Would you buy a plagiarized doll/design? (not a recast)

I would not buy a doll that had been directly copied without permission from another company. Recast or not, it's still benefiting monetarily from someone else's work without compensation.

That said, I would need very compelling evidence to make that decision. Rumor, speculation, or a few points of similarity wouldn't be enough. For me to decide not to buy the doll, it would need to be proven in some fairly definitive way, not just people making accusations.

 

I wouldn't buy a plagiarized doll on purpose, but that stuff's really hard to tell sometimes. It's not the sort of thing where you'd buy a knockoff on purpose.

Clothes are a whole other matter. Nobody's reinvented pants that I know of.

 

I don't know if this has been brought up before, but I was wondering whether you would consider this plagiarism?
The doll looks almost exactly like Daenerys Targaryen from Game of Thrones/A Song of Ice and Fire. She even has the purple eyes, a red dragon and is named "Mother of the Dragons". I find it a bit strange that SOOM would rip off a copyrighted character so blatantly - especially considering all the problems they have had with recasts. They could of course have gotten permission to use the character, but I find that unlikely since they decided to call her "Agate" and add their own backstory. It is as if they are pretending that this is their own original character.

Would you ever consider buying a doll like this?

 

Yes, I would if I could afford her, She's lovely!

 

I hope I did not come off as rude. I was merely curious as to what other people consider plagiarism and what their thoughts are about such a case as this

 

Calfuray: Libacious said it best and I don't see the point of myself joining in on this topic of conversation anymore. bye.

 

I guess it is sort of like Alice in Wonderland? Except the book is more recent and the author living. Taking a character people know and playing off of that popularity. The dragon is red while the three in the books are not and she has been given the Soom clothing treatment (goodness are those clothes beautiful!) so they have made some effort to make her different. Doll companies pull characters from other literary sources as well. Soom has all the fairytale dolls and Ringdoll has dolls like Dracula. I sort of see it the same way. As long as the company isn't making a Daenerys Targaryen doll and dressing her in clothes from the show and telling the ASOIF story, I think it is just a cool nod to a popular character.

 

I'm certainly not a legal expert. However, on a moral level, I couldn't knowingly buy a doll that is obviously plagiarized. If I, or someone else, bought one unknowingly, then I see it as being victims of a scam. Which, if the seller is trying to pass off someone else's work as their own is pretty much what they are doing. Maybe that isn't true LEGALLY, but that is what it would feel like to me.

Now, I have to say that I would have to make up my own mind about it. There are times I've seen people scream "copy!" but when seen side by side or overlapped, isn't line for line. If you transpose the two sculpts and they match almost exactly, the evidence is damning. But, there is only so many ways to sculpt a head or body, and there is going to be some that come uncomfortably close purely by accident. I'd probably stay away from those to be safe, but try and give the sculptor the benefit of a doubt.

As far as recasts, the fact that they aren't trying to pass the work off as their own really doesn't lessen the sin. Recasters are still making profit off of someone else's hard work and creativity. It might not be a scam, but it is theft. That's why I'd never knowingly buy a recast. Again, if I didn't know, then I would feel victimized there, too. People that buy recasts without knowing they are recasts aren't villains here, they are victims. Witch-hunting and shaming someone in that case shouldn't be done. I always feel bad for those people, being victimized twice, once by the scammer and again by more zealous members of the community.

I understand the zealots' side of it a little, though. It is such a hot button topic, and has caused such havoc and paranoia among collectors that it is easy to get out of hand if you aren't careful. No one likes the idea that someone out there might be trying to rip them off, and that brings a lot of negativity to the fore.

 

I don't think that is the same thing. Alice is a character from Lewis Carroll's "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" and this book is from 1865 and has long since lost its copyright. Copyright only lasts for a certain amount of years and when a works' copyright term ends, the work passes into the public domain and the public is free to use materials for whatever purpose they choose. I think it is a very different matter to copy a character from a book series that is still being published and whose copyright is still very much active.

But I agree with what you are saying about it not being a complete copy and maybe what SOOM is doing is completely okay. I was just wondering, where do we draw the line? When does it become plagiarism?

