Headplay recast Rainman's monkey sculpt again!

[thenammagazine]

Well, the recaster must have purchased the sculpt from Rainman, correct?? How else would he have obtained it?? So Rainman must have been compensated for it at some point in the chain.

If anything the recaster put SOME effort into it, as far as the painting goes. If I commissioned Adam Hughes to sketch me a Batgirl, and I took the sketch home and scanned it and digitally colored it and sold prints. . . am I stealing from Adam Hughes?? I think DC would come after me before Adam Hughes did.

There's more work in casting and painting a sculpt than there is in photocopying a piece of art.

I'm pretty sure I've said this before in this debate, but what it really comes down to, and what irks me about it is that we tolerate recasts if someone has recasted a company's product, but we do not tolerate if someone recast an 'individual's' work. People buy from 7Toys7 and IronCrossHunter and all the other recasters on eBay that recast Hot Toys stuff and all other companies stuff and that goes on all the time, and nobody starts threads about it, but when someone recasts Rainman's stuff. . . this is the 3rd or 4th thread about it. Shoot, I think even Elvis bought a recast HT Wolverine head so he could do a bash, but nobody shunned him for buying a recast. I mean, if Kojun did a custom Wolverine figure and someone recast it, there'd be a big to-do about it, but when Kojun sculpts a Wolverine for Hot Toys and it's recast, sure there's a big to-do about it, but then people buy it anyways because they want a Wolverine and don't want to pay for an original.

Some of the most vocal against Rainman's stuff being recast, have an unauthorized recasted and resized to 1:6 Indy PF head in their collection. It is blatant hypocrisy.

 

[bperry]

Some of the most vocal against Rainman's stuff being recast, have an unauthorized recasted and resized to 1:6 Indy PF head in their collection. It is blatant hypocrisy.

 

[intothevoid]

Some of the most vocal against Rainman's stuff being recast, have an unauthorized recasted and resized to 1:6 Indy PF head in their collection. It is blatant hypocrisy.

Hmmm it's my understanding that Trev knows about it and is fine with it, so not sure if that's the best example.

 

[thenammagazine]

Hmmm it's my understanding that Trev knows about it and is fine with it, so not sure if that's the best example.

But it is. The rights to the piece belong to Sideshow, not Trevor. And they've been more than vocal about their stance on unauthorized recasting over the years.

 

[Darklord Dave]

To clarify YET AGAIN - no it's not all right for HT heads to be recast. Diver4 was banned for selling recasts of commercial heads. It's all the same - if someone is stealing from an artist it doesn't matter if it's a customizer or an artist that works for a company.

And some posts deleted for referencing certain things.

 

[Ironman1188]

I just get in this thread, and want to understand:

Make a unlicensed Head Sculp and make a lot of money: RIGHT

Make a recast of a unlicensed Head Sculp and make money: WRONG

Is that correct?

Pretty much.

Wasnt Diver4 banned for recasting? Cant we just kick headplay? I mean they just use this platform to promote their stuff. They do not add anything to the discussion. No loss.

Yes, diver4 was banned and as you can see if you check ebay he hardly puts anything up for sale anymore The ban thus virtually crushing his business. The main difference being we all know that diver4 is a recaster and sells horrible, flawed resin casts. Headplay is known for selling vinyl heads, so resin recasts kind of seems odd to be coming from them. Then again the sellers of these alledged recasts is Headplay, but other names completely.
And you don't see any more from them, I would hazard to guess, because either they can't find the deleted thread, OR anything new they post is being summarily deleted before it hits the board.

I notice for both Fight club heads and the monkey head it says material: resin (being the medium of a typical grassroots caster or recaster).
Would'nt a Headplay product be made in vynl ?
I see no ohter recognizable legit headplay products for sale by this seller.
I have seen names of big companies like HT or SSC or BBI attached to auctions of products that are not their's just to attract attention to the auction

As all the other headplay heads are vinyl I would think so, but at this point I don't see it making a difference. All the rainman fans [no offense intended] will apparently never believe anything other than headplay is selling resin recasts now.

