance should cover. If you don't want to go that route then apoxie sculpt can be used to fix it. If its good enough you can recast from its good enough you could repair it.

 

No, it's not ok, it's a recast.

 

Erm, prettyhatemachine, you're not saying the same thing as a Teo128 is at all. She's saying if she bought a CD, and wanted a copy for her in home stereo system as well as her car she's within her rights to make a copy, since she bought the CD first.

You're saying you downloaded music and manga without paying for it, and have the right to do that because you're not reselling it. That's not the same thing at all

 

I agree completely. Legally and ethically wrong.

As for the art teacher saying it is OK to copy for learning...I think some clarification is in order. I think copying by hand is what the teacher is talking about. We (I am an art teacher who has told my students it's OK to use other artist's work as a refernce point) are not talking about putting a painting on your computer scanner and then changing the colors. We are talking about using your eyes and hands and paint in a visual exercise to practice observing, seeing, color mixing, etc. If I sat down in front of Michealangelo's David with a lump of clay and attempted to sculpt that figure with my own hands, that would be copying for learning. If I made a mold of the statue itself and cast it so I could have one in a different color, that is just copying.

 

I understand. I actually wouldn't copy a doll just because the company didn't make it in the color I wanted either, I firmly believe that the petition option is the respectful choice... I've just been mightily confused by some of the justifications for copying one thing but not another (in many comments, not just yours)... and I really had no idea what you meant by small things

 

I don't think you should recast a doll regardless but...

Couldn't you dye the resin blue? If you can dye a doll tan, why not blue? I would try it on a spare pare of hands first but I think it's plausable, I actually discussed the possibility of it with a friend of mine.

 

I think recasting is completly wrong. If you wanted the doll in another color you can always dye them, but recasting is... another story. I just feel as if you're copying another person's work (You are if you think about it) and changing the color doesn't justify it as another doll. It's like plagerism. Changing the font doesn't make it yours.

 

Second everything Chaos Aroura said. Besides, it seems like most of the modding you would want to do you could do without recasting the body. Several people already mentioned you could simply dye the resin.

More information about copyright infringement.

 

Even if its not for any personal profit, I don't think that recasting is right without the permission of the original creator. It's like any other art form - If I find a piece of pixel art that I love but it's in the wrong color, I can't just replace the colors and call it mine - sure, maybe it's not illegal if I don't make any money, but I couldn't live with myself. And that's with a free hobby.

Dye a volks, or sculpt your own doll, but don't take advantage of the effort someone else put in to the doll just to make a (probably inferior) copy.