New from Pegaso

[JasonB]

Yeah, Andrea gets cute and does things like renames their Spiderman figure "The Arachnid", did the Arnold Schwarzenegger from Predator (Alien Hunter maybe?), Maximus "The General" from Gladiator, "The Dark Knight (Batman), the lead character from "Kingdom of Heaven" as Crusader Knight, "Empire of the Apes" from Planet of the Apes, Last Samurai Fig "The Last Daimyo" and a Tomb raider fig "Storm Raider", "The Untamed' is Aragorn from LOTR, "Buccaneer" is Jack Sparrow from Pirates of the Caribbean.
Others they didn't even get tricky with. "The Name of the Rose" depicting Sean Connery as a monk and "Braveheart", obvious Mel Gibson. I think they also did a Rambo fig. Its a long list, and I have always wondered why nobody calls them on it. All of those personalities/characters are trademarked by the movie studio. I'm sure they would make a stink if their figures started showing up under another label without their permission. I noticed they have never touched the Star Wars characters, Lucas is very well known for enforcing their copyrights/trademarks on all things Star Wars. Kudos to Knight Models for going through the proper channels and getting licensed to do their Star Wars and Marvel Comics figs.

 

[rheath]

Look it's a very loaded subject one which even extends to aircraft engines in miniature I have seen, eg : Pratt & Whitney approached a eastern euro company that was/is doing after market 2800CC engines in resin for P47's - the whole story became legal with their lawyers wanting changes made and/or loyalties paid, Andrea's owners I hear have a love of the movies especially it's role characters, but yes quite honestly one has to approach the right authorities, making copies of the original are a huge stamp out IMHO, but how far does one go to address all of the scale likenesses of movie characters ?? It has to be up to the entity that is involved that should approach, and not the other way around - the legal ramifications would then become ridiculous,(don't wanna contradict what I said above - kit manufacturing businesses are not multi million pound/dollar/euro businesses and cannot pay royalties or visa/versa,after all they are just paying homage to a character in miniature, the general rule of thumb is that is not being mass produced and appearing on the shelves of say Toys-are-Us all over the world, just very low profile limited runs in general-so it is up to the film/comic book studios to do as they feel or see fit or make up their minds what warrants attention and which does not !!.

 

[tonydawe]

I have no problem with Andrea, Pegaso or anyone else producing sculpted figures based on movie or TV characters, and not paying copyright fees to the movie studios. If the movie companies and actors don't enforce their copyright and intellectual property rights, then they leave themselves open to this kind of exploitation, and we benefit from significantly cheaper figure prices.

Equally if the same figure companies don't take legal action against recasters to protect their copyright and intellectual property rights then they will amost certainly get targeted by recasters, who will always be able to undercut them on price.

As I've said before, the bottom line is money. If Andrea, for example, had to pay copyright fees to the movie studios for all the movie characters they made figures of over the years, the price of those figures would make them hugely expensive. Knight Models have chosen to pay the copyright fees to Lucas and pass on the cost to their customers. If they didn't they'd almost certainly be sued by Lucas, because he can afford to enforce his IP rights.

That's why Knight Models figures are relatively expensive compared to equivalent sized figures and Andrea remain relatively cheap by comparison.

By the way, I'm not excited by Pegaso's latest releases. They seem to swing from exceptionally good to exceptionally ordinary from one month to the next.

 

[Michael Tse]

That's why Knight Models figures are relatively expensive compared to equivalent sized figures and Andrea remain relatively cheap by comparison.

By the way, I'm not excited by Pegaso's latest releases. They seem to swing from exceptionally good to exceptionally ordinary from one month to the next.[/QUOTE]


Knight Models makes itself so exclusive there is no way they dont pay up to Marvel and Lucas. Which is a shame as probably less than 50% of their releases have had to be truthful to facial likeness, while things are a little more creative and improvisional on the customs front.

I agree with the swing. Quite curious as to how Andrea and Pegaso make their choices going from month to month?

