|
|
Post by micco on May 15, 2020 12:23:48 GMT -5
How would it be fake? It’s not imitating anything else that already exists. Unlicensed, unofficial... it’s fan art, which is a real (not fake) thing. Wow, those are awesome. I don’t think it’s been talked about here yet. It is not officially licensed by the wwe. |
|
|
|
Post by MKSavage on May 15, 2020 19:14:52 GMT -5
I don’t think it’s been talked about here yet. It is not officially licensed by the wwe. It's nice. Wouldn't mind seeing some other wrestlers in this style. |
|
bootan
Mid-Carder
Joined on: May 13, 2008 23:45:29 GMT -5
Posts: 222
|
Post by bootan on May 17, 2020 4:35:05 GMT -5
yep i had no chance, i wanted one
|
|
Kasper.ca
Superstar
Joined on: Apr 6, 2012 13:02:10 GMT -5
Posts: 764
|
Post by Kasper.ca on May 19, 2020 19:08:47 GMT -5
I’m not sure if you’re new to collecting but these words have very specific meanings and clearly this is neither fake nor a custom. I understand that you’d like for the package to say on it “officially licensed” and have a wwe logo on it. You don’t have to buy it. But not having that doesn’t classify something as a bootleg knock off or any of the other words you threw out there. I suggested a couple of more accurate ways to describe it in my last post. You can argue it all you want, but the definition of "custom" or "custom made" in any version, is what this is. It's not mass produced. It's not done by a company for consumer consumption. The definition of custom-made is built to a specific order or specifications. His work is "ripping off" a trademarked image and likeness of someone and something. It's a unique addition to the standard line of figures, and an altered figure lineup that didn't exist. That's a custom in every sense of the word. It's no different than an artist painting a version of Picasso or Rembrandt. It's a knockoff. It's a fake. It's a custom. Super talented and amazing, but not legit. Just because you don't think it is, doesn't make it fact. |
|
|
|
Post by micco on May 19, 2020 20:03:06 GMT -5
I’m not sure if you’re new to collecting but these words have very specific meanings and clearly this is neither fake nor a custom. I understand that you’d like for the package to say on it “officially licensed” and have a wwe logo on it. You don’t have to buy it. But not having that doesn’t classify something as a bootleg knock off or any of the other words you threw out there. I suggested a couple of more accurate ways to describe it in my last post. You can argue it all you want, but the definition of "custom" or "custom made" in any version, is what this is. It's not mass produced. It's not done by a company for consumer consumption. The definition of custom-made is built to a specific order or specifications. His work is "ripping off" a trademarked image and likeness of someone and something. It's a unique addition to the standard line of figures, and an altered figure lineup that didn't exist. That's a custom in every sense of the word. It's no different than an artist painting a version of Picasso or Rembrandt. It's a knockoff. It's a fake. It's a custom. Super talented and amazing, but not legit. Just because you don't think it is, doesn't make it fact. Incorrect. First, these are made by a company for consumer consumption. The name of the company, small as it may be, is literally printed on the package. What they are making are completely original sculptures. Yeah, they’re based on a existing character. A lot of art is. If I draw a portrait of eminem, my drawing is not me “ripping off” of Eminem’s face. This sculptor is not recreating something that already existed as you suggested in you nonsensical Picasso analogy. |
|
|
|
Post by casanova on May 20, 2020 15:46:38 GMT -5
You can argue it all you want, but the definition of "custom" or "custom made" in any version, is what this is. It's not mass produced. It's not done by a company for consumer consumption. The definition of custom-made is built to a specific order or specifications. His work is "ripping off" a trademarked image and likeness of someone and something. It's a unique addition to the standard line of figures, and an altered figure lineup that didn't exist. That's a custom in every sense of the word. It's no different than an artist painting a version of Picasso or Rembrandt. It's a knockoff. It's a fake. It's a custom. Super talented and amazing, but not legit. Just because you don't think it is, doesn't make it fact. Incorrect. First, these are made by a company for consumer consumption. The name of the company, small as it may be, is literally printed on the package. What they are making are completely original sculptures. Yeah, they’re based on a existing character. A lot of art is. If I draw a portrait of eminem, my drawing is not me “ripping off” of Eminem’s face. This sculptor is not recreating something that already existed as you suggested in you nonsensical Picasso analogy. The artist profits from a value of a trademark he doesn’t own. The sculpture (which looks great btw) is no problem if it is for private use only. Making business with a trademark/ brand/ name/ value that belongs to someone else however is not art anymore. This being said, I’d still buy any if I have the chance to. |
|
|
|
Post by keegandimitrijevic01 on May 20, 2020 16:27:18 GMT -5
How much was it?
