Recasts and Bootlegging

SERIOUSLY?

Wow, tell that to all of the intellectual property lawyers in the world.

I can't believe there are people who do not understand that recasting by anyone other than the sculpt owner or his/her designated casting company is THEFT. Period. Plain and simple. Dat's the fact, Jack.

 

THIS. Thank you.

 

Sidebar, to address this statement a few pages back. Just FYI, bootlegging predates the internet. Years ago there were several tables at your average con selling bootleg video tapes and eventually Taiwanese CDs. Bootlegging has in the past been an accepted part of the fan community, as it was often the only way to obtain rare or unusual items. In recent years, as legit media has become more readily available, anime cons specifically have banned bootlegs from the dealers rooms. However, it still proliferates at large gen cons like Dragon*Con, for example.

Regardless of whether we feel bootlegging is right, I will say that I really doubt it's going to just go away on the efforts of one, admittedly large, forum. It has a long and checkered history that goes far beyond our current issue. While I admire everyone for being so strong in their convictions, I think a lot of energy is being wasted in fist-shaking and teeth gnashing. There are dishonest people on both sides of this equation, people who do not honestly portray their 'purebred' dolls during sales. But, they are the minority. I suspect the same may be true of the other side.

The priority needs to be keeping DoA a recast-free zone with a cordial, if chilly stance toward recast owners. I know that won't satisfy some people, but I think it is the best, most realistic solution in the short term. In the long term I think working towards some sort of registration would be ideal, but the logistics are daunting.

 

It's actually nineteen pages of people arguing about legal issues and rights, and respect for the talented people who create art.

NO, you can not take it just because it exists. Ignorance of the applicable laws (I would say just plain ignorance, but that would be rude) does not meant they don't apply.

It's really not productive to debate on a topic when you have no clue what the facts are, particularly when you are debating with people who do.

 

I tried to think hard about whether or not I would expect a friend to get rid of a doll after finding out it was a bootleg- that is, they didn't know it was when they bought it. And at first I was like: "No, because they spent money on it. It's not right to punish them for being duped." But then I compared it to something that really gets my blood boiling like the issue of the copied dolls- for me, it's plagiarism. There's a book out that is insanely popular that I hate because I consider it plagiarism and I get upset with friends for liking it and would be pretty upset if they supported the author by buying it. Quite honestly, it infuriates me.

I just don't think that some people who are on the fence about it are making good comparisons to other "crimes" they feel strongly about. What about if someone bought test answers from someone so they could cheat yet you stayed up all night studying so you could pass. It's a class you struggled in, so it's not like it's easy for you to learn the material. They make an extremely high grade, and you do pass. However, your classmates find out that the person cheated. It's going to be guaranteed that they will either tell the teacher and/or grow extremely upset and angry with the person because they couldn't be like everyone else and study. Or if they bought a paper and plagiarized their research paper that others spent months on... you can't think that they would be allowed to keep their grades and social standing if these things came out. You can't think that anyone would so: "oh, no big deal." Because that person has also taken someone else's hardwork and tried to pass it as original.

I know that people keep saying: "Oh, not all of them are trying to pass it off as original". But you couldn't possibly expect someone to get away with; "I didn't write this, I bought it from someone, but I'm going to turn it in. At least you know now that I didn't write it."

 

Pinksugar, that's a great comparison. At least, though, in the academic arena there is a built-in mechanism for using portions of someone's work without crossing the line; citations. And if you want to reproduce someone's work in its entirety, there's even a mechanism for that -- you ask permission.

I seriously doubt there is an analagous way to do this with dolls or doll parts.... Other than licensing the recast.

 

How about a chip, being poured into the doll with the resin? Chips are quite hard to fake from what I've understood, at least harder then the dolls themselves, especially if they work with encryption. I am no expert but from what I've understood even the scanners aren't terribly expensive or hard to get by, and the company could even sell it's own scanners on their site, if neccessary.

I've near-reached the limits of my understanding here though, is there someone on here with some knowledge concerning this who could mentally test-drive this idea a bit further?

 

That's absolutely astutely true-- and it should put paid to the whole Hypocrisy question. It seems like half the defense to recasting is "well, you don't complain about pot-smoking or MP3 theft or lolita-brand knockoffs, so therefore you have no right to complain about doll recasts." Which is as hollow as a stale slice of Wonder bread.

Yes. That's what's been disgusting from the beginning. The notion that it's not OK to name a criminal a criminal because harsh language or value judgments might hurt their feelings; the notion that the criminal doesn't deserve anyone's scorn because s/he might have a "valid" reason for ripping off the artists; the notion that others should care whether they're socially insecure or dislike being ostracized, that we should help soothe their persecution-complexes. You don't get to whine about being persecuted or bullied if you've actually done wrong. As my dad would say, "get off the cross - we need the wood for the fire".

And, if your particular crime happens to be one that really sets people off, you'd better be prepared for a little namecalling. Namecalling is another one of those grim meathook realities of the First World that seem to overwhelm the pro-recast community. We all have to put up with being called names by strangers online, especially when those strangers are really passionate about something. People on YouTube will accuse you of being a puppy-eating nun-rapist and threaten to come to your house & cut your throat just because your review compared their favorite metal band to Justin Bieber.... if somebody calls you a creep for ripping off their favorite doll artist, you butch up and deal with it.

