Edited - Are the Minimee Sculpts Original?

Because... Minimee aren't made after other dolls- that is copying. Scupting in the image of a particular real person, or a character, isn't, really.

 

I think that because they can only do something to 80% likeness, so it's not really copying something 100%.

 

I think the Minimee team is capitalizing on artistic license. I don't find what they are doing to be hypocritical, they make the point of saying the sculpts will be 80% accurate which is not a direct likeness. Also you are ignoring the fact that there are people who authorize the use of their original characters when they have the sculpts made, and that is not an "unauthorized duplicate" as you have stated. I think the dilemma is more moral. Last I heard your image as a human being is not able to be copy written, but then again I'm not a lawyer.

 

Forever doll is copying an existing doll (in other words, taking credit for someone else's work). Minimees are dolls that don't already exist. The customer provides the "design", but the sculpting is completely original (as opposed to recasts of another doll).

 

Isn't there kind of a big difference between recasting or directly copying one doll into a "new" doll a whole lot different than an artist creating a sculpt from a picture?

Me thinks yes.

 

I would tend to agree that minimees made to look just like the character or person they were modeled after aren't very unique. Most are beautifully sculpted, artfully painted and are gorgeous, there's no doubt about that, but the "custom, original doll" aspect is lost I think.

However, I have seen people take a minimee head sculpt and make it into a new character. Maybe you really like the shape of Catherine Zeta-Jones' face, but when you get the minimee based on her you mod the nose, give her blue eyes and put a blonde wig on her. Now, she might look a little like Zeta-Jones, but with your new take on her look she can be an original character.

And let's not forget those people who actually get minimees to look like themselves, or drawings they've done.

 

Heh. You might want to ask Angell-Studio what they think about that... They got jumped on six ways to Sunday by Angel Sanctuary fans over the names and costumes they gave their Gabriel and Lucifer sculpts. Enough so that they pulled the dolls off of their site and have yet to put them back up for sale.

 

Really??

That's interesting, considering Soom is well known for swiping video game designs. (Final Fantasy, Granada Espada, etc.)

 

Minimee is not taking another companies doll, making a mold of it, and selling it as their own invention. They are taking an 80% likeness of a real person or character (not another doll) and making a doll somewhat like them. There is a huge apparent difference there.

 

Yes. Really.
Look up the thread on Gabriel and Lucifer over in the Large Dolls section...

 

I shall! (How did I miss this? I love Angel Sanctuary. O_o )
EDIT: Found it! Dude, that's bold. Not just the outfit, but the whole character design...Sheesh.

 

Hmmmm.....I don't see "hypocrisy" here. Sculpting a doll's head based on a photograph of a living person is nothing at all like copying a doll. Copying either through recasting or using the doll as "inspiration." However, that doesn't really seem to be the debate query here - the debate sounds to be about the "originality" of a doll sculpted to look like a person rather than an original, fantasized mold. I, personally, find the realistic aspect of the minimees to be an interesting topic of discussion, especially when discussing abjd - but that's already being discussed and debated in other threads....

 

I'm not so sure that's the only issue at hand... Sure, sculpting from a photograph isn't the same as copying an existing mold. However, the outbirk over things like Gabriel and Lucifer (ie: Commercial manga characters transformed into resin without the original creator's knowledge or go-ahead) vs. people's reactions to, oh, say the Dante, Link and Final Fantasy Minimee heads is interesting. I can see why the OP might see a double standard in operation there.

If the hint of a likeness to copyrighted characters was enough to get Angell Studio in hot water with the "fandom", why aren't people having the same reaction to DiM?