 

[armysoldier74b]

If money was the only thing your are after, the smartest thing would be to sell a very limited number of heads, say 20 pcs, and then release a mass produced version of the same sculpt under a different name, and then claim that it is a pirated re-cast.

We dont know what is going on behind the scene, and probably never will.

Gotta love conspiracy theorists

Al Qaeda is selling RM's HS to fund the war against the imbecil Americans. Lol

 

[Laney74]

Just befriend them on FB, all of this info is posted on Headplays official page, then you will have no more doubts (unless of course, someone else is using their name on facebook).

Why not post a screen capture. This thread is light on for evidence.
Where is the proof?

 

[Ironman1188]

Just befriend them on FB, all of this info is posted on Headplays official page, then you will have no more doubts (unless of course, someone else is using their name on facebook).

I don't do facebook, so I can't see what you're talking about. I do, however, know that if someone has a page and posts a picture of....oh, let's say Brad Pitt, that they may not actually be Brad Pitt.

Why not post a screen capture. This thread is light on for evidence.Where is the proof?

Thats what I've been saying. Apparently not jumping on the circumstancial bandwagon can get you deleted though.
Its a thread of hypocrisy.
Sculpt an unlicensed head = OK.
Be accused of recasting said head = NG
Folks will claim that its two different things if a sculptor [we'll use Rainman as an example since the thread revolces around him] puts in hard work on an unlicensed sculpt and someone recasts it then if someone creates a 3D sculpt and sells it. Wouldn't both be copyright no-nos?
And, technically, the customizer is stealing from an artist everytime he sculpts an unlicensed head.

 

[die]

Just to clarify - these are completely different things. Yes, it is technically wrong to create an unlicensed product of someone else's Intellectual Property. Comic book artists shouldn't be doing Batgirl sketches at cons and selling them. That is exactly the same thing as a 3D artist sculpting a portrait and then selling it. Copyright law says this is a no-no.

But it is a completely different thing for someone to take a sculpt that an artist has invested many hours in and simply copy it and sell it without compensating the artist. That is if someone took that comic book artist's sketch, photocopied and then sold it as an original.

I see what you're saying, Dave, I just wanted throw something out there though... I really think the problem with this type of subject and why it always pops up is that so many people think that their own moral codes should be automatically universally accepted. I think there are alot of artists out there who have basically re-invented well known characters and made them hugely popular and revitalized interest in the franchises (think Todd Mc with Spider-Man). I think you have to consider that if somebody is making money off of a head that is an exact likeness of a particular artist's style it is pretty much the same thing as directly copying an artist's work as well. For instance, the custom Arkham Asylum style Batman figures that Sovereign Studios is selling, sure it's a direct violation to DC but also consider the artist(s) behind re-inventing the DC characters for the videogame. The re-invention of the characters is a huge part of why there's such a huge demand for merchandise of these characters in that particular style.

This is why I don't try to get involved in other people's purchasing decisions, I realize that everybody has to make these decisions for themselves and for their own reasons. We all have different perspectives, some of us look at it from an artistic standpoint, some from a business standpoint. To me, the biggest problem right now has been the actual "artists" themselves who have skill, have talent and horrible business ethics. Sure, those recasters out there may be offering subpar knockoffs or sometimes even really nice knockoffs but at least they are delivering something. We've got talented sculpters basically stealing thousands of dollars from people who trusted them to deliver and they're still getting away with it daily. I'd hate to see us lose sight of the real issues here.

 

[thenammagazine]

Gotta love conspiracy theorists

Al Qaeda is selling RM's HS to fund the war against the imbecil Americans. Lol

Well, if the Italian postal system wasn't the main employer of the nation's "special bus" population, sadly the most intelligent of the populace, I'm sure they'd ship to Italy too.

 

[armysoldier74b]

Well, if the Italian postal system wasn't the main employer of the nation's "special bus" population, sadly the most intelligent of the populace, I'm sure they'd ship to Italy too.

