The Legality of 'character' Minimees

I think I read somewhere that as far as artists and copying there has to be six points of difference between the original and the copy? I don't remember for certain though.

I think if I did make a manga or something and Minimee made a sculpt from a character in it I would feel honored, not like I should've been owed mony or something. But maybe that's just me?

However, I don't know where the law would lay in that, unless the very first statement is actually true, but I don't remember where I read it so...

 

Because what often bothers people about stealing images is the fact that the person doing the stealing is at worst claiming that they came up with those images themselves or at best not giving any credit at all.

With minimees and other forms of fan art, the artist is being upfront about where the character concepts came from--they aren't claiming that it's from their own imaginations, not are they using someones photo or drawing and claiming that they created it themselves. While what they create maybe based on someone else's character, they are using their own artistry to create the fan work. So some of the people that have an issue with one thing and not the other are not being hypocritical, they are just taking into account the differences between individual situations.

This is less of a legal vs illegal issue and more of what is culturally acceptable. Sometimes the legal technicalities do not really reflect the realities and attitudes that people have about a given activity. Of course on this board, there is a variety of cultures represented, and while fan art and comics are most often tolerated in Japan, they tend to be less tolerated here in the US. This is what makes this issue such a gray area, because there is so much more to it than just the law says X. It is complicated by the different attitudes of various people and companies, how the fan artist handles themselves and their work, the way the fans themselves interact with the show/character/comic that they are fans of, the culture surrounding different fandoms, and different expectations based on country of origin. To ignore those things is to not fully understand the issue as a whole.

No matter how much you might want to say 'it's illegal, so there' this issue will never be that clear cut.

 

People always bring this up. "If six things are changed, it's original work..." or "If it's 20% different from the original it's ok" Whoever told you that this is acceptable is wrong. There are no percentages involved or guidelines to follow to take someone else's work and make it your own. If it is still recognisable as someone else's work despite your own creativity on top, it is plagiarism.

 

Throughout history, countless painters, sculptors, writers, bards, etc. have all incorporated other people and characters into their works.

There is a famous painting called "The Birth of Venus." This painting shows the story and characters from the Greek/Roman myth of Venus' birth. Now, Boticelli, the man who painted this, originally took a work that was not his and made another art form of it. Is this wrong? Not at all.

With Minimees, it's very similar, only on a much smaller scale. It's turning one art form into another.

As far as celebrities go, faces cannot be copyrighted.

 

All legality aside, as far as the Minimee's go, I'm just glad there is a company/artist out there that is willing to make the heads/bodies for the masses that want them. For the people that want the FF hunks, or Torchwood guyz, or Star Trek's Mr. Spock, and all those others, we have at least one person who, for a fee is willing to do the work of sculpting and casting. I am certainly not going to be the one who looks the GIFT horse in the mouth. I just can't wait to see what/who he sculpts next. Just want to say thankx for the beauty and happiness that you have given so many.

- ShadowHawke -

 

Botticelli's work is transformative, it takes a Graeco-Roman mythical story and turns it into a physical work of art, rather than a literary one. However, a face is already a 3D physical reality. Making a sculpture of a copyrighted face, such as a character, isn't transformative and unless the copyright holder does license the sculptor to produce them the product isn't legal.

No, faces cannot be copyrighted, but would you be happy if someone had a Minimee of you without your permission? My face might not be famous or copyrighted, but it is still my face, and I wouldn't like anyone else to have control over what they could do with my appearance. It isn't like licensing Mattel to produce Barbies or action figures. DIM doesn't get licenses for the characters or people it reproduces.

 

But would you know it was you if you saw it and no mention was made that it was you? As I said in my post, genetics makes us look a lot like our fellow countrymen. Unless you have a unique facial feature... like the late Mr. Jackson's nose, it's difficult to distinguish you from people of your own family or people from your own ethnicity, especially if the sculptors only guarantee 80%. For 80% you can stick your face in facial recognition software and see which celebrity you most resemble... 80% is a good match.

I have Sting's head. Will I make a Gordan Sumner doll? No... I'll probably give him a trench coat and teasingly call him "John Constantine" because that DC comic book character's appearance is supposed to be based on Sting.

