Nintendo just filed last month a take down notice with full damages going in

http://www.3ders.org/articles/20140819-a-fan-3d-printed-poke mon-planter-faces-nintendo-copyright-claim.html

Maybe people learn what Trademark means and Copyright from this!

Well I hope that Nintendo gets the $10 or $20 in production royalties they so rightly deserve. Such a shocking claim of similarity to their franchise intellectual property cannot be tolerated!

If someone stole your car ...he get jail sentence.

Stealing someone intellectual property it is no joke.

They can ask for brand damages fro 10-100.000$ or more even if it did not sell anything because they used their brand for marketing and ...influenced other to steal intellectual property. Market your business without the right holder of the name in order to get popularity ... Nintendo don`t want to be associated with house hold items ... that are not related to their market.

I know! It's wrong for someone to sell anything that remotely looks like the intellectual property of anyone especially if they think somebody else MAY own the rights to it. You can't expect to successfully fight a large corporation in court if they make a claim against you. That's why they have highly compensated lawyers. They will squash you like the greedy little cockroach you are and fight you until all of your resources are depleted. And just to be safe, never, ever in a product description or published interview mention or acknowledge any possible perceived similarities to any other product ever produced by any company on any continent, just for your personal protection.

In addition they should demand that 3D printing companies also return the profit they generated from such infringement for every item they sold, publicly or privately, plus an additional damages claim for potential lost revenue in expanded markets and lawyer costs. This animal planter must stand as an example to all that every planter must be designed as a smooth cylinder or box without any decoration or representative shape whatsoever to eliminate any and all possibilities of intellectual property infringement in the future. And never, ever in a product description or published interview mention or acknowledge any possible perceived similarities to any other product ever produced by any company on any continent ever, again for your personal protection.

That it is one of the main reason some manufacturers chose to use the basic forms for some products. Like the general usage drinking glass for wine.

But still there are original defined version with sculptural stuff on them that can be of higher value.

Usage of things related to movies , animation , drawings can always land in court and put charge on every count of infringement from : copyright , brand , market damage ... and what they list.

In general corporate lawyers are not like "regular" lawyers and they tend to go for full charges , where a simple company with not big budget their hired lawyer will recommend "licensing" the work in order to expand the market.

So asking Nintendo to license a stuff you made when you did not contact them before to sale to public ... will fire them at you full weapons and they use that at maximum.

I do think prevention and education it is better than punishment in Intellectual Property field.

Meaning in every school must be a teacher that say the basics : "Copyright means to protect the work of a man that create something. So that man can get money for food and other living necessity. And in long run , the same man that made something can hire YOU and YOU that you don`t have ability to make something and give you a living"

When you make a brand you make it to protect your income and your employees job ...

In real life everything we use , is born from copyright , even the law was first ... a text on paper. Everything made made.

Problems arrive when people abuse the right , and have no common sense , and make big bucks , never hire nobody ... and they die and the state get the money and invest them in future people.

There are lots of people in this world that can`t control themself ... and does not matter the profession.

In my opinion (not speaking on behalf of Shapeways), I find it to be a very grey area.

For example, people post Pokemon fan art on DeviantArt all of the time which gets shared around the internet all the time. Is this ok, because they aren't selling it?

Then... people can offer their fan art for sale as a poster. Is this ok, because it's just fan art?

What if someone creates their own pokemon that looks nothing like an existing pokemon, and doesn't call it a pokemon? Is this fan art? Copyright Nintendo? Or where does it fall?

So my question is, where do you draw the line?

I agree that if you're making a 'Bulbasaur Pokemon planter' that is clearly labeled as such, that is grounds for copyright dismissal.

I truly believe that fan art is great for companies like Nintendo. As mentioned above, I hope they realize that they can 'be involved' in the process (like Hasbro with SuperFanArt) and work with designers so that everyone wins, instead of just sending a takedown notice and shutting down someone who was inspired enough to make a great little product that tons of people around the world have expressed love for!

