Post by: limitz on Fri, 23 January 2015, 18:52:09
Fan art is a common topic, especially so on Etsy as much of the business there is dependent on fan art. So much so they made an article specifically discussing this:
https://blog.etsy.com/en/2010/fan-art-and-fair-use-one-truth-and-five-myths/
But to summarize, fan art, and even fan art sold for a profit, is not always considered copyright infringement. Legally, four clauses govern fair use (17 U.S.C. § 107):
(1) The purpose and character of the use, including whether you’ve made a new transformative work, and whether your use is commercial.
(2) The nature of the original work, such as whether it is more factual than fictional.
(3) How much of the original work was used.
(4) Whether the new use affects the potential market for the original work.
With different weights applied to each clause by situation. However, as the Etsy article states, #4 is typically weighed most heaviest by courts. Since Disney does not sell a Vader keycap in any form, I'd argue that CC doesn't affect the potential market at all for Star Wars merchandise.
The fact that they were a one-time, limited run strengthens that argument even more. Just because CC made a Vader keycap, does not mean he broke copyright on Disney's Star War's trademark. I'd be willing to bet that any decent IP lawyer can come up with a solid fair use defense in this case.
Post by: tbc on Fri, 23 January 2015, 18:55:22
16yr old lawyers from reddit
:)
i've done some schooling on copyright law/general tort law and this is completely correct afaik. this has been brought up at least once before
Post by: exitfire401 on Fri, 23 January 2015, 18:57:15
inb4
16yr old lawyers from reddit
:)
i've done some schooling on copyright law and this is completely correct afaik.
QFT
Post by: hwood34 on Fri, 23 January 2015, 18:57:28
inb4lawyer here. also biologist. and part time philosopher. and aquarium manager. also semi-pro curler
16yr old lawyers from reddit
:)
Post by: limitz on Fri, 23 January 2015, 19:02:35
inb4lawyer here. also biologist. and part time philosopher. and aquarium manager. also semi-pro curler
16yr old lawyers from reddit
:)
Did you stay at the Holiday Inn Express last night?
Context for the non-Americans here:
Post by: exitfire401 on Fri, 23 January 2015, 19:04:04
inb4lawyer here. also biologist. and part time philosopher. and aquarium manager. also semi-pro curler
16yr old lawyers from reddit
:)
(http://www.quickmeme.com/img/76/76555639839e28ffeeb16d6f153c4d5c955cceb15d3757e1d3811cb93acc4f9b.jpg)
Post by: tbc on Fri, 23 January 2015, 19:11:06
inb4lawyer here. also biologist. and part time philosopher. and aquarium manager. also semi-pro curler
16yr old lawyers from reddit
:)Show Image(http://www.quickmeme.com/img/76/76555639839e28ffeeb16d6f153c4d5c955cceb15d3757e1d3811cb93acc4f9b.jpg)
(http://25.media.tumblr.com/f1fed06ab570fb1a7c5e2fddc1d732da/tumblr_mhc5sd35iU1r7jrmlo1_500.jpg)
Post by: sethk_ on Fri, 23 January 2015, 19:12:42
TYBGinb4lawyer here. also biologist. and part time philosopher. and aquarium manager. also semi-pro curler
16yr old lawyers from reddit
:)Show Image(http://www.quickmeme.com/img/76/76555639839e28ffeeb16d6f153c4d5c955cceb15d3757e1d3811cb93acc4f9b.jpg)Show Image(http://25.media.tumblr.com/f1fed06ab570fb1a7c5e2fddc1d732da/tumblr_mhc5sd35iU1r7jrmlo1_500.jpg)
Post by: heedpantsnow on Fri, 23 January 2015, 19:21:31
inb4lawyer here. also biologist. and part time philosopher. and aquarium manager. also semi-pro curler
16yr old lawyers from reddit
:)Show Image(http://www.quickmeme.com/img/76/76555639839e28ffeeb16d6f153c4d5c955cceb15d3757e1d3811cb93acc4f9b.jpg)Show Image(http://25.media.tumblr.com/f1fed06ab570fb1a7c5e2fddc1d732da/tumblr_mhc5sd35iU1r7jrmlo1_500.jpg)
I was just thinking about George. The marine biologist. The architect. The city planner. The importer/exporter. Haha
Post by: fohat.digs on Sat, 24 January 2015, 08:12:11
A few years ago, I worked for a small company that was destroyed from within by a disgruntled high-ranking employee.
