It is currently Sat Oct 19, 2019 9:18 pm

All times are UTC


THE PROP DEN is primarily a Darth Vader Prop Discussion Board, but we also deal with other Star Wars Props as well as Prop Replicas from other movies. If you do not yet have an account, set one up, sign in and jump into the Vader Prop Discussions!


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 494 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 29, 30, 31, 32, 33
Author Enter your Message here
 Post subject: Re: The AA Trial - renamed from armor sculpt topic
PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:26 am 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 8:58 am
Posts: 10614
Location: Denmark
Sorry to resurrect and old thread, but didn't want to clutter Brian Muirs thread about the test footage trooper with this.

So... what exactly has AA taken credit for and how much has so far been debunked?

I recall:

  • Creating the trooper - debunked as Liz Moore sculpting the helmet & Brian Muir sculpting the armor (sculptors)
  • Detail work on helmets - now stated to be the creation of Bob Walker (graphic designer)
  • Design and fabrication of TIE, Rebel, Imp Gunner, Imp Tech helmets - with all these other things debunked as his creation... can he still lay claim to the fabrication and combination of parts for these designs?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The AA Trial - renamed from armor sculpt topic
PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:17 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:03 pm
Posts: 657
Location: UK
I think its been clear since the UK case closed that AA was essentially the fabricator of the Stormtrooper, and appears to have had little involvement in the actual creative design process, since both drawings and clay sculpts were provided to him. However whats not been made clear is whose idea/design it was to have the ears and brow (to cover the joins that would now be present due to the vac-forming process)

With regard to the other helmets (Rebel Pilot, Rebel Fleet Trooper, Rebel Ground Crew, Imperial TIE, DS Gunner and DS Guard we know that he was given a US Helecoptor Pilot helmet and a US Navy Talker helmet (or a casting from them), which formed the BASIS of all those helmets. It also seems like he was given sketches of those helmets made by John Mollo, RMQ etc. But what we don't know is how much artistic interpretation was involved in producing the final pieces - and certainly the drawings Ive seen are not the most detailed.

So he was clearly involved in the design process, although how much is hard to say. Unfortunately his untruths and constant revisions have resulted in people having no faith in anything he's gone on record as saying he'd done. Hence we have to rely on impartial 3rd parties and written documentation for the facts.

Cheers

Jez


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The AA Trial - renamed from armor sculpt topic
PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2008 7:18 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 4:36 pm
Posts: 405
Location: england
BingoBongo275 wrote:
I think its been clear since the UK case closed that AA was essentially the fabricator of the Stormtrooper, and appears to have had little involvement in the actual creative design process, since both drawings and clay sculpts were provided to him. However whats not been made clear is whose idea/design it was to have the ears and brow (to cover the joins that would now be present due to the vac-forming process)

With regard to the other helmets (Rebel Pilot, Rebel Fleet Trooper, Rebel Ground Crew, Imperial TIE, DS Gunner and DS Guard we know that he was given a US Helecoptor Pilot helmet and a US Navy Talker helmet (or a casting from them), which formed the BASIS of all those helmets. It also seems like he was given sketches of those helmets made by John Mollo, RMQ etc. But what we don't know is how much artistic interpretation was involved in producing the final pieces - and certainly the drawings Ive seen are not the most detailed.

So he was clearly involved in the design process, although how much is hard to say. Unfortunately his untruths and constant revisions have resulted in people having no faith in anything he's gone on record as saying he'd done. Hence we have to rely on impartial 3rd parties and written documentation for the facts.

Cheers

Jez


Hi Jez,

Ainsworth had no involvement in the design process of the Stormtroopers.
He was not given the clay sculpt of the armour. I saw it moulded, cast and tools made up at Elstree. I saw suits pulled off those moulds and it was the moulds that were sent to Ainsworth.
As regards the helmet it is my belief that he was given the moulds to pull from - not the clay.
The ears and the brow can only be argued between John Mollo and Ainsworth but I know who I believe.
The drawings were not that detailed ( as with the drawing I was supplied with for Darth Vader) but many discussions took place regarding design with Ainsworth and John Mollo - at Ainsworth's admission who stated with great emphasis that John was a great communicator.