 

As far as taking 2D art and turning it into 3D art, there can be a lot of variation. Sure it might be "the same character" but more so, it's just taking certain features from one thing and applying it to another.

If someone were to have a Minimee made of my face, I honestly don't know what I'd think. Part of me would think, "well I've been putting my pictures out on the internet for years, what can I expect?" Depending on the person or scenario, I could be either creeped or flattered, but if it doesn't effect my wellbeing, it's up to the other person and I probably wouldn't care much one way or the other.

What if someone, instead of making a minimee, bought a doll and customised it/modded it to look very much like me? How is that any different from the concept of someone making a minimee of me? I had a guy tell me once that he'd based a character of his off of me. I didn't care for this person too much, but I tried to at least be understanding that people find muses and inpirations in every day life and in ordinary people. Perhaps the only reason why I or anyone else may feel weirded out by something like this is due to the fact that we would not place ourselves in those positions.

 

I think that's a very interesting point, and one that rarely gets discussed--I almost never see people complain about fan dolls in general. I suppose it's because DIM sold the specific sculpts, however, as they were commissioned and sold to individuals for private use and non minimee fan dolls were purchased and customized (and sometimes customizers were paid for fan doll related services too) for private use I see little end difference. If the owners of either type of doll decided to sell them at a later date, they could still sell the fan doll done up as that character pretty easily. The truth is, people have been creating fan art with dolls long before the minimee project. Some of the non-minimee fan dolls are very well done and also bear a very strong likeness to the original characters they represent.

Personally, I don't think I'd care if someone really wanted to commission a minimee of me (or put together a nonminimee doll). Now if someone were going to mass produce dolls of my likeness without my permission that would be another story. However, those are two very different circumstances.

 

As someone in the art field who is familiar with copywrite in an artistic sense, I don't see any problem with the MM sculpts. You can't copywrite the structure of a face. No matter how I look at it I don't see the argument holding up in court. There are too many conflicting variables. The translation from 2D to 3D, the likeness only being 80%, the fact that the sculpt will never completely replicate the look of the actual character...I really don't see this getting anywhere.

 

There's also the matter of differing copyright laws. I think someone on the first page linked to an article of the U.S. Constitution... but is a company based outside of the United States expected to adhere to US Copyright law? I'm not up-to-speed on international law and all, but isn't this how some people can buy knock-off brand purses and such from overseas manufacturers? How do you bring charges against a company not legally bound to observe your copyright laws?

 

Very interesting thread. I have a commissioned minimee headsculpt inspired by the character Edward Cullen with soon-to-be-finished faceup by Chewin, and also a Mihael head modded to the female Bella Swan through a faceup by Jay S. This doll is so spot-on Bella, that she almost looks like a minimee commissioned sculpt.

What are anybody's copyright thoughts on creating the exact look of a celebrity/person just by carefully choosing the correct head sculpt from existing BJD heads out there, and then having the faceup rendered as the person's double?

If this part of the topic was already covered, so sorry. I am new to this whole discussion thread.

 

It's not like DIM is hiding their making of minimees, like some kind of shady, idea-stealing company. If someone wants to challenge them, they can go ahead and do so and probably win. Otherwise it's like they more or less have permission to make scupts of anime/manga/game characters (i have no insight on celebs and regular individuals however).

For instance, the already mentioned Square-Enix makes action figures. I find it doubtful they are losing money in those sales to minimees since the market for a something so much more expensive doesn't really overlap with the regular people that would spend a small/moderate sum of money on their favorite character. But if they are offended that their ideas are stolen then they can just speak up.

Otherwise I say let the fans have their expensive toys. I hate it when a series doesn't get merchandise (like i wish they made ouran host club figures... not just the limited superdeformed ones that look retarded).

But in the end, yes DIM is making a derivative of someone else's work, and it definitely is against moral or legal standards.

 

Faces can't be copyrighted end of story.

These discussion always irritate me because what about the people who do have these minimees? I can imagine them feeling a little bad with this discussion going on....But I really don't are about the legality of these minimees They seem to be i the same boat as cosplay, fan-art, and replica clothing and bags. Do people frown on it? Yes, but it isn't gonna stop.