Our lawyer said that it was the most egregious case of this type that he had ever seen, and that we were sure to prevail in the end.
"However, it will take about $35K out of pocket and 2 years for the process to work through the courts."
Post by: baldgye on Sat, 24 January 2015, 08:15:48
Post by: sethk_ on Sat, 24 January 2015, 08:39:28
Shouldn't this be posted on Reddit, so all the other law professionals can debate this with you?"I have been a practitioner of law for 15 years, and you are wrong, this is clearly illegal"
Post by: limitz on Sat, 24 January 2015, 08:58:53
Shouldn't this be posted on Reddit, so all the other law professionals can debate this with you?
It was. I posted it as a comment response to someone who claimed that CC broke copyright by making the Vader cap.
Predictably it was downvoted. It's pitifully sitting at -3, or -4 or right now, and will probably even go lower. Worst part is, I didn't even editorialize the comment. I mentioned K3 zero times, and only stuck to the facts.
As a long-term redditor, and very active poster... I'm a little disappointed. There are plenty of awesome subreddits... subreddits where you can learn so much in (thanks /r/PrintedCircuitBoard), but the /r/MK subreddit is just ridiculous. Ripster has made a cult of personality for himself, and I've never seen that in any other subreddit.
Post by: baldgye on Sat, 24 January 2015, 09:06:18
Shouldn't this be posted on Reddit, so all the other law professionals can debate this with you?
It was. I posted it as a comment response to someone who claimed that CC broke copyright by making the Vader cap.
Predictably it was downvoted. It's pitifully sitting at -3, or -4 or right now, and will probably even go lower. Worst part is, I didn't even editorialize the comment. I mentioned K3 zero times, and only stuck to the facts.
As a long-term redditor, and very active poster... I'm a little disappointed. There are plenty of awesome subreddits... subreddits where you can learn so much in (thanks /r/PrintedCircuitBoard), but the /r/MK subreddit is just ridiculous. Ripster has made a cult of personality for himself, and I've never seen that in any other subreddit.
It's definitely one of the most toxic sub's I've ever seen where the lead mod of the sub essentially pushes his own agenda as-well as counterfeit goods.
Post by: sethk_ on Sat, 24 January 2015, 09:32:14
I sense a new non-cult/circlejerk mech board subreddit coming soon.Shouldn't this be posted on Reddit, so all the other law professionals can debate this with you?
It was. I posted it as a comment response to someone who claimed that CC broke copyright by making the Vader cap.
Predictably it was downvoted. It's pitifully sitting at -3, or -4 or right now, and will probably even go lower. Worst part is, I didn't even editorialize the comment. I mentioned K3 zero times, and only stuck to the facts.
As a long-term redditor, and very active poster... I'm a little disappointed. There are plenty of awesome subreddits... subreddits where you can learn so much in (thanks /r/PrintedCircuitBoard), but the /r/MK subreddit is just ridiculous. Ripster has made a cult of personality for himself, and I've never seen that in any other subreddit.
It's definitely one of the most toxic sub's I've ever seen where the lead mod of the sub essentially pushes his own agenda as-well as counterfeit goods.
Post by: hwood34 on Sat, 24 January 2015, 09:32:28
(http://i.imgur.com/zjCJ0js.jpg)Shouldn't this be posted on Reddit, so all the other law professionals can debate this with you?