 

I can't say I'd be comfortable with chips. I try hard enough to keep my phone, computer, facebook, gmail from tracking where I am. I'd rather not have one more potential thing someone could walk by and scan to get personal information about me. (Even if it's just "This doll is legit" and not my name, the idea that other people could be scanning something I own without my consent is creepy to me.)

 

I had a Facebook account once. Then I read their TOS. Apparently they have the right to monitor everything I do online, everywhere, always. That freaked me out a little.

As long as my doll's chip isn't connecting itself to my internet or GPS or states in a TOS they own my soul I'm fine with a chip just being a chip.



EDIT: Industries using chips for tracking or identification: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio-frequency_identification

 

Licensing would be the legal way for recasts. One could always ask the copyright holder (in most cases the doll artist or company) if they will allow you to make a recast of the doll you have (for whatever reason you give them). If you get permission for one replica, your recast would be a legal one. You could see it as a very brief licensing contract. One could also ask for permission to make X amount of recasts or be allowed to produce recasts for X amount of time. Financial compensation for "renting the copyrights" could be offered too.
If permission is not given, it should be accepted that it is not given. Some things should be given and not taken.

 

Agreed.

I think it would also greatly increase the costs of the dolls. At minimum, the head, body, hands/feet, and any extra/fantasy/whatever parts would need to be chipped separately (depending largely on what type of option parts the company actually offers). That is, if the chip could even withstand the casting process and chemicals. (As I understand it, resin casting takes a great deal of pressure.)

How many doll owners would actually purchase the equipment necessary to verify an embedded chip? Because, really, once the doll is out of the parent company's hands, it is our responsibility to verify that a second-hand doll is legit. Or... in the case of a doll from a dealer, that the dealer is authorized to sell that company's dolls.

Also... unless every doll company chose to use the same kind of chip, doll owners would probably need to have different scanners for different types. I remember reading in an article about micro-chipping pets, that a vet/shelter couldn't necessarily identify a dog just because the animal was micro-chipped - because the scanner they did have didn't read that type of chip.

True - especially with the number of trackable variables necessary for it to be truly effective - but once the framework was laid out, the database could technically take care of itself, with a minimum of moderating to remove the occasional sneak who tried to register a fake. The biggest problem, really, would be getting people to use it. Even looking a the company picture databases, it's easy to realize that it's not every doll that exists on the forum.

 

I'm not sure, that's what they taught me in artschool, but they could've had it wrong.

 

Best.Comment.Ever.

 

I'm going to be flat-honest. I love Volks, I love Volks more than any other company. And yes, I think Volks is the best doll company out there --- MY OPINION. Cry more. Anyway. I get really upset at people wanking over Volks being too expensive and overrated, then going out and getting a Volks recast because they "can't justify" spending the secondhand market price or even the original market price for a Volks doll. If they can't justify the price of a Volks doll then they shouldn't buy a recast, because obviously they don't like the look of the dolls enough to pay the price.

 

It is a bit odd to be so stuck on a particular sculpt, but then not to think it's worth saving for. It's as though you are in a long distance relationship - terribly in love with a person who lives overseas - but you're unwilling to pay for a plane ticket to bring them to you, so you're just going to date some tourist who happens to be visiting from the same country.

 

Oh man I laughed so hard.

 

Oh, well played!

 

*snork* this!

 

There ARE dolls out there that cost less than $1300. Just sayin'.

It seems to me that the recast owners/buyers who would spend $200 on a recast instead of buying a cheaper authentic BJD are just.... too elitist to own a cheap BJD? So they get a cheap knock off of an expensive one? That's what I'm seeing, please someone tell me if I'm wrong.

So.... to say to an artist "I love your work, but you're simply TOO expensive for me, so I'll rip you off and instead give my money to a bootlegger to steal your work!" is better?

And you'd be HAPPY if someone ripped off your hard work???? REALLY? You wouldn't go after them for doing something that is actually quite illegal?

I do not understand you. :/

This is NOT THE SAME AT ALL. First of all, any replica painting is not going to be the same as the original. It's just not. Brush strokes are as distinctive as fingerprints and anyone who knows anything would know it's a fake immediately. Secondly, the replicator actually has to do some work and be artistic, not just make a mold of someone else's work and pump it out for $$. Third, the people who painted most of the paintings that this is done with have been dead SO LONG that their work is PUBLIC DOMAIN. So it's NOT stealing to do this because it now belongs to the public. The copyright has expired. Same with making prints of famous paintings and such.

This is not about TOYS, this is about ART THEFT. Intellectual property THEFT. It's about the act of stealing, not the toys.

And for goodness sake, YES there are such things as INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT LAWS and recasting is BREAKING THEM. No I won't dig them up for you. If you cared, you wouldn't be too lazy to look them up yourself.

If I found out a doll I bought in good faith was a recast, the first thing I'd do is post all over DoA, warning people against whomever I bought it from -- but I would still keep it as long as it wasn't toxic. I wouldn't take pictures of it or post it anywhere, but I'd keep it to remind myself not to be such an idiot in the future. I mean... once you own it, what can you do? How can you correct that mistake? Throwing the thing away won't do any good. *shrug*


SORRY FOR THE LONG POST. I just had to respond to all these things 8|