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

I don't want to be too mean, but I found both the original and "copy" to be fairly common patterns, and a bit uninspired. Just searching lolita or fairy kei suspender skirt brings up tons of examples, including ones with bows. And pink or blue polka dots is an incredibly common pattern choice for those styles....

In fact, I think I had a jumper like that when I was a toddler lol.

 

lol mine was dark pink and white, inspired by sanrio/hello kitty if not actually made by them.

 

Considering that apparently one of them is using a recast doll to model the clothes, I am not pleased that I am going to have to defend their "copying" the outfit.

On the other hand, that is a very common outfit design. My mother made a similar dress, with thicker straps to make a top, for my Dark Elf Soo when she had nothing to wear. If the second user was using the same ornaments in the same locations I would be suspicious, but they are not.

 

personally, i think that plagiarism isn't that big of a deal, unless, they copy it exactly the same without stating that the design is inspired by...... or citing the original creators or where the idea came from. If the doll is exactly the same with little, to no differences, then i wouldn't buy it if, the site states that the idea is their own when it clearly isn't. but, if the doll was suppose to represent the character then, i guess i would; it would be like purchasing an action figure in this sense. though personally, if the doll represent a movie character exactly, i would not purchase it because bjds are very expensive and i think that after spending so much money on a bjd, i would customize it and make it my own, rather then replicate it to someone elses idea.

 

I'm going to agree with those saying that the design isn't nearly unique enough to constitute "plagiarism" here. It's a very common design, and in spite of what I'm fairly sure I read in one of the posts (seriously, why do people feel the need to use "cutesy" fonts and colors? That post is painful to try to read), yes, it's a very basic item, and not some work of genius.

Now, the recasts thing (as well as what I've seen of some pretty heavy copyright violation coming from the "offending" party) are certainly other reasons for one to choose not to deal with her, but in this particular case, I too have to disagree that there's anything sketchy going on. And really, if there's legitimately sketchy things happening, why not focus on that instead of distracting from it?

 

I think this discussion needs more concrete examples so every argument isn't over Leekeworld/Dust of Dolls or over something not in the bjd community. Let the examples come from different spots over a range of immitation behavior.

Let's talk about:
Angellstudio not recasting but copying volks faces (rumor has it, the art director gave the sculptor volks faces to sculpt from)
IMPL not copying soom but following closely the style of the face.
AIL's thigh-to-hip joint mechanism being copied (the mechanism that hides the stringing slot). Or Unoa's hip joints being copied for that matter.

That's all for now. But I'm sure we can come up with more examples as a community. I think the discussion would be more fruitful this way. Let's not make this an argument over the facts of the cases but over whether certain behaviors mentioned in these cases should be considered acceptable (personally or as a community).

 

Considering that I own 2 of Groove's Ais, and recently discovered how closely they resemble Pocket Fairies (which I didn't know existed when I got my dolls), I may have already done this. >.>

 

If you look back at the play line dolls made during the 1950s and 60s, you'd have to come to the conclusion that almost all of them are knock-offs to one degree. Even the famous Madame Alexander dolls derive from standard types put out by the big manufacturers like Effanbee and Ideal. And yet, I don't recall any lawsuits until Mattel was sued for copying Bratz with the My Scene Barbies. I like the My Scenes better, BTW.
Anyway, I'd be annoyed at seeing obviously copied dolls in the BJD market, and probably wouldn't buy, unless the copied doll corrected some serious flaw in the original. Originality and technical proficiency don't always go together.

 

Every time I come across a doll that looks like another I don't want it. Many dolls looks like others, that probably isn't plagiarism, but I just don't like it.

Do you know of those pocket mirrors with pictures of Volks dolls? Not exactly plagiarism maybe but I doubt they have Volks permission.

In Italy if you buy counterfeit you can get sanctioned for up to 7000 euro.

 

I personally 100% believe that there is no such thing as a completely unique design/idea. Everything will have been done at some point. In the many years that this hobby has been around, you can't expect that dolls will never have similarities.

Of course if someone outright copies a design, not as an influence or inspiration but with intention to copy, no, I would not purchase such a doll or feel comfortable purchasing anything else from the company. But I think controversy on these sort of topics can be started far too easily.

As an example, I saw a huge controversy on deviantArt one time about someone's drawing having a similar pose to theirs. The pose was not an exact replica, the proportions were different, they just happened to be similar - but the person who did the pose first insisted that the second was a copy of them. Which, in my opinion, is ridiculous. How can you claim the right to a pose, especially if it is a common one?

And how, then, can you claim right to a face based on similarities? BJDs are made in human image, and humans have similarities in appearances. It just happens.