It was. I posted it as a comment response to someone who claimed that CC broke copyright by making the Vader cap.
Predictably it was downvoted. It's pitifully sitting at -3, or -4 or right now, and will probably even go lower. Worst part is, I didn't even editorialize the comment. I mentioned K3 zero times, and only stuck to the facts.
As a long-term redditor, and very active poster... I'm a little disappointed. There are plenty of awesome subreddits... subreddits where you can learn so much in (thanks /r/PrintedCircuitBoard), but the /r/MK subreddit is just ridiculous. Ripster has made a cult of personality for himself, and I've never seen that in any other subreddit.
It's definitely one of the most toxic sub's I've ever seen where the lead mod of the sub essentially pushes his own agenda as-well as counterfeit goods.
and put stock caps on kustoms
Post by: baldgye on Sat, 24 January 2015, 09:35:40
I sense a new non-cult/circlejerk mech board subreddit coming soon.Shouldn't this be posted on Reddit, so all the other law professionals can debate this with you?
It was. I posted it as a comment response to someone who claimed that CC broke copyright by making the Vader cap.
Predictably it was downvoted. It's pitifully sitting at -3, or -4 or right now, and will probably even go lower. Worst part is, I didn't even editorialize the comment. I mentioned K3 zero times, and only stuck to the facts.
As a long-term redditor, and very active poster... I'm a little disappointed. There are plenty of awesome subreddits... subreddits where you can learn so much in (thanks /r/PrintedCircuitBoard), but the /r/MK subreddit is just ridiculous. Ripster has made a cult of personality for himself, and I've never seen that in any other subreddit.
It's definitely one of the most toxic sub's I've ever seen where the lead mod of the sub essentially pushes his own agenda as-well as counterfeit goods.
Sub-Reddits can't actually exist without a circlejerk ;)
Post by: sethk_ on Sat, 24 January 2015, 09:36:43
Well, that is true, but one that doesn't focus around one person, and one that isn't based on ripping on other forums.I sense a new non-cult/circlejerk mech board subreddit coming soon.Shouldn't this be posted on Reddit, so all the other law professionals can debate this with you?
It was. I posted it as a comment response to someone who claimed that CC broke copyright by making the Vader cap.
Predictably it was downvoted. It's pitifully sitting at -3, or -4 or right now, and will probably even go lower. Worst part is, I didn't even editorialize the comment. I mentioned K3 zero times, and only stuck to the facts.
As a long-term redditor, and very active poster... I'm a little disappointed. There are plenty of awesome subreddits... subreddits where you can learn so much in (thanks /r/PrintedCircuitBoard), but the /r/MK subreddit is just ridiculous. Ripster has made a cult of personality for himself, and I've never seen that in any other subreddit.
It's definitely one of the most toxic sub's I've ever seen where the lead mod of the sub essentially pushes his own agenda as-well as counterfeit goods.
Sub-Reddits can't actually exist without a circlejerk ;)
Post by: limitz on Sat, 24 January 2015, 11:07:32
I sense a new non-cult/circlejerk mech board subreddit coming soon.
Wouldn't be surprised. Just as /truegaming, /truereddit, /truetruereddit exist, I wouldn't be surprised if a sub like /diykeyboard formed.
Post by: admiralvorian on Sat, 24 January 2015, 11:18:59
I sense a new non-cult/circlejerk mech board subreddit coming soon.
Wouldn't be surprised. Just as /truegaming, /truereddit, /truetruereddit exist, I wouldn't be surprised if a sub like /diykeyboard formed.
http://www.reddit.com/r/mechboards/
Post by: Xowie on Sat, 24 January 2015, 11:19:24
(4) Whether the new use affects the potential market for the original work.
With different weights applied to each clause by situation. However, as the Etsy article states, #4 is typically weighed most heaviest by courts. Since Disney does not sell a Vader keycap in any form, I'd argue that CC doesn't affect the potential market at all for Star Wars merchandise.