Brian


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The AA Trial - renamed from armor sculpt topic
PostPosted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 5:59 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:03 pm
Posts: 657
Location: UK
vaderman wrote:
BingoBongo275 wrote:
I think its been clear since the UK case closed that AA was essentially the fabricator of the Stormtrooper, and appears to have had little involvement in the actual creative design process, since both drawings and clay sculpts were provided to him. However whats not been made clear is whose idea/design it was to have the ears and brow (to cover the joins that would now be present due to the vac-forming process)

With regard to the other helmets (Rebel Pilot, Rebel Fleet Trooper, Rebel Ground Crew, Imperial TIE, DS Gunner and DS Guard we know that he was given a US Helecoptor Pilot helmet and a US Navy Talker helmet (or a casting from them), which formed the BASIS of all those helmets. It also seems like he was given sketches of those helmets made by John Mollo, RMQ etc. But what we don't know is how much artistic interpretation was involved in producing the final pieces - and certainly the drawings Ive seen are not the most detailed.

So he was clearly involved in the design process, although how much is hard to say. Unfortunately his untruths and constant revisions have resulted in people having no faith in anything he's gone on record as saying he'd done. Hence we have to rely on impartial 3rd parties and written documentation for the facts.

Cheers

Jez


Hi Jez,

Ainsworth had no involvement in the design process of the Stormtroopers.
He was not given the clay sculpt of the armour. I saw it moulded, cast and tools made up at Elstree. I saw suits pulled off those moulds and it was the moulds that were sent to Ainsworth.
As regards the helmet it is my belief that he was given the moulds to pull from - not the clay.
The ears and the brow can only be argued between John Mollo and Ainsworth but I know who I believe.
The drawings were not that detailed ( as with the drawing I was supplied with for Darth Vader) but many discussions took place regarding design with Ainsworth and John Mollo - at Ainsworth's admission who stated with great emphasis that John was a great communicator.

Brian


Brian,

I'm not arguing with you about this. I said "little involvement" and you said "no involvement". I didn't want to categorically say "no" as there are still some question marks over who did brow, ears etc. on the Stormtrooper.

As far as the other helmets, it still unclear although was working (again) to drawings and physical castings.

Cheers

Jez


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The AA Trial - renamed from armor sculpt topic
PostPosted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 2:27 pm 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 8:58 am
Posts: 10614
Location: Denmark
LFL lost!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14287864


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The AA Trial - renamed from armor sculpt topic
PostPosted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 2:55 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 10:38 pm
Posts: 816
Location: Essex UK
Too Much Garlic wrote:


Mixed emotions here, i'm not particularly sad about LFL losing i'm just sad about who they lost to.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The AA Trial - renamed from armor sculpt topic
PostPosted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 3:33 pm 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 8:58 am
Posts: 10614
Location: Denmark
Well, this isn't just LFL losing. It's the whole movie industry. Any movie older than 15 years is now open for legal prop reproduction without a license in the UK. Don't think that sits well with the rest of EU though.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The AA Trial - renamed from armor sculpt topic
PostPosted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 4:39 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:56 pm
Posts: 1263
Location: Germany
Too Much Garlic wrote:
Well, this isn't just LFL losing. It's the whole movie industry. Any movie older than 15 years is now open for legal prop reproduction without a license in the UK. Don't think that sits well with the rest of EU though.


Well that may sounds stupid now, but it's also good for RS Props/ Simon.
They have made copy's of a product they have no rights for.
So if Lucas want something bad, they also could get post from Georgies advocate.

I mean what they have done would be the same as i would own a Ferrari , replicate a door of it and sell it as a Ferrari door.
Stupid example may be , but it would be the same. A concession infringement.
Therefore also luck for them.
They had not realy sold there first copys quite, so that LFL not get noticed from that.
I'm sure LFL knows what they do.

