Copies or Scibor's original works? (Copyright issues)

NAVARRO · Post by **NAVARRO** » 12 May 2006, o 21:53

what the hell? why theres only two sides? why do anyone need to take sides? and who determines them? you Artemis?

Your replying without reading man and without knowing our individual positions concerning anything...

one thing for sure CofC is a group of friendly people who have individual opinions not a freaking bunch of blind fanboys...

is starting to be anoying you making judgments about everyone and everything.... CofC doenst needs your rotules and insinuations... your not the paladin of truth thats here to show the light to the clueless.

you need to know something before talking about it. and of us you obviously know nothing. im out of smilies.

Artemis · Post by **Artemis** » 12 May 2006, o 22:00

Trovarion wrote:
Artemis wrote:
Trovarion wrote:Artemis, you miss the point that LE was making because you analize the post to death by picking on the one "negative" thing that you can spot there.

She didnt take any side she just explained a few things to you...
The 'one' negative thing? Didn't take sides? See, I knew you had a sense of humour.
at this point i stop posting again because my next post wouldnt be polite.

Fair enough. In case you were interested my next post would have wondered how I could tell the difference.

Artemis · Post by **Artemis** » 12 May 2006, o 22:07

NAVARRO wrote:what the hell? why theres only two sides? why do anyone need to take sides? and who determines them? you Artemis?

Yes, despite LadyEyes being the first person to bring sides into it, and despite LadyEyes defining the number of sides as two 'I' am of course the one deciding them.

NAVARRO wrote:Your replying without reading man and without knowing our individual positions concerning anything...

Where am I doing this? What am I stating your opinion on that's wrong? Have I wandered into Vaguetown and nobody told me? Do you see me making vague statement without backing them up?

NAVARRO wrote:one thing for sure CofC is a group of friendly people who have individual opinions not a freaking bunch of blind fanboys...

I don't believe I've ventured an opinion on the entirety of CoC. Perhaps this is another one of thos things someone else said that you'd prefer to ascribe to me?

NAVARRO wrote:is starting to be anoying you making judgments about everyone and everything.... CofC doenst needs your rotules and insinuations... your not the paladin of truth thats here to show the light to the clueless.

Correct. Now if only I'd implied I was that may have been relevant.

NAVARRO · Post by **NAVARRO** » 12 May 2006, o 22:28

" don't believe I've ventured an opinion on the entirety of CoC"

i will only respond this time with your own words about grave insinuations to all CofC

Artemis wrote:
You want more participation as long as we turn a blind eye to piracy when we think we see it? That's an interesting stance for a miniatures forum. Or is it just that the pirate is a member of the CoC group?
(..)
Certainly, I'll be happy to look around and 'also' comment on what I'm sure are many excellent miniatures and paintjobs. However if I'm banned from raising an objection to illegal activity when I see it then I'd rather not thanks.

i will not respond to more because your not being serious and are obviously lost... we are all adults here and you should behave like one, please.

Trovarion · Post by **Trovarion** » 12 May 2006, o 22:32

why does this just smell like "oh now I annoy you all till I am banned" - wont happen. mahon is too polite for that

I am out of here, this is just provocation anymore.

Artemis · Post by **Artemis** » 12 May 2006, o 22:51

NAVARRO wrote:" don't believe I've ventured an opinion on the entirety of CoC"

i will only respond this time with your own words about grave insinuations to all CofC

Artemis wrote: You want more participation as long as we turn a blind eye to piracy when we think we see it? That's an interesting stance for a miniatures forum. Or is it just that the pirate is a member of the CoC group?
(..)
Certainly, I'll be happy to look around and 'also' comment on what I'm sure are many excellent miniatures and paintjobs. However if I'm banned from raising an objection to illegal activity when I see it then I'd rather not thanks.
i will not respond to more because your not being serious and are obviously lost... we are all adults here and you should behave like one, please.

Both of those are direct replies to a single person and have no relevance to my views on the entirety of CoC. I'll happily extend the benefit of the doubt to you and assume the language barrier is making you misunderstand those comments.

Paintamabob · Post by **Paintamabob** » 12 May 2006, o 23:04

Hasslefriesian wrote: No. Using images you see in media as "inspiration" is not actionable. Pressmoulding something you buy to make copies or selling photocopies of artwork you've bought or downloaded is actionable.

I agree, GW wont be overly hurt by this in the short term but, if true, it doesn't make it any less wrong.

I've been a lurker but this whole discussion drew me out. I have to say I completely agree that Scibor's work looks to be pirating others work and is definitely an IP infringement in the least.
I do have to say that "inspiration" can easily cross over into copyright infringement as well. I know that Eidos, for example, has shut down some sculptor's in the garage kit industry for making statues too similar to the design of Lara Croft despite renaming her as "Linda Craft" or "Grave Hunter." Your Eve figure would certainly raise their ire. Just as GW not yet noticing Scibor's stuff, Eidos not yet noticing yours doesn't make it OK. Eidos makes money from licensing & unlicensed product is legally theft.
I would hope you don't take this as an attack, but as you take offense as a sculptor from Scibor's work, the software designers of some of your inspired by characters may take offense at yours.

madmcgobbo · Post by **madmcgobbo** » 12 May 2006, o 23:07

Ok, my first post here and this could be dangerous seeing how its currently going....
My point of view: From certain sculpts you can see that the faces are the same, and Scibor has admitted on CMON that he has in the past used press moulded faces.
If he is using press moulded faces in his commercial sculpts or even other companies parts then it is a breach of IP rights and should be stopped immediately.

Now my main concern is that it will be Mahon who will get indited along with Scibor if he is doing those things and the companies sue. Its easy from the regular posters point of view to defend and even say in some instances that "its the companies problem", but it wont be them who will get the brunt of it.
The items are sold through Mahon's ebay account so it wont be Scibor that gets done by ebay but Mahon.
If Scibor isn't press moulding then he really needs to strengthen his position himself by posting, not through some third party but himself, images of him with WIP sculpts. Not only to take heat off himself but to make sure Mahon doesn't get embroiled in a lawsuit.

Hasslefriesian · Post by **Hasslefriesian** » 12 May 2006, o 23:29

@ Paintamabob. We have deliberately steered clear of anything that suggests the miniature is a representation of Lara Croft and chose a name that (AFAIK) had no connection either.

The idea "gun-toting female in DMs" is not copyrightable. Using a play on words to imply that the character is an existing intellectual property would make it so.

edited for spelling

madmcgobbo · Post by **madmcgobbo** » 12 May 2006, o 23:35

I also think that Paintamabob should see that the whole thread is about suspected press mould copying not copying an image for inspiration.