And what with this 'if it is about ~% percent different, its ok'??? Can someone seriously have proof of this?

 

I have minimees. I don't mind the discussion. It is interesting to hear everybody's POV.

 

I think it's fine. They're basically re-creating something that's supposed to resemble that character, but it's not the exact same thing. So it's not really the same as, say, selling illegal merchandise or something.

 

As far as copyright, it's really not a legal issue.
Commissions (Which minimees fall under) are kindof an odd spot legally. They're not selling an 'FF7 Cloud head', They're selling a head designed as you request, and getting paid for the work and materials involved in producing it.
As a commissioned work, I think the minimees fall under the same rules as fanart/commissions at conventions: A Commissioned product is allowable (read "legal") As long as the commissioned item does not directly compete with an existing product by the copyright holder (I.E. There is no FF7 Cloud DOLL, so commissioning a doll is ok, where as there is an existing action figure, so commissioning and action figure is not.) If they were mass producing them, it would be a completely different issue. I think that's why they insist that even if someone else commissions the same person as you, the previous mold will not be used: They will re-do the work, and re-produce something slightly different, that way it is still a commission by you.
Whether or not this is the actual word of the law or just accepted practice, I'm not sure. Although, since accepted practice becomes precedent and helps define law through lawsuits, I'm not sure the difference is important anyway.
As far as the moral dilemma... That's an individual choice and isn't something a community has a right to police anyway.

It's actually an interesting point, but Copyright law isn't just US copyright law (I'm sure there's some US specific nuance, but for the most part). There is an international copyright law agreed on and enforced by most countries. Taiwan is one notable country that refused to sign the international copyright act, hence it is the source of many bootleg products. I'm sure China and Japan, and Pretty sure that Korea all signed into the international copyright laws. If Korea hasn't, it probably explains some of the hangups we get in customs as a community. Customs is allowed to confiscate any incoming products that defy International Copyright law.


Also, since the celebs came up anyway: Faces are not copyrighted. If a photographer takes your portrait, do you know who owns all legal rights to it? the photographer. Sounds stupid I know, but try and take an Olan Mills portrait of yourself to be copied at a professional photo lab, and you'll get the whole speel. (Believe me, I have to give it enough times a day...) So by the same token, if somebody makes a doll of you, you know who has all sale and distribution rights by default? The dollmaker. Not you. So, there's really no legal thing on the celebrity part, that all falls under your moral standing. And since people have differing moral codes, there really is no one right answer.

 

As some people have said, you can't copyright a face. Otherwise, Sarah Silverman could be coming after me any day now (or so my friends would say; they claim I have her same eyebrows, eyes, hair, and face shape. They would agree that the MNM 80% likeness is there! )

It would be a problem if DiM sold the heads as entire dolls, fullset, complete with wig and outfit and all that good stuff, made to be a doll of that character. In that case, they would be making a profit off an image they are paying no royalties to use. Volks had to pay to do the Rozens, because they were doing fullsets and using the whole of Shinku and co.'s images. But a simple bald head with facial features that resembles a character just doesn't cut it for a court case.

In fact, from what I've seen, about 80% of MNM owners actually want the head for other characters (for example, I didn't see everyone who got a JD MNM making a Sweeney Todd or Jack Sparrow doll from it!) It becomes even less of a representation of the character it was commission to be, and more of it's own original one. It takes it farther into the "white" of the "grey" area, so to speak.

Again -- I would be a bit creeped out and bothered if someone made an Andie BJD -- complete with a face up that resembles my face, an outfit that is a replica of one I own, etc. They would be using my entire image, and that (I think) requires royalties be paid (see how Mattel asks celebs like Heidi Klum before doing dolls of them?) But I wouldn't be bothered if someone made, I don't know -- a redhead cheerleader character and wanted the doll to face my facial structure and features.

So, really, I'm not bothered by MNMs.

 

I'd like to add that I have MNMs and I get the head of the actor that has played the roll of the character I like,( usually for the costume).
So I see a film, love the portrayal and costume of the chracter,so it doesn't really matter to me who the actor is.
In a film based on books there are characters that are brought to life by a costume designer's creativity.The enjoyment I get is that I just like to see if I can recreate that costume in a miniature form....