But in this case which LFL have lost, i'm also little bit disappointed.
Cause they lost against a big liar.But i think that's not the end of this story.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The AA Trial - renamed from armor sculpt topic
PostPosted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 5:09 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 10:38 pm
Posts: 816
Location: Essex UK
Too Much Garlic wrote:
Well, this isn't just LFL losing. It's the whole movie industry. Any movie older than 15 years is now open for legal prop reproduction without a license in the UK. Don't think that sits well with the rest of EU though.


They could always register their designs in the UK and protect them for 25 years which some would argue is plenty long enough time to have a monopoly on a design.
That is afterall why industrial design versus artistic design came about to prevent monopoly within an industrial arena.

Your post quite clearly illustrates the point well, you called it the movie industry and that's exactly what it is an industry.
Don't for a second kid yourself Lucas took legal action over this for artistic reasons it's purely financial reasons.

I understand personal feelings and emotion on the subject, i don't like AA myself he's a liar and a person lacking in moral fortitude but that is a seperate subject to that of the legal issues.
I also don't feel this takes anything away from people like Brian and Liz in terms of them being artists, the term industrial design is just a term describing the use of the design not the process of how it was created.
We are surrounded in our daily lives with objects which serve no practical purpose and are purely decorative items which are not considered art even though clearly an artistic process was used in the design of them.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The AA Trial - renamed from armor sculpt topic
PostPosted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 9:25 pm 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 8:58 am
Posts: 10614
Location: Denmark
Defstartrooper wrote:
Too Much Garlic wrote:
Well, this isn't just LFL losing. It's the whole movie industry. Any movie older than 15 years is now open for legal prop reproduction without a license in the UK. Don't think that sits well with the rest of EU though.


They could always register their designs in the UK and protect them for 25 years which some would argue is plenty long enough time to have a monopoly on a design.
That is afterall why industrial design versus artistic design came about to prevent monopoly within an industrial arena.

Your post quite clearly illustrates the point well, you called it the movie industry and that's exactly what it is an industry.
Don't for a second kid yourself Lucas took legal action over this for artistic reasons it's purely financial reasons.

I understand personal feelings and emotion on the subject, i don't like AA myself he's a liar and a person lacking in moral fortitude but that is a seperate subject to that of the legal issues.
I also don't feel this takes anything away from people like Brian and Liz in terms of them being artists, the term industrial design is just a term describing the use of the design not the process of how it was created.
We are surrounded in our daily lives with objects which serve no practical purpose and are purely decorative items which are not considered art even though clearly an artistic process was used in the design of them.

Well... of course it is financial for LFL. Who wouldn't want to profit from ones own creation. Musicians do that every day and that's also an industry. Will you argue that their music, lyrics, etc. are industrial, because they are part of an industry? Doesn't really make sense, now does it. I always felt it stupid that there was a time limitation to how long a songwriter could monopolize his own lyrics and songs before they got transferred to public domain - 75 years is an odd number. Until the artist dies would be more sufficient, but I guess the 75 year span is to also accommodate rights to the family in case the artist dies early.

What do I know. Just that UK seems at odds with every other country in the world in regards to copyright laws. Hell... Lucas has the image of the stormtrooper protected in every single country of the world... but suddenly... not the UK. Nor any of his other owned designs. Really weird, if you ask me.

And Turrican. I doubt SiMan and co would have had any problems with their offerings as long as they didn't advertize the infringement like AA did.

But... now all a company needs to do is set up production seat in the UK and they can produce any prop from any movie more than 15 years old without worrying about a license. That's a severe blow of interest to any company who goes and buys a license, because they have to in all the rest of the world. They'll not be able to compete and goes under. Like with recasting... who do you think will eventually suffer? I doubt the movie industry will take this one sitting down - they'll certainly avoid the UK from now on, as their property isn't protected there.

