The Prop Den
http://thepropden.aokforums.com/

The End of SDS?
http://thepropden.aokforums.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=166		 Page 6 of 7
Author:  Star Wars Helmets [ Fri Mar 23, 2007 8:52 pm ]
Post subject: 
No problem mac :)

To clarify, in 1976 there was no "TIE Mould" as such. I think there's general agreement that there was a stormtrooper face mould, a stormtrooper back/cap mould, x-wing helmet mould, US Navy Gunner mould, and then some assorted swoops, ears etc.

The difference between the Stunt and Hero stormtrooper faces was caused by the differing materials (HDPE against ABS) and also that the moulds would have changed slightly between him doing the two different kind of helmets (i.e. the blocking either by accident or design of the 4th and 5th tooth holes).

The TIE face was done straight after the Hero (and only 6 Heros were made) so I'd bet the Hero and TIE faces are 100% the same (even the same ABS material, just a different colour).

Apart from AA no one knows whats happened to the moulds between 1976 and 2005 so we can only guess

Hope this helps

Cheers

Jez
Author:  Defstartrooper [ Fri Mar 23, 2007 10:30 pm ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
Here in the States, the intellectual propertly laws are like this: Marvel Entertainment owns the intellectual property and character of Spider-man.

If you make a Spider-man mask and begin to mass produce it, you are in violation of the intellectual property laws. As much as you say, "Well, I decided to use silver-mirror lenses because in the comic art they appear only white. I did all the webbing detail on the face differently than it's drawn in the John Romita Sr. art." Fine, you created an interpretation that is truly your own art. But this in conjunction of using trademarks and the "Spider-man" trademark really doesn't make you look good.

Stan Lee and Steve Ditko created Spider-man. Simply because someone makes a 3D mask of Spider-man doesn't mean he's the creator of Spider-man!


Thats all very true but a couple of points to consider are firstly can LFL show enough evidence that the stormtrooper helmets/armour are a 3D interpretation of RM's preproduction artwork and if indeed they can were these designs registered copyright/trademark material at the time the helmets/armour were created ?
Author:  CSMacLaren [ Sat Mar 24, 2007 12:11 am ]
Post subject: 
Well, supposedly if you duplicate someone's work but not identically, you might be able to convince the judge you're okay. Supposedly if something is up to 30 percent different, it will hold up as being different enough and not be an infringement. How you quantify that 30 percent is a whole different ball of wax.
Author:  Star Wars Helmets [ Sat Mar 24, 2007 10:23 am ]
Post subject: 
In the UK there isnt a 30% rule.

AA will need to be able to convince the court that his influence on the final charater was significant enough - that there was some artistic application in what he did.

LFL has said that he's only produced something they already clearly defined, and that even if he did have a material influence - it was always "assumed by both parties that he was working under contract".

LFL is unlikely to win that 2nd part as the law here is pretty clear about there having to be a written agreement - else the guy making it has the copyright.

So the case is not about AA owning the rights to "the Stormtrooper", but that he owns the rights to that version of the stormtrooper that LFL has used for subsequent movies, toys etc.

I suppose that even if AA did win, LFL could argue that the toys were not based on "his" version seen in the movie but McQuarries drawings (although it would be a hard one given photos of "his" one were on the toy packaging).

Cheers

Jez
Author:  crow [ Mon Mar 26, 2007 1:36 am ]
Post subject: 
and then along comes these....


Image
Image
Image


LFL McQuarrie concept merchandise! lol Intersesting how merchandising these underscores the immense difference in the concept art versus the final product. Heck, I can spot 30% worth of difference right away!! (good lord...a shield?) LOL.

Does anyone know what stage the legalities are in in the UK at the present time? Is litigation actually proceeding or are the parties posturing?
Author:  crow [ Mon Mar 26, 2007 2:08 am ]
Post subject: 
I'll throw up this interesting reading as well. These are scans of some of the pages out of the manual that came with my SDS armor.

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image

The page numbers are out of number order even in the manual...in fact I had to put them in order here, less the numbers that were left out (he was not good at desktop publishing, this is clear LOL) but it makes for some interesting reading.
Author:  Pantheragem [ Mon Mar 26, 2007 7:48 am ]
Post subject: 
BingoBongo275 wrote:
LFL has said that he's only produced something they already clearly defined, and that even if he did have a material influence - it was always "assumed by both parties that he was working under contract".


....And you know what they say about assumption.... I don't have a vested interest in either side really, but to make things nice and "legal" as to who has the rights to what, it would seem everything needs to be in writing.
Author:  Star Wars Helmets [ Mon Mar 26, 2007 4:08 pm ]
Post subject: 
Pantheragem- ABSOLUTELY! If the UK Courts decide that its a straight copyright issue then LFL WOULD HAVE to provide a clear contract signed by AA showing that he passed across copyright to them.

I'm presuming they dont have this (otherwise they would have showed it earler for a complete slam-dunk), so AA would win this part. HOWEVER LFL might still be able to argue that AA was merely a fabricator (not a sculptor and thus "protected" by his "artistic" endeavours) If they can prove to the court that there existed pre-production clay sculpts for the Stormtrooper helmet and armour, which they produced themselves. I'm pretty sure no one here has seen such a thing so would be really interesting if they had a photo

Interesting info Crow - I think both sides are posturing and proceeding at the same time!