The fact that they were a one-time, limited run strengthens that argument even more. Just because CC made a Vader keycap, does not mean he broke copyright on Disney's Star War's trademark. I'd be willing to bet that any decent IP lawyer can come up with a solid fair use defense in this case.
Just for Devil's advocate (read: I do not support the counterfeits ):
Do you think that the fake clacks will affect CC's ability to sell his own clacks?
Post by: hwood34 on Sat, 24 January 2015, 11:42:38
nice idea, but I doubt that many people here would want to go over to reddit, and all the keyboard people at reddit are already in r/MK
I sense a new non-cult/circlejerk mech board subreddit coming soon.
Wouldn't be surprised. Just as /truegaming, /truereddit, /truetruereddit exist, I wouldn't be surprised if a sub like /diykeyboard formed.
http://www.reddit.com/r/mechboards/
Post by: asavi on Sat, 24 January 2015, 11:44:28
(4) Whether the new use affects the potential market for the original work.
With different weights applied to each clause by situation. However, as the Etsy article states, #4 is typically weighed most heaviest by courts. Since Disney does not sell a Vader keycap in any form, I'd argue that CC doesn't affect the potential market at all for Star Wars merchandise.
The fact that they were a one-time, limited run strengthens that argument even more. Just because CC made a Vader keycap, does not mean he broke copyright on Disney's Star War's trademark. I'd be willing to bet that any decent IP lawyer can come up with a solid fair use defense in this case.
Just for Devil's advocate (read: I do not support the counterfeits ):
Do you think that the fake clacks will affect CC's ability to sell his own clacks?
The way I see it, it's the kind of thing that's only really cool when you meet someone else who knows what it is. If you turn yours over and it says K3 anyone who knows what it is isn't going to like that too much. That's why I'd never buy one of those, it's not attractive enough to lose the value of other people liking that you have it.
Post by: limitz on Sat, 24 January 2015, 11:54:56
(4) Whether the new use affects the potential market for the original work.
With different weights applied to each clause by situation. However, as the Etsy article states, #4 is typically weighed most heaviest by courts. Since Disney does not sell a Vader keycap in any form, I'd argue that CC doesn't affect the potential market at all for Star Wars merchandise.
The fact that they were a one-time, limited run strengthens that argument even more. Just because CC made a Vader keycap, does not mean he broke copyright on Disney's Star War's trademark. I'd be willing to bet that any decent IP lawyer can come up with a solid fair use defense in this case.
Just for Devil's advocate (read: I do not support the counterfeits ):
Do you think that the fake clacks will affect CC's ability to sell his own clacks?
Personally, I don't think this has an affect on CC at all. I don't believe CC's own business has been touched by this, and if anything, the exposure from K3KC has made the demand, and the aftermarket value, of real Clacks jump up.
Post by: Xowie on Sat, 24 January 2015, 12:02:10
I completely agree with this.(4) Whether the new use affects the potential market for the original work.
With different weights applied to each clause by situation. However, as the Etsy article states, #4 is typically weighed most heaviest by courts. Since Disney does not sell a Vader keycap in any form, I'd argue that CC doesn't affect the potential market at all for Star Wars merchandise.
The fact that they were a one-time, limited run strengthens that argument even more. Just because CC made a Vader keycap, does not mean he broke copyright on Disney's Star War's trademark. I'd be willing to bet that any decent IP lawyer can come up with a solid fair use defense in this case.
Just for Devil's advocate (read: I do not support the counterfeits ):
Do you think that the fake clacks will affect CC's ability to sell his own clacks?
The way I see it, it's the kind of thing that's only really cool when you meet someone else who knows what it is. If you turn yours over and it says K3 anyone who knows what it is isn't going to like that too much. That's why I'd never buy one of those, it's not attractive enough to lose the value of other people liking that you have it.
Nothing like a good controversy to drum up business :p(4) Whether the new use affects the potential market for the original work.