With one stroke... all sorts of prop reproduction just got legal in the UK. So, anyone wanna make a Robby the Robot in the UK can... and not worry about a C&D. As an example.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The AA Trial - renamed from armor sculpt topic
PostPosted: Thu Jul 28, 2011 4:47 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 10:38 pm
Posts: 816
Location: Essex UK
Carsten you're making an assumption in saying SW props and images are protected in every country except the UK, as far as i'm aware this kind of case hasn't happened anywhere else including the US where the case was simply won by default as AA didn't show up, no evidence therefore had to be presented or argument made so really it's just opinion and guesswork as to how it would have swung if it had, so really you have no position to state that as a fact.
From memory until fairly recently there was absolutely no copyright protection laws at all in Sweden for example if i remember correctly, that's why a lot of peer to peer torrent sites kept their servers located there.

You may be surprised to hear this but copyright law in the UK is actually tighter than it is in the US, for instance in the US industrial design is only protected for 12 years whereas in the UK it's 15 for unregistered and 25 for registered so the potential is there to protect your design for over twice the length of time in the UK compared to the US.

As for harming the movie industry that's not going to happen no studio is going to go broke or stop making movies because some company in the UK is making replica props from a 15 year old franchise, replica props are hardly a billion dollar industry it's chump change.
They certainly won't avoid making movies in the UK because it doesn't matter where the movie is made the movie could be made on Mars and a company is free to make products using any design as long as it's deemed to be of industrial design once the prerequisite number of years have passed.

Prop replica companies will still purchase licenses too of course they will.
For one thing that means they can sell worldwide not just countries where the designs are deemed unprotected.
Secondly they get to use things such as official logos and brand names which are trademarked by the studio which is a whole different beast to copyright.
Everyone loves official merchandise, people are suckers for a seal of approval and a brand name.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The AA Trial - renamed from armor sculpt topic
PostPosted: Thu Jul 28, 2011 10:35 am 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 8:58 am
Posts: 10614
Location: Denmark
You're right. I guess I did make a lot of assumptions there. It's still odd that props are now deemed industrial design.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The AA Trial - renamed from armor sculpt topic
PostPosted: Thu Jul 28, 2011 1:11 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 10:38 pm
Posts: 816
Location: Essex UK
Too Much Garlic wrote:
You're right. I guess I did make a lot of assumptions there. It's still odd that props are now deemed industrial design.


Yeah it's a difficult judgement to agree with i grant you that, i had issue with it to begin with myself but that was purely because i had trouble with calling the work that Brian and Liz did something other than art but i just came to terms with it in the end by realising the ruling doesn't take anything away from the artist or insult their talent in any way.
I thought about and realised i'm just surrounded with objects which clearly took an artist and an artistic process to produce but are items nobody would describe as art, the plates i eat my dinner of for instance an artist had to design the pattern on them but i wouldn't describe the items themselves as pieces of art.

Plus i'm a firm believer in a free market and that's what laws like this were created to protect.
Quite honestly i think 15 to 25 years is plenty adequate amount of time for a company to have a monopoly on a product, and this doesn't stop LFL still producing their own goods or discourage licencees.
It didn't put MR off or eFX both of which produced and sold stormtrooper helmets and sell out of the items produced despite their products being less accurate, i know AA's helmets aren't screen accurate but they're closer to the screen helmets in terms of shape,construction and materials than anything both those companies has released so far.
Obviously the upcoming Legend helmet from eFX is a different beast to what has been available thus far but again this just goes to show that eFX obviously don't foresee sales being an issue, if they did they wouldn't be producing them.
And that official logo on the box is a golden ticket eFX know that so they aren't going to up sticks and move to the UK to avoid paying a license fee, that official stamp adds instant value in terms of price to a product, you know full well the price isn't going to be anywhere close to any of the fan produced offerings out there.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The AA Trial - renamed from armor sculpt topic
PostPosted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 4:50 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:12 am
Posts: 3112
Very interesting, thanks for the link.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 494 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 29, 30, 31, 32, 33

All times are UTC


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Blue Moon by Trent © 2007
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Hosted by Freeforum.ca, get your free forum now! TOS | Support Forums | Report a violation
buy web visitors
MultiForums powered by echoPHP phpBB MultiForums