I get most of my mail via USPS to my FPO address. Read about it!

 

[armysoldier74b]

I see what you're saying, Dave, I just wanted throw something out there though... I really think the problem with this type of subject and why it always pops up is that so many people think that their own moral codes should be automatically universally accepted. I think there are alot of artists out there who have basically re-invented well known characters and made them hugely popular and revitalized interest in the franchises (think Todd Mc with Spider-Man). I think you have to consider that if somebody is making money off of a head that is an exact likeness of a particular artist's style it is pretty much the same thing as directly copying an artist's work as well. For instance, the custom Arkham Asylum style Batman figures that Sovereign Studios is selling, sure it's a direct violation to DC but also consider the artist(s) behind re-inventing the DC characters for the videogame. The re-invention of the characters is a huge part of why there's such a huge demand for merchandise of these characters in that particular style.

This is why I don't try to get involved in other people's purchasing decisions, I realize that everybody has to make these decisions for themselves and for their own reasons. We all have different perspectives, some of us look at it from an artistic standpoint, some from a business standpoint. To me, the biggest problem right now has been the actual "artists" themselves who have skill, have talent and horrible business ethics. Sure, those recasters out there may be offering subpar knockoffs or sometimes even really nice knockoffs but at least they are delivering something. We've got talented sculpters basically stealing thousands of dollars from people who trusted them to deliver and they're still getting away with it daily. I'd hate to see us lose sight of the real issues here.

You make good points but here is where it falls short. HP is not coming up with their own style or interpretation of RM's work. They are recasting something, throwing some paint on it, and calling it their own (or not giving credit where credit is due). License or no license Rainman does his HS from scratch and that is art and thats what his fans are buying.

 

[die]

You make good points but here is where it falls short. HP is not coming up with their own style or interpretation of RM's work. They are recasting something, throwing some paint on it, and calling it their own (or not giving credit where credit is due). License or no license Rainman does his HS from scratch and that is art and thats what his fans are buying.

No, I understand completely, trust me. You might have missed the whole point in what I was saying. I never said HP was copying a "style", I know they were copying somebody's work. My reference to that was of sculptors copying an artistic style, as in the Arkham Asylum look which was a re-imagined immensely popular style of classic DC characters. People are making unlicensed 3D sculpts of 3D videogame characters, thus not just infringing on DC but also on the artist(s) that designed them and cashing in on the demand for those characters before HT releases them. But in this case, you wouldn't consider the artists who came up with these concepts to be the artists, right? You'd say the sculptor who copied their design is the only artist in the equation? This was my point.


People seem to have different opinions on exactly what an "artist" is and what a "businessman" is in general. People will allow "artists" to get away with questionable tactics that they will not allow "buisnessmen" to get away with. Even though there's really not that much difference between the two, they're both making license-fee-free money hand over fist. You're saying it's ok to create an exact replica of somebody else's work and sell it as long as you started it from scratch when you copied it exactly?

if so, then I'm about to write the Twilight series and get rich.

If Hot Toys does not deliver a product that we paid for, then we immediately throw a fit because they are a "business" but if a custom sculptor on the board runs off with our money and no product, we are supposed to wait 3 or 4 years and hold onto to hope because they are not a "business" they are "artists"? The same applies to these "artists" who make thousands for their limited edition "custom artworks", it's ok that they don't have to pay licensing fees and can still rake in higher prices than HT?

If you don't think there are shades-of-gray to all of this, consider the fact that most people are actually trying to bend what the ACTUAL LAW says about issues like this. It's pretty much the whole reason you're seeing a MIAMI SERIAL KILLER and a ANDROID HUNTER on eBay all the time rather than "Dexter" or "Deckard".

 

[Ironman1188]

if so, then I'm about to write the Twilight series and get rich.

Please don't, once with that was enough.

