The issue of copyright in TS collecting.... (1 Viewer)

[Martin Tabony]

It's the same issue with Cd copying. If you buy a cd but then burn a copy for a friend, the artist (and most are not well off) have lost a sale. If this process repeats itself, then the artist will have to find a new line of work.

That is my point. If any business doesn't make sales it can't survive.

MARTIN

 

[Martin Tabony]

What about if the figure is an 100 year old Britains figure? Does copy write still apply? If it does, then I can name around 3-5 large manufacturers offhand whho have done this....^&confuse^&confuse
-Sandor

The point there surely is that Britains is still an on going business, whether the figure is 100 years old or not. Try using a 100 year old Coke bottle and see how far you get. I'm in no way connected with Britains but I believe when the modern owners bought the name and business they bought the rights to existing figures. Was there not some talk of an English maker paying Britains for the rights to reproduce old figures a couple of years ago?
Over the years I've heard talk about if you only use 20% that's OK well to my mind that's like saying if I only steal 20% that's OK. What if you use 20% of five different figures? That makes 100% stolen figure.
If you want to name 3-5 large manufacturers that have breached copyright, then do it and let them defend themselves! Name and shame as far as I'm concerned!

Martin

 

[jazzeum]

What about if the figure is an 100 year old Britains figure? Does copy write still apply? If it does, then I can name around 3-5 large manufacturers offhand whho have done this....^&confuse^&confuse
-Sandor

Yes. This has come up on the jazz forum to which I belong. There are many Lps that are out of print and probably will never see the light of day. The owners of the forum don't allow public discussion of Lp burning because of the concern that the record companies may complain and bring suit.

Even a 100 year old Britains figure is still a valuable property right. They may want to bring out a yesteryear line, for example, and if they turn their hands at illegal copying, they could be losing sales. Collectors may think it's ok but it costs companies potential sales.

 

[Martin Tabony]

London Bridge does some Britain's hollowcast repros and replacement parts, but with permission from the current owners of the marque. The only other people I know of who do these repros for sale have either retired, left the business, or are a tiny operation. I buy old Britain's figures on the secondary market, obviously, since they haven't been made since 1966 at the latest. Going by the print and music paradigms, this is also ethically fraught- but what are my options if I can't recast for my own use?
Re: using bits of existing figures- the courts allow a degree of sampling in music- up to 30 seconds. In a 2'30" song, that's 20%.

Which courts. Do they allow it for free or do they expect you to pay for using another persons property?
I believe in the U.S a Federal Distric Court in a case in 1991 cited the ten commandments ("thow shalt not steal") during a ruling in favour of Gilbert O'Sulivan who had had a few note of one of his songs used as a sample in a Biz Markie song. The judge also ruled that no other copies of the album could be sold and refered the case for possible criminal prosicution.
To use any music you must "clear the sample" with the publisher. It also makes a difference whether you want to use the song or a particular performance of that song.
Before anybody mentions "fair use". It must be used for parody,critisim, teaching,news reporting,research or some non profit use. Not just because it sounds good! By non profit making this doen't mean selling it for charity, because then the charity would make a profit. The same goes for toy soldiers (or anything else) you can't just use the head, arm, hand, pistol or any other part just because it looks better than something you can make yourself. After all isn't it suposed to look better that's what you're paying for!
I've been trying to find where Canadian copyright law is different from the rest of the world, if anything it's more strict.
Martin

Martin

 

[Martin Tabony]

I bow to your greater grasp of this issue. :redface2: I've been trying to justify my own laziness and shortcuts in what is just my hobby. But it is your livelihood you are defending, and your rights regarding the products of your own skill and labour. And the rights of your fellow craftsmen.

Thank you for your understanding. I'm also glad to see that more people that are voting in the poll get the point also.

Martin

 

[theBaron]

London Bridge does some Britain's hollowcast repros and replacement parts, but with permission from the current owners of the marque.

That is correct, or to clarify, London Bridge is a licensed dealer in Britains replacement castings, as well as a Britains dealer.