With different weights applied to each clause by situation. However, as the Etsy article states, #4 is typically weighed most heaviest by courts. Since Disney does not sell a Vader keycap in any form, I'd argue that CC doesn't affect the potential market at all for Star Wars merchandise.
The fact that they were a one-time, limited run strengthens that argument even more. Just because CC made a Vader keycap, does not mean he broke copyright on Disney's Star War's trademark. I'd be willing to bet that any decent IP lawyer can come up with a solid fair use defense in this case.
Just for Devil's advocate (read: I do not support the counterfeits ):
Do you think that the fake clacks will affect CC's ability to sell his own clacks?
Personally, I don't think this has an affect on CC at all. I don't believe CC's own business has been touched by this, and if anything, the exposure from K3KC has made the demand, and the aftermarket value, of real Clacks jump up.
Post by: limitz on Sat, 24 January 2015, 12:30:01
Nothing like a good controversy to drum up business :p(4) Whether the new use affects the potential market for the original work.
With different weights applied to each clause by situation. However, as the Etsy article states, #4 is typically weighed most heaviest by courts. Since Disney does not sell a Vader keycap in any form, I'd argue that CC doesn't affect the potential market at all for Star Wars merchandise.
The fact that they were a one-time, limited run strengthens that argument even more. Just because CC made a Vader keycap, does not mean he broke copyright on Disney's Star War's trademark. I'd be willing to bet that any decent IP lawyer can come up with a solid fair use defense in this case.
Just for Devil's advocate (read: I do not support the counterfeits ):
Do you think that the fake clacks will affect CC's ability to sell his own clacks?
Personally, I don't think this has an affect on CC at all. I don't believe CC's own business has been touched by this, and if anything, the exposure from K3KC has made the demand, and the aftermarket value, of real Clacks jump up.
*Insert PT Barnum Cliche Here*
But on a more serious note, it's actually the reason why large brands largely don't care about counterfeits. Forget markets in Asia, there are markets in most major US cities where you can find knockoffs.
However, largely, the knockoffs only serve to reinforce the brand exclusivity, and causes the original brand to only increase in value. Numerous marketing studies have shown this already, and even the Harvard Business Review agrees with this notion:
https://hbr.org/2014/04/think-differently-about-protecting-your-brand/
"Authorized or not, brand awareness in a new market is usually a good thing. And increased brand exposure can lead to a migration from counterfeit to original goods when the economic climate of that market improves or discretionary spending increases."
Essentially, counterfeits in the market only serve to "boost brand exposure and expansion without significant investment."
Other institutions have found similar results:
http://upstart.bizjournals.com/views/blogs/market-movers/2007/07/27/when-counterfeits-increase-brand-value.html
Dolce and Gabbana is one of the most counterfeited brands in the world, yet are completely unwilling to help law enforcement due to the fact "that the existence of counterfeits only serves to enhance the desirability – and sales volumes – of the real thing."
This article http://www.intangiblebusiness.com/news/marketing/2006/05/brand-piracy-faking-it-can-be-good summarizes it the best:
"product's values is also not diluted as the owner of the counterfeit products knows it is just that, a fake, and therefore does not expect the same performance from it. In fact, decisions to purchase the counterfeit products usually reaffirm the brand's values as the recipient buys the article to project the very image the brand is trying to portray through its advertising and promotion. This endorsement encourages loyalty, generates awareness and strengthens the brand's values with the owner of the fake as well as everyone with whom they come in contact."
-----
Just food for thought, and though it may be extremely unintuitive to some users here, but in most cases counterfeiting only serves to boost prices and demand. This topic has been exhaustively studied by marketing firms and corporations, and that's why counterfeits are largely tolerated. This line of logic is another reason why I believe that CC's own business has not been affected, and in fact, has only strengthened his own brand. Take the current sale for instance. Items are typically sold within seconds of listing. The total length of the sale is ~60days, and the price ranges from $50-120 for a cap. Even if every cap was $50, that's $3000 over 60 days.
