Why are we always trying to accuse copies?

I wonder that too!
it's like people are really looking for a fight because often the doll accused of being a copy looks NOTHING like the "original" especially if you put them next to each other.... (like dust of dolls being accused of copying Unoa's leg <.< here is the pic http://www.flickr.com/photos/petite-chose/5551559212/ )

 

It has happened that artists and doll companies have taken existing dolls and sold or tried to sell direct or modified recasts. It's sad, but it has happened and it will most likely happen again in the future. With so many new companies out there with a high output of new dolls it's hard to know every legimate doll out there, so it's also hard for one person to recognise a recast.
Therefore it's great that the community keeps an eye out for recasts.

Sometimes it's hard to tell whether a doll is a (modified) recast or not.

 

Yes, BJDs are artwork, and there will always be some sort of influence between companies in their sculpts. An out-right copy, however, is another story entirely. If one company copies another's design, that's plagiarism, in a sense. And it isn't right. It's like one artist making an awesome drawing, and someone tracing it and taking credit for doing it. It's just not right. As a BJD-loving community, we're on the look out for such things ("We're on the look out for such injustices to save the companies - one cast at a time!" (Too much Sailor Moon will start heroic monologues. ^^; )). We're only looking out for the artists who create our lovely little boys and girls; it's not making a "big deal", in my opinion.

sahoma's example, however, is an extreme. With the whole Leekeworld VERSUS Dust of Dolls, I think it's a blatant recast of the Puns. Leekeworld was probably just trying to take heat off of them so they wouldn't lose business; what's a better way to ruin your accuser than to accuse them of the same thing? The Puns legs CLEARLY do not look like Uona/Unos, so the accusation is CLEARLY bologna.
Sometimes, it's not so obvious though, if it's just a slight similarity between two companies' dolls, and I think that's where we have to chalk it up to being influence and just see what happens.

I think Muisje said the rest of what I'm thinking the best. C:

 

They can't be a recast of Püns, because both dolls are a different size. Heavily influenced: yes, but not a recast.

As for the copies... The past few years there have been quite a few 'artists' trying to sell dolls that were merely (in some cases poorly done) modifications of existing dolls. They took a sculpt, did a recast, added some clay on top of it, or substracted some resin and... voilà! Instant recipe for new doll! As a result, we as a community have become quite weary when a company releases a doll whose looks are quite similar to another sculpt.

A company claiming they've created a doll when all they did was dump some clay on someone else's work is something we as a community should not be okay with.

 

Totally stealing an idea from one company to use at yours is just piracy and thieving. There is no other way to describe it.

But similarities? That goes into the gray area... legally and in terms of creative space. Just look at how many people are doing time-lapse photos with lights in the dark. Someone might say XYZ started it and then someone will point out Pablo Picasso experimented with it years ago. Or how some people get mad when someone else has a similar hairstyle or tattoo. I say, "Puh-lease, relax! You aren't original, you weren't the first, and you certainly won't be the last." Art, fashion, and other things in life have a way of coming and going. Maybe for a good ten years we will see lots of similarities when it comes to knee jointing or faceup styles or whatever... and then when the aesthetic changes slowly all companies will follow suite. It is just the way of life. Things come and things go, you know?

 

Ummm, no, if you had really read the information available about the situation it was made very clear that there is no possible way Mikhaila is a recast of Puns, which is why she is permitted on DoA.

As for actual recasts: Unfortunately, there have been companies producing bootleg dolls, and it is a problem. That said, there have been periods when people have gone a bit crazy with the accusations -- less so now really, than a few years back. I think there's a balance to be struck -- people need to be aware that recasts are out there so they don't accidentally get scammed, and we need to keep them out of the community. However, it is a very serious accusation to make, so the people making the accusation need to be able to prove that there is a valid reason for the accusation.

Cases of inspiration are more gray -- how much is too much? People draw the line at different places. A lot of legit companies are clearly inspired by each others' work, however, so that's something to keep in mind. Basically in that case -- if it makes you uncomfortable don't buy the doll, if it doesn't make you uncomfortable and you like the doll by all means buy. That's a personal decision for each individual hobbyist to work out on their own.

Also keep in mind, that there is a lot of loyalty to particular companies, and people really love their dolls which can cause some protectiveness (and sometimes overprotectiveness depending on the situation) among doll owners.

 

like she said. püns are 26cm and mikhaila is MSD size

 

I think people accuse because there is such a gray area between drawing influence from something and stealing the idea, are those two things the same or quite different?

The unoa and dust of dolls comparison pics are are bit excessive. Maybe they were pointing out that the dolls both have curvy legs, but that is imitating the human figure.

It's hard with these type of dolls because they are all exaggerations of the human form so unless if it is a recast how can we judge if it's too similar. What if someone modeled a doll after their own body and someone with a similar body type did the same, that would be coping but the doll could end up looking close to one another.

I feel a bit hesitant post this but I guess I should just go for it:

With the Mikhaila case I feel really torn because I want to be on the side of the artist and I can understand how they would be hurt and upset that they worked hard to make an idea to have a big company come along look at their work and say I should try making a curvy doll too.

Are dust of dolls the only ones allowed to make a doll with exaggerated curvy legs now and everyone else that does so should be banned for making copies of their idea? That does not sit well with me.