 

[rheath]

I have no problem with Andrea, Pegaso or anyone else producing sculpted figures based on movie or TV characters, and not paying copyright fees to the movie studios. If the movie companies and actors don't enforce their copyright and intellectual property rights, then they leave themselves open to this kind of exploitation, and we benefit from significantly cheaper figure prices.

Equally if the same figure companies don't take legal action against recasters to protect their copyright and intellectual property rights then they will amost certainly get targeted by recasters, who will always be able to undercut them on price.

As I've said before, the bottom line is money. If Andrea, for example, had to pay copyright fees to the movie studios for all the movie characters they made figures of over the years, the price of those figures would make them hugely expensive. Knight Models have chosen to pay the copyright fees to Lucas and pass on the cost to their customers. If they didn't they'd almost certainly be sued by Lucas, because he can afford to enforce his IP rights.

That's why Knight Models figures are relatively expensive compared to equivalent sized figures and Andrea remain relatively cheap by comparison.

By the way, I'm not excited by Pegaso's latest releases. They seem to swing from exceptionally good to exceptionally ordinary from one month to the next.

Well said Tony - objective !!

 

[thegoodsgt]

To stir the pot further....

Am I the only person who absolutely zero interest in likenesses from the movies? There are many more interesting historical subjects that I'd rather see. Every "character" figure the manufacturers release is one less "historical" figure released.

 

[FigureLover]

I for one love the depiction of icons from any popular entertainment. It gives a much broarder scope for our hobby other that just historical stuff, plus I think it would catch the eye of younger modellers who would relate to this form more. I personally will model anything that catches my eye and creative desires be it historical or fictional. Lets face it, it is harder to depict a likeness of an actual person, character, or actor through sculpting and paint work than depicting a generic figure .
As for the copyrite issue, our hobby really doesnt take monies away from the copyrite owner, whereas a recaster does. If anything, a model company probably actually helps the copyrite owner as it brings added interest to their product/movie etc.
Ben

 

[rheath]

To stir the pot further....

Am I the only person who absolutely zero interest in likenesses from the movies? There are many more interesting historical subjects that I'd rather see. Every "character" figure the manufacturers release is one less "historical" figure released.

I agree too, rather have historical figures in annonimity.

 

[Einion]

I have no problem with Andrea, Pegaso or anyone else producing sculpted figures based on movie or TV characters, and not paying copyright fees to the movie studios. If the movie companies and actors don't enforce their copyright and intellectual property rights, then they leave themselves open to this kind of exploitation, and we benefit from significantly cheaper figure prices.

We should care for them. Just to be clear here I'm not telling you how you should feel, what I'm saying is the principle is the principle.

Well said Tony - objective !!

Oh come on, Tony stated his opinion so it's just as subjective as the next guy's.

Am I the only person who absolutely zero interest in likenesses from the movies?

Nope. I have to be honest if there were a dead-on likeness of a character I liked I would have some interest, but not if they're only so-so.

Every "character" figure the manufacturers release is one less "historical" figure released.

Good point, hadn't thought of it that way. And it's not like they can sit on their laurels with historical subjects anyway, given the slipshod research that'll pass muster so often these days (as evidenced by the bust above).

...depiction of icons from any popular entertainment [give] a much broarder scope for our hobby other that just historical stuff, plus I think it would catch the eye of younger modellers who would relate to this form more.

That's a good point; but they should pay for the privilege.

As for the copyrite issue, our hobby really doesnt take monies away from the copyrite owner, whereas a recaster does. If anything, a model company probably actually helps the copyrite owner as it brings added interest to their product/movie etc.

I think it breaks down sort of like this: if a product makes money from some IP (intellectual property) then a portion of those profits should by rights go to the IP holder and it's that that is essentially being denied them.

So in essence there is money being taken out of their pocket, even though it might not seem that way at first glance.

Einion

 

[Blind Pew]

As with Knight Models' output, I gather George Lucas has a long and inglorious record for chasing people over copyright issues and he doesn't give up either. That's why he's a billionaire. They paid him to keep him off their back. Than pass this on to the consumer.

 

[Flashman]

As Knight Models’ Art Manager, I would like to give my opinion on this subject, since there are a few comments regarding us.