Cheers

Jez
Author:  Too Much Garlic [ Tue Apr 03, 2007 10:58 am ]
Post subject: 
This was linked to on the RPF: http://www.whitearmor.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=721&st=0
Author:  Star Wars Helmets [ Tue Apr 03, 2007 12:16 pm ]
Post subject: 
Edit - here's Trooper Master's post over from that forum...
Quote:
OK I met with Brian Muir and his wife today and we had a great chat and a laugh. Brian confirmed to me that HE scultped everything of the stormtrooper armour from the neck down and AA did nothing but the forming and maybe the assembling but did NO sculpting. Up until recently Brian though Andrew 'may' have sculpted the helmet but new pics have been uncovered revealing the original sculptor. I tried and tried to get the info but he said he couldn't say but he could say AA will lose his case.

Brian was a very nice and helpful chap and answered all my questions in great detail. The only problem was I thought of a load more questions I didn't ask him on the way home (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)

I also met up with Salo Gardner who played an original stormtrooper and actually was one who stormed Tantive IV in the opening scenes. He didn't really tell me much about trooper armour and was more interested in showing me pics of other films he was in (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)

-Paul.


If its true then it will signal the death-knell of SDS and AA would have committed commercial suicide in launching his whole operation.

If LFL has these Photographs Muir mentioned then why on earth hasnt it presented them in its case? - as imo the presence of them would make the whole case in the UK a slam-dunk.

TM's a member here I believe in which case I'd be interested as to whether Brian Muir said whether he had seen these pics or whether he had been told about these pics

Cheers

Jez

Edit added TM's quote from other forum and question
Author:  Defstartrooper [ Tue Apr 03, 2007 5:13 pm ]
Post subject: 
Has any evidence been presented at all in any court yet ? the UK case hasn't actually started yet has it ?
And am i right in thinking the US case was awarded to LFL by default due to AA not showing up in which case no evidence would have needed to be presented ?
I am curious as to what the nature of these pictures is that proves someone else sculpted the helmet though very intriguing.
Are there any dates set yet for when the hearings start ?
Author:  Star Wars Helmets [ Tue Apr 03, 2007 10:00 pm ]
Post subject: 
Gary, there was some interesting information presented in the US case, and RPF member Exoray kindly documented on this site

http://rpf.exoray.com/LFL_vs_SDS/

You are correct that LFL won as SDS did not contest the case (other than the issue of juristiction)

The UK case in certainly on-going and started (I think) October of last year, with both sides presenting two or even three sets of papers on the case, so the volume of documentation already goes into the ,000's of pages - although the content of those papers is not in the public domain.

It sounds like this too'ing and fro'ing will continue for at least another six months before they actually get into Court itself (unless they decide to negotiate)

Cheers

Jez
Author:  Defstartrooper [ Wed Apr 04, 2007 12:49 am ]
Post subject: 
Cheers Jez hadn't see Exorays page before quite comical stuff really :lol

So am i right in thinking when you say papers have been presented that means they have been subitted to the court as evidence exhibits but haven't actually been reviewed by any judge or anything yet ?
I'm not sure how the civil system works i know in criminal law the defense is given full access to any evidince the prosecution intend to use is it the same for civil law ?
I would imagine if that is the case and AA is aware of the proof that shows he didn't sculpt or design the final stormtrooper helmet he would realise his case is hopeless and halt production as any money he makes from these products would go to LFL.
Or maybe he's funnelling money into a swiss account and booking a one way ticket to Rio :lol

This case really does have more twists than a rastafarians hairdo :toothy
Author:  Star Wars Helmets [ Wed Apr 04, 2007 8:39 am ]
Post subject: 
Hi Gary

I too have to admit that I'm no expert in the workings of our civil legal system. However my understanding is that effectively both sides fight it out with both sides trying to point out the errors/omissions etc. etc. in each others cases. So in may respects it not dissimilar to a series of posts/threads on a fan forum :lol

They continue to do this until the court date at which point both present their evidence to the judge with various witnesses and expert witnesses brought in to verify or rubbish the various claims made. At the end of it all the judge (who I presume is an expert in copyright law - as are all the Barristers) goes away and deliberates fora few months before coming back with the judgement.

I THINK thats the way it happens but if anyone knows better then please advise.

So AFAIK the timetable so far is...

1) LFL put a claim in in Oct/Nov 06 and it was significantly different from the US claim with a lot more detail
2) SDS responded and counter sued LFL for using what it considered was "its copyright" on subseqent films and the toys etc.
3) LFL came back with more questions on how SDS felt they owed copyright
4) SDS responded to LFL's questions and I presume asked more of their own
5) this has probably happened another time for both parties

So basically it sounds like this "thread" (or series of threads) will go on for about another 6 months before it all goes in front of a judge and the actual court case begins.

My gut feeling is there wont be a "decision" as such for at least 12 months - unless someone backs down.

So my question about the recent Brian Muir revelations (that someone else sculptedd the Stormtrooper helmet and there's photographic proof), is.....

If this evidence existed, why wouldnt LFL have presented it, as its in everyones interest (especially theirs) that this case is closed asap?

Cheers

Jez
Author:  Defstartrooper [ Wed Apr 04, 2007 3:51 pm ]
Post subject: 
Not really sure it's in LFL's interest Jez the longer AA keeps producing and selling merchandise and the court case drags out the greater the damages would be i assume to AA and if LFL are positive they have definitive proof to show that AA didn't design them they won't be worried about losing will they.
On another note im wondering about all the line of helmets AA has started producing recently did he design and sculpt those aswell as the trooper and TIE's ? or claim to have ?
Page 6 of 7 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/
Hosted by Freeforum.ca, get your free forum now! TOS | Support Forums | Report a violation
MultiForums powered by echoPHP phpBB MultiForums