 

Yeah I know that is why I said that the book is more recent and the author living. While Game of Thrones is not public domain, companies are trying to play off the character's popularity. While they can clearly call Alice inspired dolls Alice they would not be able to do that with this character, hence the need to make alterations. I would imagine HBO has some claim on the image rights as well. Directly translating an image from the show could lead to legal action. If you see the Snow White doll from Soom it is obvious they are paying homage to Disney's Snow White. (high collor, puffy sleeves, bodice ect) and as Disney is still releasing Snow White merchandise it is probably not wise to copy her outfit and look directly. George R.R. Martin has not, to my knowledge, taken out a copyright on the phrase "Mother of Dragon's" so it is probably perfectly legal to use the phrase. Hope that cleared things up.

 

I once bought an artist BJD in pre-order, then someone found out that the body was a blatant copy of an existing BJD. Sure she modified it a bit, but still it was quite clear that it was the same body. When researching this claim I found out that the artist had already copied other artists before... So I asked for a refund... Which I got, even if she denied all of it... But the doll would have bothered me to no end.

 

It looks like the poll says it all. I would definitely never buy a plagiarized or recasted (ie stolen) item if I was aware. If I was unaware and then realized it was fake or ripped off from elsewhere I would demand a refund.

 

To me that is more just an example of the fact that anything that's popular is going to inspire imitators. That's a reality in any market.

It's definitely not entirely original, but merely being an imitator doesn't rise to the level of plagiarism that would make me refuse to buy a doll.

 

I would really only buy a plagiarized doll if it came with everything pictured in the preview images and cost only $10-$20. Sure I'd like to support the people who make all these dolls, but I really can't afford any. Too expensive.

...but, since they usually don't...I guess I'll have to say no.

 

Not if I knew it was plagiarized. But if I ended up buying something that I'd later discover to be plagiarized, I would probably not like it as much anymore. I'd feel bad for the original artist, and probably end up not using the item because of guilt (I very easily feel guilty ^^") :/
I would also feel quite cheated actually. Buying something I thought would be original, only to discover it was plagiarized from someone else's work

 

I hadn't thought about Snow White, but I agree; she shares many of the characteristics of Disney's Snow White. In the end it probably depends on how much it resembles the original (evaluated on a case-by-case basis) and, as you said, whether there's patent or copyright on the thing being used/copied at all (e.g., the title "Mother of Dragons"). I think it's a very interesting debate, even though we cannot make any conclusions for sure. Thank you for your answer

 

It would be interesting to see some BJD's that were authorized by the film industry or authors. I know Volks has some anime/manga inspired dolls. I imagine though they prices would be nuts and the quantity limited.

 

10-20 for a fullset?! You cant even buy a second hand, unpainted little tail for that amount o.O

 

Volks's "anime/manga inspired dolls" are indeed licensed. If you buy the limited edition SD "Rozen Maiden" Shinku or the Dollfie Dream Saber Alter, you are buying official (not plagiarized) character goods. The Dollfie Dream character dolls can get very expensive both in the retail price and the second-hand market...they are official merchandise and therefore become collectables.
(Volks also produces merchandise like garage kits and action figures.)

I've seen a couple other companies that make licensed dolls. AZONE has their HAF (hybrid active figure) 1/3 scale series and has produced a LOT of female character dolls. And there's been resin versions of Black Butler and Attack on Titan characters.

I have a "Black Butler" Sebastian Michealis from Fairyland. Mine is the only one I've ever seen outside of the promotional pictures, so I really have no clue how limited he was.
(Fairyland is a part of Cerberus Project, which is a big merchandise producer, similar to Volks)

So... while it's not impossible for a doll company to get the go-ahead to make a character doll for an IP they don't own, the licensing/profit-sharing/contract terms might be too steep for some studios, and they might opt for a doll that is inspired by an IP but doesn't explicitly claim to be that IP and has enough differences that it isn't infringing on any copyrights.


Somewhat related:
In the case of fan-art, the entity that owns the IP (intellectual property) depicted in the fan art has legal rights to tell artists to stop selling images.
The game company I previously worked at once shut down the sales of a risque fan-art calendar the company thought was "in poor taste". The artist may have created the art, but the artist didn't have the rights to the IP they had depicted, and therefore didn't have the legal rights to profit from the sales of that art.

ETA:
It's rare for a company to send cease-and-desist orders to artists making fan-art. Most creators ~love~ seeing fan creations like fan-art and cosplay because it gives them the warm and fuzzies. But if they see fan-art of their IP in offensive or hateful works, or in a way that "significantly devalues" their IP, or if fan-art is being sold for big profit... the rightful owners like to smack that down ASAP.

 

I think it depends on whether im aware of it or not, i can be quite oblivious so unless i see them side by side the likelihood i will notice is slim