 

I agree with Bluegirl, since the Minimee team isn't duplicating other dolls, they're sculpting original dolls to order, I wouldn’t consider that copying. There are certain rules regarding Minimees to ensure that a large number of 1 certain character or person aren’t created. I’m sure DIM would never try to recreate a doll that already existed. This is a personal project for DIM, and if I recall correctly Denny’s original goal was to make people happy. It’s obviously moved past that into the territory of money, but I’m sure that original goal that was set still remains. Companies who copy dolls just to make money are a completely different subject. I don’t see a correlation between the Minimee Project and Counterfeiters at all. Perhaps you’re getting the 2 subjects a bit confused. I understand that you’re entitled to your opinion, but it seems like this thread’s main aim is just to bring other’s down and a place for you to vent about your apparent dislike of the Minimee project. Even your title is very harsh. That of course, is my opinion.

 

what I'm curious on is how much of it the same do you consider it before you say it's a copy? My experience in this is blatantly limited, but in other instances the only time someone could scream copy would be if it was a true bootleg (passing off as original) or only a few color changes but the base is identical (such as taking an original and moulding off it). In any art style, especially something like BJD that seems to have has a set aesthetic, there can be some imbreeding that occurs where the differences between one style and another can be just a flick of a nose, a slight upturn of an eyelid. Pretty much we're starting with a simplified head of roughly asian design. With all the companies I've seen so far using the same BJD starting point, it's no wonder someone's going to make similar stuff.

So what ratio do we use before we say "It's a copy!" One thing? Five? Seven? Or is there another way to determine copy, another criteria? If criteria can be determined, then it's simpy following that checklist to make a decision. The problem I see is the above point, with everyone starting with similar ingredients, the dishes are going to taste quite similar.

I have to admit this has made me curious... what do others think?

 

It might be the amount of them, since they've self restricted themselves to only making 10 and then there is no more done. That might be why DiM is more accepted.

 

No, it is not hypocritical. You appear to be making an assumption based on almost no knowledge of copyright law.

If a company creates a mold, they own the copyright to the mold and any reproduction thereof because they were the creators. With creative copyright, if someone makes even a single mark on a sheet of paper, takes a photo of anything, or makes just two bars of original music, that intellectual property is theirs wether they declare it so or not. If another company or person uses that mold (or drawing, or photo, or music) without direct permission from the creator or copyright holder that is stealing. Since Minimee explicitly states that they cannot reproduce molds from other companies, they are not opening the door for such a thing (and no, someone cannot do something like copy the face entirely but not the body and claim it for themselves because the body and face molds are made separately).

(EDIT: As an aside, I just thought of this - If you're going to argue that a company is going to come along and just tweak the nose of a Lahoo and call it their own, think about the nature of individuality. Imperceptible difference between nose, eye and mouth shapes and the million other permeations are what makes everybody different and the same can be said for a doll. I think a lot of brands of dolls look alike, but it might be something as small as how wide an eye is or the curve of the jaw that makes something so vastly different. Even dolls of the same type look different. I've seen a lot of CP Moons but every one of them has looked different.)

Likenesses of celebrities is completely allowable if the likeness isn't 100%. If people could sue every time they thought something looked just like them we wouldn't have political cartoons, comics in any medium or satire/parodies. Please also be aware that anybody who registers themselves as a public persona such as a politician or celebrity is completely aware that their photographs, likenesses and mannerisms are at the beck and call of the public. EDIT: If fans object to the use of a certain celebrity, it comes down to a matter of respectfulness, and if they feel it was in good taste or not.

Also keep in mind that when it comes to characters, Minimee isn't even doing an 80% likeness because it's representing only the face of something; there's also things to be considered such as the name, mannerisms, eye color, costume, none of which the Minimee imposes on the doll. It is the purchasers that put the wig, clothes and eyeballs in the doll and can then say: this is Cloud. And since Minimee isn't specifically selling a Cloud doll, just allowing molds made with that face as a guideline, they are not selling the character. Now if that purchaser then turns around an tries to sell that doll as Cloud that seller is trying to profit from a copyrighted Squaresoft character and is violating their copyright on the character. That is why the Angel Sanctuary dolls were theft of intellectual property and a face based loosely around a character is not.

So no - Minimee is not opening the doors for companies to completely violate copyright.

*whew*

 

I was going to post... but I think Yugami said everything I was going to very eloquently, so, snaps.