Prost!
Brad

 

[Napoleon1er]

Thank you for your understanding. I'm also glad to see that more people that are voting in the poll get the point also.

Martin

I too concede{sm4}. The only thing I disagree with is that from a moral, not legal standpoint, I still don't like that some people make clear copies of characters and bypass the law by not going the next step and calling it what it is.
All the best,
Sandor:salute::

 

[PJDeluhery]

At the risk of be-laboring a point, we have beaten the h*ll out of this subject many other times on this forum. For example, here: http://www.treefrogtreasures.com/forum/showthread.php?12831-Casting-copies-of-other-soldiers/page4

While I generally concede that each of us is entitled to his/her opinion, I have seen the damage that abuse of copyrights has casued. I think most of us "get it" but there still appears to be some holdouts. Hopefully they will become educated to the notion that copying is stealing.

When you buy a figure, you buy/acquire the right to possession - to hold it. You do not acquire- unless you have a license- the right to reproduce, modify or sell it. Those rights remain with the manufacturer or other owner.

Let's not disrespect the hard-earned rights those who give us our toys (and thereby, so much pleasure) for the sake of saving a few bucks. Character is measured by what one does when no one is looking.

Mike, you are a stand-up guy. That post took courage. I'm proud to know you.

 

[Napoleon1er]

At the risk of be-laboring a point, we have beaten the h*ll out of this subject many other times on this forum. For example, here: http://www.treefrogtreasures.com/forum/showthread.php?12831-Casting-copies-of-other-soldiers/page4

While I generally concede that each of us is entitled to his/her opinion, I have seen the damage that abuse of copyrights has casued. I think most of us "get it" but there still appears to be some holdouts. Hopefully they will become educated to the notion that copying is stealing.

When you buy a figure, you buy/acquire the right to possession - to hold it. You do not acquire- unless you have a license- the right to reproduce, modify or sell it. Those rights remain with the manufacturer or other owner.

Let's not disrespect the hard-earned rights those who give us our toys (and thereby, so much pleasure) for the sake of saving a few bucks. Character is measured by what one does when no one is looking.

Mike, you are a stand-up guy. That post took courage. I'm proud to know you.

Well said. Sorry if starting this thread caused unneeded debate, but as you say, this issue was just 'eating away' at me.

 

[marco55]

When you buy a figure, you buy/acquire the right to possession - to hold it. You do not acquire- unless you have a license- the right to reproduce, modify or sell it. Those rights remain with the manufacturer or other owner.

I still think that if I buy a figure that I have the right to modify for myself.Many people do conversions.In everything else I agree with you.
Mark

 

[Martin Tabony]

When you buy a figure, you buy/acquire the right to possession - to hold it. You do not acquire- unless you have a license- the right to reproduce, modify or sell it. Those rights remain with the manufacturer or other owner.

I still think that if I buy a figure that I have the right to modify for myself.Many people do conversions.In everything else I agree with you.
Mark

I agree you certainly have the right to convert or modify the figure or parts of a figure that you bought from the copyright holder, into what ever you want. nThe problem only arises when some people think that because they have made changes to the figure it then gives them the right to reproduce the converted figure!

Martin

 

[damian]

I doubt very much whether a few happy amateurs trying to make a few copies for their own use in the privacy of their own homes has been responsible for any small makers decline. Most of the copies made are so terrible that no-one would buy them anyway. Just like a few people swapping tapes of music back in the eighties was responsible for any musician starving. Sure if you set up a production line of some one else's figures and flog them that is wrong. The ethics we can debate and no-one is going to be convinced either way. As I have said in the past the small manufacturers need to learn that they have to function like a business. That means they need to be able to hold stock and have a working online presence. Blaming a few collectors for the woes of the industry is diverting blame. If you cannot answer an e mail if you persist in having dead links on the net well then you have yourselves to blame because it means you do not see what you are doing as a business but rather as a hobby. Personally I reserve my patronage of small manufacturers to those who I can actually get hold of without needing to place an international call.

