Hobbyist Forums banner

21 - 40 of 125 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,318 Posts
I noticed that one well-known individual that was apparently recasting parts has since replaced some parts offerings with new parts cast from new, legitimate masters. I don't know if there was any admission or apology, but ceasing and desisting is at least something.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,089 Posts
It would been nice if that individual would have ceased and desisted the first time he was told to stop in 1996.

Or when he was notified in writing a month after that.

Or even when he was notified again in 2001 after a vendor that sold his stuff ratted on him.

It all must be coincidence now that new masters have been made and molds taken from them after prior activities were 'discovered' at a hobby show.
I don't know if there was any admission or apology...
None that I've ever heard. Unless you count "You're not making these parts anymore and they want them and I'm the one to see that they get them!"

I have seen an offer on another message board of an 'accurate secondary hull hanger bay door section' for the Ertl Enterprise-A very recently. Hopefuly that too is a newly crafted master.

In any case, I wish the best of luck to this person in his endeavors casting his own crafted parts. I am sure they are very nice.
 

·
Curmudgeon
Joined
·
6,600 Posts
My take on this subject is this: If the manufacturers of the original kits did their homework and produced a 100% accurate kit, there would be no need for aftermarket accurization parts. Along those lines, if the aftermarket suppliers can produce an accurate part, so can the original kits' manufacturers. And, as has been said before, you still have to purchase the original kit in order to use the aftermarket parts. So there really are no losers in this situation.

Recasting, on the other hand, is an entirely different matter. And Chuck_P.R.'s statement, "Recasts usually are done only of kits that are no longer made," is inaccurate. Right now, there are several recast kits available on eBay that have been recast from kits that are readily available. But most people, when faced with paying top dollar for an original kit or buying a recast for much less, will take the recast so they can save money. Personally, I wouldn't knowingly buy a recast unless the original kit was absolutely unavailable and the original manufacturer has publicly announced that it will never be reissued. Or if the recaster has an agreement with the original manufacturer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
585 Posts
I noticed that the original castings (which I bought) where losing their detail, but to the molds aging, while the aleged recastings where nice and crisp. The hanger door details are pretty crisp too, better then the softer, older ones.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,335 Posts
If I understand what you're referring to, Michael, the pieces/parts you're talking about are what you got from Lunar Models, right? If so, LM has been selling those accurizing kits for the Refit/-A for more than 10 years. As such, they're not recasts, unless I've missed something about ownership of pieces/parts in regards to the shuttlebay and other LM parts....

- - - - - -

Jeffrey Griffin
Griffworks Shipyards

* * * * * *

Star Trek Scale Modeling WebRing
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
585 Posts
um.. they're the ones that YOU YOURSELF asked me to compair, between the old lunar models castings and the newer ones, by a different caster.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,335 Posts
Um... YOU YOURSELF showed me pics of a lot of things, but I don't recall YOU YOURSELF ever showing me pics of a hangar bay door, which is what was mentioned above. I was assuming it to be a part of the LM hangar bay set that you had previously mentioned, dude. I know you had shown some pieces/parts that went on either side of the hangar doors and we had a conversation about THAT, as well as a few other pieces/parts. Then you showed pics of the LM pieces/parts w/the hangar bay. And that was also how many months ago...? ;)

- - - - - -

Jeffrey Griffin
Griffworks Shipyards

* * * * * *

Star Trek Scale Modeling WebRing
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,235 Posts
Zombie_61 said:
I wouldn't knowingly buy a recast unless the original kit was absolutely unavailable and the original manufacturer has publicly announced that it will never be reissued.
This is an ethical problem too. If I as a manufacturer decide to discontinue a product, there may be a lot of reasons for it which are unknown to all but me. So if its my "intellectual property" and I don't want the product manufactured any more, that doesn't give anyone the right to reproduce without my permission because they might think, "well gee, John O's Model Co has given up on it, so it must be okay for me to pick up the ball". Nope, no-one has the right to copy anyone's work unless its agreed upon.

John O.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,089 Posts
As a retailer, if I were to carry John Q's line of model kits and lighting products, and John O came up to me and said "Those parts are recast or derived from my masters and work" I would be under moral, ethical and quite possibly legal obligations to at least question John Q as to the origins of 'his' products and to not carry or endorse those specific products I had any doubts over.

Instead, as a retailer and non-manufacturer, a conscious thought out decision was made to dismiss fact and do what was in his personal best interest for profit and gain.