|
|
ozz
Main Eventer
Joined on: Aug 1, 2011 16:37:04 GMT -5
Posts: 1,397
|
Post by ozz on May 20, 2020 21:09:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by micco on May 21, 2020 7:07:44 GMT -5
Incorrect. First, these are made by a company for consumer consumption. The name of the company, small as it may be, is literally printed on the package. What they are making are completely original sculptures. Yeah, they’re based on a existing character. A lot of art is. If I draw a portrait of eminem, my drawing is not me “ripping off” of Eminem’s face. This sculptor is not recreating something that already existed as you suggested in you nonsensical Picasso analogy. The artist profits from a value of a trademark he doesn’t own. The sculpture (which looks great btw) is no problem if it is for private use only. Making business with a trademark/ brand/ name/ value that belongs to someone else however is not art anymore. This being said, I’d still buy any if I have the chance to. Nah buddy. Art is art. Attaching a license To something doesn’t take something was art, and suddenly transform it so that it’s no longer art. If you believe that, try telling that to rob schamberg. He sells officially licensed art prints on the wwe website. Tell him that those prints aren’t his art. You guys seem to think there are certain hard rules for art when there aren’t. You’re making them up. I have a friend who painted his interpretation of Mickey Mouse (obviously a trademarked character) and had it displayed in the Whitney biennial. The museum then actually purchased the painting. His painting of Mickey Mouse hangs in one of the worlds most prestigious museums of art. Prints of it have been sold. He was not sued and can not be sued because it was his art. |
|
|
|
Post by casanova on May 21, 2020 15:02:17 GMT -5
The artist profits from a value of a trademark he doesn’t own. The sculpture (which looks great btw) is no problem if it is for private use only. Making business with a trademark/ brand/ name/ value that belongs to someone else however is not art anymore. This being said, I’d still buy any if I have the chance to. Nah buddy. Art is art. Attaching a license To something doesn’t take something was art, and suddenly transform it so that it’s no longer art. If you believe that, try telling that to rob schamberg. He sells officially licensed art prints on the wwe website. Tell him that those prints aren’t his art. You guys seem to think there are certain hard rules for art when there aren’t. You’re making them up. I have a friend who painted his interpretation of Mickey Mouse (obviously a trademarked character) and had it displayed in the Whitney biennial. The museum then actually purchased the painting. His painting of Mickey Mouse hangs in one of the worlds most prestigious museums of art. Prints of it have been sold. He was not sued and can not be sued because it was his art. As you already mentioned Schamberg sells officially licensed items. The painting of your friend (how awesome is that btw?!) will most likely be fair use in form of a „transformative use“. Art is art, I get your point. But business is still business too. Problems always occur when people start to make business with their art that uses the copyright of someone else. If the Hulk Hogan copyright has been used without permission, it is no problem for private use (that is art aswell). The moment you start business with your art that uses someone else’s copyright the copyright is violated. The question is not if it still art (the answer to this question really doesn’t matter at all), but simply if the artist is allowed to make money with the copyright of someone else. Your friend is a perfect example for a possible way to use someone else’s copyright by fair use. However I honestly doubt that the museum is allowed to sell prints. But that is not your friends issue and as long as Disney doesn’t care everything should be good, but I wouldn’t hold my breath for Disney being good with it if they ever get attention to it. This doesn’t effect the original work if your friend though. |
|
|
|
Post by casanova on May 21, 2020 15:07:01 GMT -5
The artist profits from a value of a trademark he doesn’t own. The sculpture (which looks great btw) is no problem if it is for private use only. Making business with a trademark/ brand/ name/ value that belongs to someone else however is not art anymore. This being said, I’d still buy any if I have the chance to. Nah buddy. Art is art. Attaching a license To something doesn’t take something was art, and suddenly transform it so that it’s no longer art. If you believe that, try telling that to rob schamberg. He sells officially licensed art prints on the wwe website. Tell him that those prints aren’t his art. You guys seem to think there are certain hard rules for art when there aren’t. You’re making them up. I have a friend who painted his interpretation of Mickey Mouse (obviously a trademarked character) and had it displayed in the Whitney biennial. The museum then actually purchased the painting. His painting of Mickey Mouse hangs in one of the worlds most prestigious museums of art. Prints of it have been sold. He was not sued and can not be sued because it was his art. Sorry for being unclear in my original post. The original sculpture is of course always art. The reproduction and mass production of that sculpture however is usually not part of the art process (there are some stamp paintings that are of course one project and art altogether; but we are currently referring to the reproduction process for business purposes). |
|
|
|
Post by micco on May 21, 2020 22:49:22 GMT -5
