Selling sculptures legality question.

[valemeister]

I thought it was legal to sell a bust you made yourself (of say Captain America for example) as long as it was a one of a kind and you weren't mass producing them?

Also, what are the rules regarding garage kits? Are kits exempt from say DC or Marvel licenses?

[CyborgChicken]

Originally Posted by Underdog07

Am I reading the above correct: you only sent them a picture of the sculpt, not the actual sculpt. If there was no formal submission form, there probably was some disclaimer or "legal provisons" stated on the "contest page." So assuming you sent them a pic, you would not have assigned them rights to anything other than that pic.

Basically without such language, you could send Wizard a pic, and then if they used it you could sue them. Such provisions insulate them from that type of action. Similarly, I previously posted how DC's website includes a provision that anything submitted to the company becomes their property.

Well, they don't run those contest anymore if that tells you anything

Originally Posted by Jonathan74

It's "copyright". Search results here.:
)

Sorry - no matches. Please try some different terms.

[Underdog07]

Originally Posted by valemeister

I thought it was legal to sell a bust you made yourself (of say Captain America for example) as long as it was a one of a kind and you weren't mass producing them?

Without getting into the ins/outs of it, here is a two-cent answer.

It is a violation of copyright laws to make anything involving a protected character. It is unlikely that a copyright owner would ever pursue an action against someone who made 1 sculpt for their own use. Once said sculpt starts being sold, even if just a one of a kind, the copyright owner is likely to take notice and more likely to pursue legal remedies.

Originally Posted by valemeister

Are kits exempt from say DC or Marvel licenses?

Yes, and my Mustang is exempt from posted speed limits.

Seriously, the answer to that is no.

[Underdog07]

Originally Posted by CyborgChicken

Sorry - no matches. Please try some different terms.

Strange.

Try this link: http://statueforum.com/search.php?searchid=1193682

[risingstar]

I've had this debate with one of the lawyers from Warner brothers... The law is very straight forward. They own their trademark. Period. If you sell a Batman doodle you made on napkin and sell it for a quarter, you're breaking the law. The idea here is that you never would have been able to make that quarter unless you took advantage of a marketable product. Chances are, if you doodled a picture of your goldfish on a napkin, you may not have been offered a quarter for it. Basically, you need to purchase a license to sell Batman napkins from WB or else you place yourself in an actionable position.

The only reason you're not in court for selling your commission is because it isn't worth WBs time to go after you. They choose their battles. However, if the person who paid to have the napkin lisence finds out about your illegal napkins, he/she could file a complaint and force WBs hand against you.

[Underdog07]

Originally Posted by risingstar

The law is very straight forward. They own their trademark. Period. If you sell a Batman doodle you made on napkin and sell it for a quater, you're breaking the law. . . .

The only reason you're not in court for selling your commission is because it isn't worth WBs time to go after you.

In that situation, WB could hire my firm and we would get them their quarter (for roughly $2.5 million in legal fees - not an exaggeration). My point being that cost is another major conern with these companies. Litigation is not cheap. And most trademark and/or copyright violations do not result in large damage awards (whereas patent cases routinely get multi-million dollar verdicts).

That is why the standard course of action for these companies is to send out cease and desist letters. Cheap and effective.

[Wayne Industries]

Originally Posted by risingstar

I've had this debate with one of the lawyers from Warner brothers... The law is very straight forward. They own their trademark. Period. If you sell a Batman doodle you made on napkin and sell it for a quarter, you're breaking the law.....

So does this mean that every commission artist out there at every comic convention drawing anything Marvel/Dc and company related is breaking that law? And anyone of us that buys said commission is also breaking the law? (for receiving "stolen" merchandise) Not arguing the context of the copyright law with anyone, just wondering why certain actions are accepted while others persecuted.

[risingstar]

Originally Posted by Wayne Industries

So does this mean that every commission artist out there at every comic convention drawing anything Marvel/Dc and company related is breaking that law? And anyone of us that buys said commission is also breaking the law? (for receiving "stolen" merchandise) Not arguing the context of the copyright law with anyone, just wondering why certain actions are accepted while others persecuted.

Feel free to contact WB and ask for legal. They'll be more than happy to explain copyright laws for you.
I believe there's a 1-800 number.

[Underdog07]

Originally Posted by Wayne Industries

So does this mean that every commission artist out there at every comic convention drawing anything Marvel/Dc and company related is breaking that law?

Yes.

Originally Posted by Wayne Industries

And anyone of us that buys said commission is also breaking the law? (for receiving "stolen" merchandise)

Yes

Originally Posted by Wayne Industries

Not arguing the context of the copyright law with anyone, just wondering why certain actions are accepted while others persecuted.

Because. OK, I'll explain further. It is within the discretion of the CR/TM holder whether or not they want to pursue an action of infringement. A similar example involving real property rights is tresspassing. Someone entering your property uninvited is tresspassing. However (I hope) you do not call the police on every person who enters your land without your permission. But you could if you wanted to.

With the above two examples, it is not to the benefit of a company -- and indeed likely is to its detriment -- to persue such violations. Further, comic companies seem to have a hand shake agreement that artists at shows can freely create pics of their characters. It gives them free marketing and can spur sales. Also, it may give them an inside track at signing highly talented artists. Plus, back to risingstar's point, there really is not a lot for the company to gain by suing someone for drawing one picture. Now if a famous artist sat in his house drawing pics, making giclees of them and selling them, that would be a different story.

As for the fan who bought the piece, yes it is illegal to own, but the CR/TM owner would have a difficult time establishing damages. Plus the negative publicity that would come from a comic company suing a fan with a pic highly weigh against a company ever taking any action against a consumer given those facts.

[Wayne Industries]

Originally Posted by Underdog07

Yes.



Yes



Because. OK, I'll explain further. It is within the discretion of the CR/TM holder whether or not they want to pursue an action of infringement. A similar example involving real property rights is tresspassing. Someone entering your property uninvited is tresspassing. However (I hope) you do not call the police on every person who enters your land without your permission. But you could if you wanted to.

With the above two examples, it is not to the benefit of a company -- and indeed likely is to its detriment -- to persue such violations. Further, comic companies seem to have a hand shake agreement that artists at shows can freely create pics of their characters. It gives them free marketing and can spur sales. Also, it may give them an inside track at signing highly talented artists. Plus, back to risingstar's point, there really is not a lot for the company to gain by suing someone for drawing one picture. Now if a famous artist sat in his house drawing pics, making giclees of them and selling them, that would be a different story.

As for the fan who bought the piece, yes it is illegal to own, but the CR/TM owner would have a difficult time establishing damages. Plus the negative publicity that would come from a comic company suing a fan with a pic highly weigh against a company ever taking any action against a consumer given those facts.

All this lawyer talk makes me want to shoot somebody.. unfortunately it makes perfect sense....law is only broken when someone reports it, exceptions are made depending on the situation. Good thing too, I love going to cons for the artist alleys..