 

[Martin Tabony]

I doubt very much whether a few happy amateurs trying to make a few copies for their own use in the privacy of their own homes has been responsible for any small makers decline. Most of the copies made are so terrible that no-one would buy them anyway. Just like a few people swapping tapes of music back in the eighties was responsible for any musician starving. Sure if you set up a production line of some one else's figures and flog them that is wrong. The ethics we can debate and no-one is going to be convinced either way. As I have said in the past the small manufacturers need to learn that they have to function like a business. That means they need to be able to hold stock and have a working online presence. Blaming a few collectors for the woes of the industry is diverting blame. If you cannot answer an e mail if you persist in having dead links on the net well then you have yourselves to blame because it means you do not see what you are doing as a business but rather as a hobby. Personally I reserve my patronage of small manufacturers to those who I can actually get hold of without needing to place an international call.

I thought this discusion was about copyright. Perhaps if you would like to discus how a figure maker should run their business you could start a different thread.
Every copy of a figure whether good or bad is still a lost sale.

Martin

 

[jazzeum]

I doubt very much whether a few happy amateurs trying to make a few copies for their own use in the privacy of their own homes has been responsible for any small makers decline. Most of the copies made are so terrible that no-one would buy them anyway. Just like a few people swapping tapes of music back in the eighties was responsible for any musician starving. Sure if you set up a production line of some one else's figures and flog them that is wrong. The ethics we can debate and no-one is going to be convinced either way. As I have said in the past the small manufacturers need to learn that they have to function like a business. That means they need to be able to hold stock and have a working online presence. Blaming a few collectors for the woes of the industry is diverting blame. If you cannot answer an e mail if you persist in having dead links on the net well then you have yourselves to blame because it means you do not see what you are doing as a business but rather as a hobby. Personally I reserve my patronage of small manufacturers to those who I can actually get hold of without needing to place an international call.

You are mixing issues here. How a business is run has very precious little to do with lost sales due to an infringement. An illegal copy of a copyrighted item, be it music or toy soldiers, is a lost sale. By traditional measures of damages, the injured party would be entitled to recoup the profit such party would have received from the sale, plus incidental or consequential damages, if applicable.

 

[damian]

I do not buy the continued attempt to demonize a few collectors who make copies to supplement their own collection. I doubt very much if any one is ever going to take a amateur caster to court so using legal arguments concerning huge media organizations and the like is not helpful. In the early 1980's we had home taping the record companies went on and on about it. The home tapers were killing music they said. In reality if we had not had home taping there are quite a few bands I may never have listened to and then gone on to buy all their albums. If some one is going to flesh out a display by knocking out a few home castings then really he has done little harm to anyone. It is unlikely that he was going to buy any more of the figures anyway. As I have said before if you go ahead and start mass producing and selling another's figures that has crossed a line. But to go on about how people having a bit of fun in their dens with a few figures most of which end up going back into the melting pot is a bit pointless. It is not those guys who are responsible for any one else going out of business.

 

[binder001]

I know we're beating this to death, but I just wanted to clarify my unpopular position from earlier. I referred to making copies of figures or parts thereof for one's own use. If I buy a Rolling Stones CD, I can create a copy of the disc so that I can play it in my car, and I can copy the songs to my iPOD for my own use. I agree that I can't copy the songs to sell, share, give away, or whatever, but I can make all the copies I need to support my own media enjoyment.

By the way, for the record, I don't actually copy anything - I haven't mastered the techniques and haven't needed anything bad enough to go to the expense of buying the mold making equipment and resin.

 

[Martin Tabony]

I know we're beating this to death, but I just wanted to clarify my unpopular position from earlier. I referred to making copies of figures or parts thereof for one's own use. If I buy a Rolling Stones CD, I can create a copy of the disc so that I can play it in my car, and I can copy the songs to my iPOD for my own use. I agree that I can't copy the songs to sell, share, give away, or whatever, but I can make all the copies I need to support my own media enjoyment.