I feel like its similar to how volks was upset when other companies came out making dolls the same size as their dolls, but they are not the only ones allowed to make resin dolls in the sizes that they started.
I do understand why a company or artist would be upset, but I have no idea what is right or wrong when it comes to the gray areas.

 

I really think that we are a bit quick to accuse a doll of being a recast/copied in a lot of situations, though I've seen the most ridiculous incidents when people accuse artists of copying themselves. o.- I can't cite a source, but I know I've seen it.

Works are going to be influenced by other people, it's always going to happen. There is no originality in art anymore- not really. It's all been done before. All we can do is try to present it in different ways- that's where the originality comes from.

Also noting because it was mentioned, that no, Mikhaila is not a recast or copy. Heavily inspired without credit, sure. But not a recast. Otherwise, I don't really think the point of this topic was for that debate and probably shouldn't have been brought up in the first place. o.-

 

Because stealing and profiting off of someone else's intellectual property isn't okay.

Certainly there are people who scream "copy!" at the first sign of similarity, but I think they are the exception, rather than the norm, and they tend to get shot down pretty quickly. I, for one, am happy that this community is so vigilant, so that I don't mistakenly give my money to thieves.

 

Actually, the head sculpt isn't the same -- not even nearly (Leeke and Dust of Dolls have two very different aesthetics which is why some people prefer Puns and some prefer Mikhaila), but I have seen people try and draw comparisons between Mikhaila and several different heads which goes to show how similar features can show up in heads from totally different companies. I also feel that if people want to hold Leeke to a particular standard when it comes to how much inspiration one should take, then they should hold other companies to that same standard. Of course that might cause some difficulties considering this sort of thing actually happens a lot -- it just often gets overlooked. With Mikhaila and Puns looking so different bodywise from traditional abjds people notice. Also, many female and male bodies are very similar to each other in build, and I don't think anyone would argue that those shapes should be copyrighted. Just because this particular body shape is currently uncommon in abjds (it isn't necessarily when it comes to other dolls) doesn't mean that hobbyists should approach this differently.

Many of the things we take for granted now with abjds like 70+ cm dolls, tinies, anthros, dolls with hooves, beefier male bodies, low hip joints, double joints, jointed hands etc all started with one particular company coming up with the idea, and a host of others following suit -- and no, they didn't cite their inspiration when they did so, though if you look back far enough, it's usually pretty easy to figure out who did it first. That said, no one should buy a doll that they are not comfortable with -- it's definitely an individual decision.

You did bring it up and give your own opinion on it in your original post and then continued discussing it

That reminds me -- another thing that throws people for a loop sometimes is when an artist switches companies. Since the style is obviously then very similar, people will sometimes worry that it's a copy, only to find out later the dolls were merely sculpted by the same person.

 

Buyers should do their research and be alert when choosing what doll to buy. That doesn't mean they should believe everything they read. However gathering up as much information as they can they can make informed decisions about their purchases.
A responsible buyer should want an original product and should want to stand by the artists who created it.

There is a distinct difference between being influenced by another design to using the exact same design but producing it in a different size. Some companies do not have any scruples but a buyer can.

 

100% agreed.

Not everybody sees a 100% copied design, however. Just because they use the same body shape does not mean that the two dolls are identical but just in two different sizes. They used one aspect, it just happens to be very distinctive. But then Soom copied the (at the time) distinctive design for the low hip joint from CP without giving credit (the Gem body is even the same body type, though not an identical sculpt by any means, but then Mikhaila and Puns are not identical either). This isn't a matter of buyers not having scruples, it's a matter of looking at the information and coming to two different conclusions. People look at the same pics and see totally different things all the time -- that's usually how drama arises over accusations of copying or too much similarity.

Actual recasts make things easy as the bootlegged doll is a copy in every sense of the word. However, when you leave the black and white realm of recasts and enter into the gray world of similarity things aren't going to be as clear cut, and you're going to get less agreement among people -- even honest people who wouldn't touch a bootleg with a ten-foot pole.

 

I think that some people, especially relative newbies, feel that there is a certain kudos if they are the first to spot plagiarism, so they are very, very eager to jump the gun when they see a new company. Like when fandom_w*nk when it was in its heyday, and there was a spate of newbies posting things that really didn't belong there in desperation to be the first to spot a big fandom kerfluffle.

That doesn't mean that there are no recasts at all, just that there's a definite overeagerness to spot them. When Doll-Love arrived, people were accusing the exact same sculpts of being knock-offs of sculpts that were very distinct in style and features from each other, in desperation to be "first". It was really kind of funny, except that it could have unfairly damaged a new company's prospects in Western hobbydom.

That's the only real reason I can find for accusations in which the "resemblance" does not even seem to exist however hard you squint, like the Angelsdoll/Spiritdoll thing. Although that won novelty points for being the first time I can recall that a Korean company was accused of recasting and modifying from a Chinese company.

 

That is very, very true. I didn't think of that, but you're right! I remember when I found out about CP switching from Luts to Fairyland. Suddenly it made sense why they looked similar... but I never thought they copied or anything- I don't know, sometimes I'm just oblivious. XD I trust DoA's official word when it comes to re-casts/copies.

I have a LOT to say about the Mikhaila-Puns debate... Though, I'm not passionate it about is, so I'm just going to walk away from it in this thread.