Not bad at all, but utterly impossible without a strong branding. There are literally hundreds of users constantly refreshing that page. In 30 days alone, that thread has received over 1.2M views. There are still 30 days to go.
Post by: Ngt on Sun, 25 January 2015, 05:58:17
Nice read. I didn't know about that point of view on counterfeits. Thanks.Nothing like a good controversy to drum up business(4) Whether the new use affects the potential market for the original work.
With different weights applied to each clause by situation. However, as the Etsy article states, #4 is typically weighed most heaviest by courts. Since Disney does not sell a Vader keycap in any form, I'd argue that CC doesn't affect the potential market at all for Star Wars merchandise.
The fact that they were a one-time, limited run strengthens that argument even more. Just because CC made a Vader keycap, does not mean he broke copyright on Disney's Star War's trademark. I'd be willing to bet that any decent IP lawyer can come up with a solid fair use defense in this case.
Just for Devil's advocate (read: I do not support the counterfeits ):
Do you think that the fake clacks will affect CC's ability to sell his own clacks?
Personally, I don't think this has an affect on CC at all. I don't believe CC's own business has been touched by this, and if anything, the exposure from K3KC has made the demand, and the aftermarket value, of real Clacks jump up.
*Insert PT Barnum Cliche Here*
But on a more serious note, it's actually the reason why large brands largely don't care about counterfeits. Forget markets in Asia, there are markets in most major US cities where you can find knockoffs.
However, largely, the knockoffs only serve to reinforce the brand exclusivity, and causes the original brand to only increase in value. Numerous marketing studies have shown this already, and even the Harvard Business Review agrees with this notion:
https://hbr.org/2014/04/think-differently-about-protecting-your-brand/
"Authorized or not, brand awareness in a new market is usually a good thing. And increased brand exposure can lead to a migration from counterfeit to original goods when the economic climate of that market improves or discretionary spending increases."
Essentially, counterfeits in the market only serve to "boost brand exposure and expansion without significant investment."
Other institutions have found similar results:
http://upstart.bizjournals.com/views/blogs/market-movers/2007/07/27/when-counterfeits-increase-brand-value.html
Dolce and Gabbana is one of the most counterfeited brands in the world, yet are completely unwilling to help law enforcement due to the fact "that the existence of counterfeits only serves to enhance the desirability – and sales volumes – of the real thing."
This article http://www.intangiblebusiness.com/news/marketing/2006/05/brand-piracy-faking-it-can-be-good summarizes it the best:
"product's values is also not diluted as the owner of the counterfeit products knows it is just that, a fake, and therefore does not expect the same performance from it. In fact, decisions to purchase the counterfeit products usually reaffirm the brand's values as the recipient buys the article to project the very image the brand is trying to portray through its advertising and promotion. This endorsement encourages loyalty, generates awareness and strengthens the brand's values with the owner of the fake as well as everyone with whom they come in contact."
-----
Just food for thought, and though it may be extremely unintuitive to some users here, but in most cases counterfeiting only serves to boost prices and demand. This topic has been exhaustively studied by marketing firms and corporations, and that's why counterfeits are largely tolerated. This line of logic is another reason why I believe that CC's own business has not been affected, and in fact, has only strengthened his own brand. Take the current sale for instance. Items are typically sold within seconds of listing. The total length of the sale is ~60days, and the price ranges from $50-120 for a cap. Even if every cap was $50, that's $3000 over 60 days.
Not bad at all, but utterly impossible without a strong branding. There are literally hundreds of users constantly refreshing that page. In 30 days alone, that thread has received over 1.2M views. There are still 30 days to go.
Post by: fohat.digs on Sun, 25 January 2015, 19:29:46
Counterfeiting has been around equally long, and, in times past, has often carried the death penalty, so no one has ever been under any delusions about the seriousness of it.
