Andrea's likenesses

[Patrick Kirk]

Gray,
I defer to the gentleman from San Diego...mi' amigo may have some insights about this topic...Petey seems to have the inside scoop on many of the behind the scene stuff in our hobby. Hopefully he will chime in; if not, I'll shoot him a note and spur him along...

Patrick

 

[John Long]

It was my understanding that Anrea had to quit producing the "El Zorro" kit a while back because Disney intervened. Their problem wasn't with the image, but with the name. I'd say they have found a loophole when it comes to likeness. In the case of the Troiani incident, since it was never litigated we'll never know who was right.

 

[frank h]

Hi Gray
The one thing I have observed,is that they do change the name of the pieces slightly.

For example it made me smile, when "Dances With Wolves"
became "Dancing With Wolves"

They along with others are great kits and if they get away with it
wheres the harm.

Frank

 

[Johan]

The one thing I have observed,is that they do change the name of the pieces slightly.

This is true. Their "Last samourai" piece is called "Western samourai".
"Predator" is "Space hunter", and so on...


... Well, the stuff sells well... guess we haven't seen the end of it yet.

 

[Richard E]

This is interesting, as I wondered about this myself and then got to ask a patent attorney about it.

Apparently, it's a minor licencing issue, the person in question would have to instruct his lawyer to hire a patent attorney in Spain to act on his behalf (doubles the price straight away), unless the US lawyer is able to practise in Spain. Secondly who do you sue ?, Andrea for producing the likeness, or the sculptor for sculpting it. The name issue is not important as the problem is the likeness. Therefore the studio is not going to bother.

Then is it worth the time, energy and money and not to mention bad publicity to sue a local Spanish Company (I can see the headlines now).

What this seems to hang on is, that as it's happening outside of the US, why bother. I still wonder what would happen if a US company did the same though.

 

[Lou Masses]

Richard,

All very true. My guess it's the "being in Spain" and the probable low volume of sales (would they spend teens or hundreds of thousands to stop tens of thousand in sales? If that much?). If it were here in the U.S I'd bet they would have at least received a "cease and disist" by now. The studios and actors vigorously defend what they consider to be their property. Sometimes at a loss. Especially in the current "download for free" environment. They're all in a panic.

Lou

 

[Terry Worster]

On this subject, a lot depends on where you live. In the US, not only the actor can come after you because they own the rights to their name and "visage" ( that's mug shot), but if you do a recognizable piece from a movie, the Studio can get you.

This only applies to pieces that are produced comercialy. One of a kinds, like for shows, can be done of anyone or anything as long as it is not defaming or demeaning. Then it gets into the personal thing.

Even the dead can not be copied. Thier estates are owned by some body usualy a lawyer. Such as John Wayne's estate is owned by his family and Marylin Monroe is still owned by Anna Strasburg. To reproduce any of these, you must be liscenced.

However, if your company is in another country, like Andrea, they have to go to that country to sue you and some of the other countries are not all that friendly to foriegn law suits.

Been there, done that

 

[Guy]

Thanks Terry,
I knew about the problem you had with an estate of a gentleman you did a sculpting of. I didn't want to bring it up unless you did.

guy

 

[JCOX]

Terry, thanks for the info and welcome to planet Figure. I've long admired your sculpts and have one in progress now (English Civil War Officer).

-jim cox

 

[gordy]

in the software world, a little similar, companies that facilitate the sharing of music and software are "owned" by individuals living on islands in the Pacific and therebye "purport" to be beyond the reach of the RIAA..

 

[kidney stone kid]

Gray, the thing that constantly gets overlooked about the whole Troianni/ Warriors thing is that Troianni may never have had an issue with this(I cannot say he was aware of it or not) UNTIL he signed a contracts with Britains toy soldier company, who wanted exclusive rights to his images for THEIR line of toy soldiers based upon his artwork. I seriously don't know who instigated the row with Warriors, but, it would seem much more likely that Britains Ltd was the one who "thought" they had something to lose. This is, to us, as historical miniaturists, as we recognize a great difference between toy soldiers and historical miniatures.

But, then once more, maybe Troianni was just waiting for a white knight to champion his nefarious cause of intellectual property......(and foot the bill)