If you don't think there are shades-of-gray to all of this, consider the fact that most people are actually trying to bend what the ACTUAL LAW says about issues like this. It's pretty much the whole reason you're seeing a MIAMI SERIAL KILLER and a ANDROID HUNTER on eBay all the time rather than "Dexter" or "Deckard".

Not just on ebay, there are threads using those same aliases right here on this board.

 

[peterparkernypd]

I see what you're saying, Dave, I just wanted throw something out there though... I really think the problem with this type of subject and why it always pops up is that so many people think that their own moral codes should be automatically universally accepted. I think there are alot of artists out there who have basically re-invented well known characters and made them hugely popular and revitalized interest in the franchises (think Todd Mc with Spider-Man). I think you have to consider that if somebody is making money off of a head that is an exact likeness of a particular artist's style it is pretty much the same thing as directly copying an artist's work as well. For instance, the custom Arkham Asylum style Batman figures that Sovereign Studios is selling, sure it's a direct violation to DC but also consider the artist(s) behind re-inventing the DC characters for the videogame. The re-invention of the characters is a huge part of why there's such a huge demand for merchandise of these characters in that particular style.

This is why I don't try to get involved in other people's purchasing decisions, I realize that everybody has to make these decisions for themselves and for their own reasons. We all have different perspectives, some of us look at it from an artistic standpoint, some from a business standpoint. To me, the biggest problem right now has been the actual "artists" themselves who have skill, have talent and horrible business ethics. Sure, those recasters out there may be offering subpar knockoffs or sometimes even really nice knockoffs but at least they are delivering something. We've got talented sculpters basically stealing thousands of dollars from people who trusted them to deliver and they're still getting away with it daily. I'd hate to see us lose sight of the real issues here.

I completly desagree with you.

Didn´t matter how many hours a sculptor take to make a HS.

If he didn´t had to pay the rights to the owner, why he had to receive any credit when someone recast their work?

But is complete and cleary WRONG recast the Joker HS, as HT had pay the rights to had this license... So THEY have all the right in the world to complaind and even shut down Head Play.

But Rainmain can´t even complain, in my opinion... His work is stealing the rights from FOX, and the recast is stealing what from him? Is he really the owner of the HS?

Is a steal from a stealer...

 

[Levit05]

uhmm.....if you go on Headplay's actual Ebay site.....you will see that they are not actually selling these "stolen headsculpts"....SHIIIT...i'm more implied to say that someone else is actually jacking their name.....

here is the link for you guys to see the difference between what the other guy is calling himself and the actual Headplay company....i also think that once people saw the name head play...it became a lynch mob....now...i'm not saying recasting is right but i think people should get all their facts correct and do a little digging of their own to make sure that before they throw that proverbial rock....that they have reinforced glass for their own house....check the link out of the Headplay site and their feedback...maybe the reason why they can't even defend themselves is because they have had all their rights removed...but hey...i don't know that so i will just post the link and let you guys see for yourselves


https://stores.ebay.com/Head-Play-Shop

 

[karamazov80]

Their rights weren't removed from this site, only the thread was deleted. They/he/she has chosen not to respond to accusations made in threads such as this one. And HP was supposedly promoting those sculpts on Facebook, though you can only see it if you befriend them.

 

[Levit05]

given that they keep getting accused more often then not by the same folk....maybe they just decided not to fight it...doesn't mean they are guilty....just means that prolly don't care and would prefer not t even get into internet squabbles...like this has become...

*shrug

 

[karamazov80]

You're right that we don't know for certain that they are guilty, but there is a court of public opinion here that could affect their sales. If there is a reasonable defense for what they are doing, then it would be in their interests to respond. Otherwise, folks have to draw conclusions based on the available evidence, which is not good for Headplay.

Even if they just want to make that old "sculpting an unlicensed sculpt is no different than recasting" argument (which as I recall isn't very different from their defense of the Tommy Lee Jones mod), then at least they would get that out of the way, and folks could decide whether or not to support them based on their POV regarding that issue knowing that they fully understood the situation. . .they just won't be able to promote that stuff here, because it isn't acceptable to the admin.