Today, in the US at least, you are free to make perfect, exact copies of any coin,
AS LONG AS THE WORD "COPY" or "REPRODUCTION" IS EMBOSSED INTO THE METAL ITSELF,
AT AN EASILY VISIBLE SIZE, IN A CONSPICUOUS POSITION.
So, if the mark is on the back ("reverse") then you can display the reproduction and it will look great from the front ("obverse").
Perhaps this is applicable, perhaps not.
Post by: MythicalWagyu on Mon, 26 January 2015, 17:06:37
sub'd!
I sense a new non-cult/circlejerk mech board subreddit coming soon.
Wouldn't be surprised. Just as /truegaming, /truereddit, /truetruereddit exist, I wouldn't be surprised if a sub like /diykeyboard formed.
http://www.reddit.com/r/mechboards/
lel at the post from Ripster linking /r/mechanicalkeyboards
Post by: byker on Mon, 26 January 2015, 17:09:48
Post by: sethk_ on Mon, 26 January 2015, 17:11:05
Hell, I will abandon r/true mk since this is a better name, if you want my help with the CSS I am able to helpsub'd!
I sense a new non-cult/circlejerk mech board subreddit coming soon.
Wouldn't be surprised. Just as /truegaming, /truereddit, /truetruereddit exist, I wouldn't be surprised if a sub like /diykeyboard formed.
http://www.reddit.com/r/mechboards/
lel at the post from Ripster linking /r/mechanicalkeyboards
Post by: Oobly on Tue, 27 January 2015, 06:21:19
Post by: Ngt on Tue, 27 January 2015, 07:30:02
Post by: Moralless on Tue, 27 January 2015, 08:14:45
Is Ripster the moderator on /r/mk?
Yes, he's the creator of the sub
Post by: MAR82 on Tue, 27 January 2015, 08:35:53
Is Ripster the moderator on /r/mk?
Yes, he's the creator of the sub
Most of the time it seems like he is the only mod there
Post by: Ngt on Tue, 27 January 2015, 08:37:56
Is Ripster the moderator on /r/mk?
Yes, he's the creator of the sub
Alright. I never heard any complain about the sub reddit apart from this thread. But I guess it is because I didn't frequent the sub reddit that often. Once I discovered GH, I saw that there was way more content on this forum than on the sub reddit. So it was pointless to stay there. Does /r/mechmarket is related to him as well?
Post by: sethk_ on Tue, 27 January 2015, 08:47:53
Is Ripster the moderator on /r/mk?
Yes, he's the creator of the sub
Alright. I never heard any complain about the sub reddit apart from this thread. But I guess it is because I didn't frequent the sub reddit that often. Once I discovered GH, I saw that there was way more content on this forum than on the sub reddit. So it was pointless to stay there. Does /r/mechmarket is related to him as well?
Not at all, different mods
Post by: derezzed on Tue, 27 January 2015, 08:54:28
Regardless of whether the Vader clack violated copyright law, they were an original sculpt by the artist and copying the artist's work and passing it off as the artist's work is wrong.
Post by: fohat.digs on Tue, 27 January 2015, 09:07:47
We have a holly tree in our yard, and Harry Potter's wand was supposedly made from holly. A few years ago, my kids and I made "magic wands" which we hand-crafted from our tree's limbs and started selling them on ebay.
Within a few days, my ebay and Paypal accounts were frozen and I had gotten a very nasty message from Warner Brothers, presumably because I had described the wands as "made from natural holly wood, like Harry Potter's" and the mere mention of the HP name was enough to violate their rights.
That our natural, unique, hand-made items in no way resembled the plastic things that came from the wand factory did not seem to matter at all.
Post by: Ngt on Tue, 27 January 2015, 09:34:41
It is easy to push your weight around when you are big enough.