By the way, for the record, I don't actually copy anything - I haven't mastered the techniques and haven't needed anything bad enough to go to the expense of buying the mold making equipment and resin.

I don't think wer're beating this to death at all. This is one of thiose subjects that seems to have lots of "I think" and "someone told me" but not many people seem to know the facts of copyright.
You mentioned the example of the Rolling Stones C.D. Well it is true that you can copy the disc( with the right technology you can copy most things) but each copy would be technicaly illigal it's just that it's unenforceable.
I assume that when you copy your C.Ds you don't edit the original song or anything, you just stick it in the machine and press the "copy button" or whatever. Well obviously to copy a figure isn't that simple. If there was a machine that could do that I think the manufacturers would have it first!

Martin

 

[jazzeum]

I do not buy the continued attempt to demonize a few collectors who make copies to supplement their own collection. I doubt very much if any one is ever going to take a amateur caster to court so using legal arguments concerning huge media organizations and the like is not helpful. In the early 1980's we had home taping the record companies went on and on about it. The home tapers were killing music they said. In reality if we had not had home taping there are quite a few bands I may never have listened to and then gone on to buy all their albums. If some one is going to flesh out a display by knocking out a few home castings then really he has done little harm to anyone. It is unlikely that he was going to buy any more of the figures anyway. As I have said before if you go ahead and start mass producing and selling another's figures that has crossed a line. But to go on about how people having a bit of fun in their dens with a few figures most of which end up going back into the melting pot is a bit pointless. It is not those guys who are responsible for any one else going out of business.

You can justify it with whatever reasons you may like but if you are making a figure or receiving copied music when you might have otherwise purchased the figure or the song, that is depriving the person of a sale.

 

[damian]

You can justify it with whatever reasons you may like but if you are making a figure or receiving copied music when you might have otherwise purchased the figure or the song, that is depriving the person of a sale.

Brad I am going to agree to disagree with you.^&grin
Over and out on this topic.

 

[Martin Tabony]

I do not buy the continued attempt to demonize a few collectors who make copies to supplement their own collection. I doubt very much if any one is ever going to take a amateur caster to court so using legal arguments concerning huge media organizations and the like is not helpful. In the early 1980's we had home taping the record companies went on and on about it. The home tapers were killing music they said. In reality if we had not had home taping there are quite a few bands I may never have listened to and then gone on to buy all their albums. If some one is going to flesh out a display by knocking out a few home castings then really he has done little harm to anyone. It is unlikely that he was going to buy any more of the figures anyway. As I have said before if you go ahead and start mass producing and selling another's figures that has crossed a line. But to go on about how people having a bit of fun in their dens with a few figures most of which end up going back into the melting pot is a bit pointless. It is not those guys who are responsible for any one else going out of business.

Are we reading the same thread? I don't see the "continued attemp to demonize a few collectors". From post 14 the dsicusion has been mostly about manufacturers useing old hollow cast britains to make new figures and personalities and book caracters being used without permision.
If you would like to move the discusion back to "home casters" that's fine by me. It is true that it's unlikely that anyone is going to take an amateur caster to court. However it is not irrelevant to use legal arguments. The law is not just for "huge media organisations" it is for everyone. The problem is that a small manufacturer in England (for instance) doesn't usually have the funds to pursue someone through a foreign court, it's still illegal though.
By your example of the "home tapeing" do you think there are many collector out there that that were only introduced to a range by first having a pirated copy and then deciding to go out and buy the whole range?
I fail to see how your reasoning works that, if the home caster wasn't going to buy anymore figures any way! Have you stopped to think that just maybe if he wasn't willing to pay for what he wants he shouldn't have it!
In my experiance pirates don't buy twenty five and just cast five more. No they usually buy one and cast thirty more.
If there are any "home casters" reading this and you would like to relpy with exactly the number of figures you have copied and which manufacturer the figures came from , that would be most helpfull, after all you've caused "little harm"

Martin