First of all, Knight Models considers that paying for copyright is the proper, as well as the legal thing to do. That’s what we’ve done, but whatever other companies do is none of our business.

Personally (my own opinion, not Knight Models’), I believe this doesn’t help the hobby at all. The only ones who really benefit from these illegal practices are the companies who unethically enrich from it.

First of all, they take advantage of the ideas and efforts of others.

Secondly, the fact that some act illegally contributes to give a bad image to the whole guild of modelers and producers.

In the third place, and most important, these minis only reach small, negligible distribution circles: being illegal, they won’t reach the usual distribution channels, because the most serious and widespread distributors won’t distribute them due to the legal problems they could cause them. Some countries have very strict copyright regulations, and distributors and producers are considered equally responsible legally wise. Thus, the fact that the characters are very popular doesn’t guarantee they would get to more people and, consequently, spread the hobby, as it could be thought. In fact, it limits, if compared to the pre-painted minis of Bowen, Sideshow, Daimond, Kotobukiya, 1/16 action figures , Starwars an films models kits of Revell etc.

Finally, I would like to point out that moneywise paying copyrights doesn’t make that much difference over the final price. In our case, our minis are more expensive due to the added value of being limited editions, packed in metallic cases (not carton board), and including pedestal and color bio cards. This makes them only 5€ more expensive than other 70mm minis. You can’t really compare our minis to, for example, Andrea’s, as theirs are 54mm, so it is the size difference what makes them necessarily cheaper, not the copyright.

 

[PhilinYuma]

Thanks, Flashman. That should clear up a lot of misconceptions about licensing copyright material. I would like to add one more point on behalf of the copyright holders, though, whose lawyers diligently seek out any infringement -- I guess that Disney is the poster child of this practice. If they do not mandate compliance then the copyright (this is particularly true in the case of logos and trademarks) can fall into abeyance and lose its legal protection as a "generic" trademark. This famously happened to Hoover and Biro, and to a degree, Velcro, though I notice that many merchants of other brands now refer to the material as "hook and loop". This practice hits marginal businesses, like the makers of model decals, even harder than figure manufacturers.

 

[gordy]

Thanks Flashman, very informative

Hey Gordy,

I think what Gary is saying, I may be wrong, is that we have no problem, I mean figure buyers, buying a figure from a company like Andera or The Tulsa Doom from Pegaso, who from most likely hoods have not paid the movie companies a $$ amount for using their likeness but then everyone wants to crucify the re caster because he has not gotten the permission from the model company to use their figures for his own gain. It is kinda of ok for me (model/figure) company to make money for free but not for the recaster.

This is just what I am guessing he means.

Joe

Thanks Joe , yes, I understand that double standard, I should have clarified, at which point is the copyright line crossed ?

 

[renarts]

Flashman brings to light a point I have wished more would pay attention to. Packaging can be expensive. Knight Models has a key ingredient to that in that by making them limited series, pack them in a flashy metal container with colorful labeling they create added value to their product. A big win in my book under the chapter of marketing but by also agreeing to pay the licensing fees, they can use the more correct and identifiable labels of their products i.e Thor, Yoda, etc which adds to their marketability. The other edge to this is that by doing so they also fall under the licensor's standards of production. Meaning simply, it better meet Lucas's expectations or it's a no go.

As figure prices creep ever upward, I wonder if anyone will redesign packaging to try and shave costs. After all, it only has to protect the figure. Other than that there are cheaper methods of labeling that will accomplish the eye catching "sparkly" we ravens look for.

Interesting discussion and insight to folk's thoughts on the ethics of the figure world.

 

[joegabo]

Hehe,



In my opinion everything is a knock off of something, almost no idea/picture comes from nothing, or has not been thought of or done before.



Putting in the work to sculpt something in the likeness of someone is not even close to the same thing as just re-casting a mini for sale. Sure they are both bottom lined at "for the love of money" but one is far more malicious then the other. (of course this is just my opinion, you do not have to agree, and many will not)


What could a painter paint if a colour could only be used, or a scene/person portrayed but once, by one person in the world.


Just my thoughts, as clouded as my water.
Joe