We have a holly tree in our yard, and Harry Potter's wand was supposedly made from holly. A few years ago, my kids and I made "magic wands" which we hand-crafted from our tree's limbs and started selling them on ebay.
Within a few days, my ebay and Paypal accounts were frozen and I had gotten a very nasty message from Warner Brothers, presumably because I had described the wands as "made from natural holly wood, like Harry Potter's" and the mere mention of the HP name was enough to violate their rights.
That our natural, unique, hand-made items in no way resembled the plastic things that came from the wand factory did not seem to matter at all.
It is off subject but do you still have some pictures of your crafts? I'd be curious to take a look at them.
Post by: P3TC0CK on Wed, 28 January 2015, 07:59:53
I've seen this argument over and over again. Hell, at one point I even believed in it myself. However, I did a bit more research regarding copyright law (US law of course), and on further review, the topic is much deeper than that. I believe a very strong fair use argument can be made here.
Fan art is a common topic, especially so on Etsy as much of the business there is dependent on fan art. So much so they made an article specifically discussing this:
https://blog.etsy.com/en/2010/fan-art-and-fair-use-one-truth-and-five-myths/
But to summarize, fan art, and even fan art sold for a profit, is not always considered copyright infringement. Legally, four clauses govern fair use (17 U.S.C. � 107):
(1) The purpose and character of the use, including whether you�ve made a new transformative work, and whether your use is commercial.
(2) The nature of the original work, such as whether it is more factual than fictional.
(3) How much of the original work was used.
(4) Whether the new use affects the potential market for the original work.
With different weights applied to each clause by situation. However, as the Etsy article states, #4 is typically weighed most heaviest by courts. Since Disney does not sell a Vader keycap in any form, I'd argue that CC doesn't affect the potential market at all for Star Wars merchandise.
The fact that they were a one-time, limited run strengthens that argument even more. Just because CC made a Vader keycap, does not mean he broke copyright on Disney's Star War's trademark. I'd be willing to bet that any decent IP lawyer can come up with a solid fair use defense in this case.
You didn't even read the entire article. You just took part of the post out of context. I originally referred to this in my first post where I called out CC supporters because of this double standard in the original knock off thread.
The part you posted is the definition of what constitutes "fair use". The articleis merely outlining what the rules are for people who will be making fan art and making them aware of the possible repercussions they may face for doing so. It points out multiple times that Fair Defense is an unpredictable defense in court.
Quote
Myth 2: Fair Use always protects fan art.
As discussed above, the Fair Use Doctrine is complex and can be unpredictable. Different intellectual property owners may have different ideas for what constitutes infringement, and what they deem as �fair� and good for their brand. And then, if a case goes to court, the fair use defense is likely unpredictable. Just because an artist is a fan and creates art, does not necessarily mean a court would find that this fan art is protected by fair use.
For more information on fan art, please check out the podcast we did with USC Annenberg School of Communications Professor Henry Jenkins, formerly of MIT.
CC has violated copyright, it's clear from even going by the myths outlined by the Etsy post. He's not doing this as a non-profit either, so there's no chance he can be under protection. Disney is fully within its rights to seek action against CC if they wanted to but they haven't because either they don't know, don't care enough, or actually don't mind. Because they have never explicitly said they don't mind people profitting off of copies of their work in the past and Lucas has defended their intellectual property.
Here is an example (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucasfilm_Ltd_v_Ainsworth) of them doing so successfully against someone who was producing replica storm trooper helmets. He did not defend himself in US court and LucasFilm won. LucasFilm and many other companies have crushed many other people for doing things like this in the past, so don't think that CC is some unique case.
You didn't do any deep research, you just took your predetermined view point and looked for something that slightly backed up your view and then posted it here.
You want to go off something in our own community related to this? Ask Brocap how he feels about his First generation optimus prime keycaps.
Post by: clickclack on Wed, 28 January 2015, 13:59:37
...so don't think that CC is some unique case.
I'm always a unique case.
It's part of my charm. ;)