Is a retailer responsible to follow up claims made by a manufacturer to investigate the authenticity and origins of certain products made by an individual known to recast main stream plastic model kit parts? You bet.


So if its my "intellectual property" and I don't want the product manufactured any more, that doesn't give anyone the right to reproduce without my permission because they might think, "well gee, John O's Model Co has given up on it, so it must be okay for me to pick up the ball". Nope, no-one has the right to copy anyone's work unless its agreed upon.
That is exactly what was said at WF '03. Except for the "Well gee, John O's Model Co" part, but the rest almost precisly word for word.

The really sad thing is that had the recaster asked about offering those parts, the original producer would have most likely agreed to having the recaster produce his parts. He recasts clean castings very well. Instead, the recaster decided he could do what he wished with the work of main stream plastic model kit companies, why not with the products of a 'garage' kitter?

The recaster was notified multiple times to stop over the years and didn't. Even sadder was the fact the table sponser was notified with ample time to do the right thing and opted not to. As far as I and others who are aware of what actually transpired are concerned, the whole situation is the apitomy of everything wrong with the 'garage' industry.
 

·
Curmudgeon
Joined
·
6,600 Posts
John O said:
If I as a manufacturer decide to discontinue a product, there may be a lot of reasons for it which are unknown to all but me. So if its my "intellectual property" and I don't want the product manufactured any more, that doesn't give anyone the right to reproduce without my permission because they might think, "well gee, John O's Model Co has given up on it, so it must be okay for me to pick up the ball". Nope, no-one has the right to copy anyone's work unless its agreed upon.
You make a very valid point, and, quite honestly, one I had not thoroughly considered. I would imagine, then, that a recaster would have to accept the possibility of losing whatever finances he/she has paid out (to reproduce an "obsolete" kit) if the original manufacturer requests or forces them to discontinue that practice.

This raises another question in my mind: What if the legal rights to a particular intellectual property have lapsed?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,318 Posts
^ Copyright lasts until death of the author plus 70 years or somesuch. For corporation-produced copyrighted work, it lasts 90 years, if I remember right.
So, it will be quite some time before you can recast stuff from John O's Model Co. :)
 

·
Starship Class
Joined
·
11,871 Posts
My questions in this area are:

If someone has a part that is not quite accurate, is it okay to take the part, accurize it and then use it, the modified original kit part, to make castings without permission from the owner of the original kit part?

Where does the ownership begin and end? Does the accurizer have to make the part up completely from scratch or can he use the kit part as a starting point for his modified part?

Also, if one is to make castings for one's own use, say, adding more crew to a ship model, is that okay?
 

·
Oxidation Genius
Joined
·
31,236 Posts
For one's own use, I figure anything is fine. You're not making a profit off of someone else's efforts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,596 Posts
uss_columbia said:
^ Copyright lasts until death of the author plus 70 years or somesuch. For corporation-produced copyrighted work, it lasts 90 years, if I remember right.
So, it will be quite some time before you can recast stuff from John O's Model Co. :)
The copyright law is not so clear as that. Recently, here in the U.S. of A., the copyright law was extended. The so named "Bono" law, which was passed shortly after his death. Some feel it was passed as an emotional issue in rememberance to Sonny. The change only affected and extended the copyrights here in the U.S. of A.. In other parts of the world, other shorter terms exist. In fact, in China, there is no copyright over movies, music, etc.. China does not belive in this type of intellitical right. China belives such works belongs to the people of the state. Much like the American Indian who belived that man belings to the land and that man cannot own land.
 

·
Starship Class
Joined
·
11,871 Posts
John P said:
For one's own use, I figure anything is fine. You're not making a profit off of someone else's efforts.
I tend to agree with you since I make VHS tapes of programs I want to view later.

However, I do wonder that it's not considered a sort of 'profit', at least for yourself, since you're not buying more of the kits due to your copying. :confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,235 Posts
If one were going to be completely and anally consistent, sure. But, I consider a certain amount of home adaptation and copying to fall under "fair use".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,589 Posts
Discussion Starter #40 (Edited)
My take, complete kit recasters - bad.
Garage kit manufacturers who create their own original works - great!
People who recast accuratizing kits - bad.
People who take the time to create accuratizing kits and share their skills with us - great!!! :thumbsup:

Sorry if these views don't detail all the legal aspects. Just the way I feel.
 
21 - 40 of 125 Posts
Top