Nah buddy. Art is art. Attaching a license To something doesn’t take something was art, and suddenly transform it so that it’s no longer art. If you believe that, try telling that to rob schamberg. He sells officially licensed art prints on the wwe website. Tell him that those prints aren’t his art. You guys seem to think there are certain hard rules for art when there aren’t. You’re making them up. I have a friend who painted his interpretation of Mickey Mouse (obviously a trademarked character) and had it displayed in the Whitney biennial. The museum then actually purchased the painting. His painting of Mickey Mouse hangs in one of the worlds most prestigious museums of art. Prints of it have been sold. He was not sued and can not be sued because it was his art. Sorry for being unclear in my original post. The original sculpture is of course always art. The reproduction and mass production of that sculpture however is usually not part of the art process (there are some stamp paintings that are of course one project and art altogether; but we are currently referring to the reproduction process for business purposes). Obviously they are reproductions of an original piece of art, however, they’re each individually hand painted so you could still make an argument for them being original works of art. I made it a point to refer to these as works of art to clearly distinguish them from being “rip offs” or “knock offs” as was previously claimed. If this man’s original sculptures are knock offs, what are they knock offs of? I conceded that they aren’t officially licensed and suggested that they be referred to as just that. Having expressed written consent to use a particular likeness isn’t what determines if something is a knock off as you do not need permission to make art of whatever subject matter you choose. |
|
|
|
Post by casanova on May 23, 2020 7:21:23 GMT -5
Sorry for being unclear in my original post. The original sculpture is of course always art. The reproduction and mass production of that sculpture however is usually not part of the art process (there are some stamp paintings that are of course one project and art altogether; but we are currently referring to the reproduction process for business purposes). Obviously they are reproductions of an original piece of art, however, they’re each individually hand painted so you could still make an argument for them being original works of art. I made it a point to refer to these as works of art to clearly distinguish them from being “rip offs” or “knock offs” as was previously claimed. If this man’s original sculptures are knock offs, what are they knock offs of? I conceded that they aren’t officially licensed and suggested that they be referred to as just that. Having expressed written consent to use a particular likeness isn’t what determines if something is a knock off as you do not need permission to make art of whatever subject matter you choose. Agreed. These are clearly not knock offs or bootlegs as they are reproduced by the artist himself. Honestly these is so clear to me that I didn’t get it as a part of the discussion. Lol Anyway, licensed or not, these pieces look fantastic and I am looking forward to getting one of these in my hands. Hopefully the next one will not be that limited. All the best to the artist! |
|
Di-Di-Dis-Distribution Problem
Mid-Carder
Elite baby blue attire H or Bolt boots, or P & G or Roman God
Joined on: Mar 1, 2018 16:03:17 GMT -5
Posts: 482
|
Post by Di-Di-Dis-Distribution Problem on May 23, 2020 21:26:55 GMT -5
These really got the clearance from Pete? I have two of his Piper, a JYD and a Heenan from him...
|
|
Kasper.ca
Superstar
Joined on: Apr 6, 2012 13:02:10 GMT -5
Posts: 764
|
Post by Kasper.ca on May 23, 2020 21:52:43 GMT -5
Agreed. These are clearly not knock offs or bootlegs as they are reproduced by the artist himself. Honestly these is so clear to me that I didn’t get it as a part of the discussion. Lol I said talented art and custom sculptures. Other guy said they aren't custom and threw in the word "knock off" to try and discredit my point and "win" the argument, which was not what I said at all. |
|
ozz
Main Eventer
Joined on: Aug 1, 2011 16:37:04 GMT -5
Posts: 1,397
|
Post by ozz on May 23, 2020 22:35:34 GMT -5
These really got the clearance from Pete? I have two of his Piper, a JYD and a Heenan from him... Yes, he was behind the plan to do so. |
|
briskski
Mid-Carder
I came here to chew bubble gum and kick ass.
Joined on: May 10, 2020 19:27:59 GMT -5
Posts: 99 
|
Post by briskski on May 23, 2020 22:42:11 GMT -5
If a fake galoob prototype was offered to me...my dude....I would be on that!
|
|
Kasper.ca
Superstar
Joined on: Apr 6, 2012 13:02:10 GMT -5
Posts: 764
|
Post by Kasper.ca on May 24, 2020 16:04:54 GMT -5
If a fake galoob prototype was offered to me...my dude....I would be on that! I think a dude makes custom 2 Ups. There are a few fake LJN protos too. The talent and ability some of these guys have is scary good. Hard to know what is real and what isn't without actually holding it in your hands and even then, it might be hard |
|
|
|
Post by micco on May 24, 2020 18:25:28 GMT -5
He's a super amazing talent and I love his work, but at the end of the day... it's a custom. I'm not really into knock offs or customs, but that's just me. I can't believe how good he is though Here’s where you said “knock offs”. |
|
|
|
Post by micco on May 24, 2020 18:29:08 GMT -5
These really got the clearance from Pete? I have two of his Piper, a JYD and a Heenan from him... Yeah. He had a falling out with the two other partners responsible for the molding of these but he told me he found new partners. Then I saw someone make a slanderous post about to which he responded by saying something to the effect of he’s “done” which could mean that there won’t be any subsequent figures. |
|