(again, my personal opinions, not Shapeways)

In E.U. selling an items based on a trademark/copyright = copyright infringement.

Producing an artwork for personal use , didactic usage , that does not involve selling something that does not hit the "copyright infringement ground".

My own interpretation of the law as I stated up , it is that prevention and communication must be the best thing to happen. But that it is not always the case ...

So if you make a "pokemon" planter in E.U. only for your own use and family and print it on Shapeways and don`t offer for sale it is all ok.

For example for U.S. , Valve Corporation has a clause in their license for Dota 2 and stuff regarding monetization on youtube ... yet they does not look to see fan art being a problem (steam it is full of fan ar...but who knows ?! they sell plushy Nature Prophet...). So every copyright holder chose what to do and when ... and in that particular case they chose the other side of the coin.

One example in music industry it is Prince ... try to google Prince music now , you will see all videos are down. It was not the case last year , they were online ...until he got in rages of reporting all.

Hasbro it is good example of a solution of the "fan art" dilemma , the problem it is convincing the other "bulls" that rage it is not solution but hurting their market.

I don`t think people will not agree to pay a little share from their markup to Nintendo.

PS: Will be nice to be able to have the option to share markup on two designers and stuff

An opportunity would be for someone to start a company that acts as a communication channel between the huge companies that hold mega dollar IP brands and the ordinary fan artists. The deal made between Hasbro and Shapeways is a very smart move by Hasbro! They'll make millions doing absolutely nothing! They will also vastly expand the exposure of the released brands without spending a single cent on advertising as well as enrich the experience of the users already engrossed in the brands.

Having said that, I realize that a go between company wouldn't be of much success without a company like Shapeways, since no company would be interested in what a single artist can do for their profits. They would only be interested in what tens of thousands of artists can provide. Therefore, Shapeways should work to be that go between company.

Looking at the success that Zazzle Brands is having I'm going to predict that by this time next year Shapeways will have made similar deals with numerous companies.

This is why my store is filled with boring things like cylinders that have no patterns or minimalist patterns on their surface. And when I do have surface patterns I'm paranoid about accidentally having the intersections of polygons and borders match up to some copyrighted pattern either officially registered or that is embodied on another object that is registered in its entirety. You just can't be too careful. Those lawyers will seek you out and DESTROY YOU even with only a tangential similarity to what they are seeking to protect. Perhaps every object that is made public and for sale needs to be submitted for copyright and/or a design patent prior to release.

Maybe try doing your own work, instead of copying something you saw on TV? It's not that hard -- just turn off the Internet for a few minutes, and it'll come to you. You never know, you might find it rewarding.

I love you Sheba

I think a distinction should be made between fan art and infringement.

I design models for people so they can feel like a part of the Star Wars universe. Some of my models are based on props and items from the movies for this very reason, but my own take on them. I don't do it to profit on the franchise. I do it because I'm a big fan and I know others are too.

I've related the story of lawyers investigating a space themed restaurant in another thread.



For example, see those color borders around the backlit information displays? The lawyers said that design feature was owned by a large corporation (as related to me by one of the owners). Just one of several infringements they claimed against the restaurant after doing their walk through. You'd be hard pressed to not run afoul of lawyers even if you don't watch TV and accidentally do something that catches their attention.

I don't know much about Pokemon or fat cats but it could be very easy to unintentionally create a blocky low resolution animal or object that had that same look, especially if you are new to 3D design or are using a simple introductory 3D design program.

Well I hope this case will make designers and shop owners on Shapeways think twice before infringing on third parties. I raised this issue a while ago and I think it is a common problem on Shapeways. Some designers don't seem to understand what copyright, trademark protection and IPR is all about. This should be the first lesson learned when starting to design. For educated designers it is (I hope)... but Shapeways has made it easy for anybody with a computer to actually create and sell their own products regardless of infringing on third parties because they simply never learned a single lesson about about copyright. Personally I think it's sad!

That being said I must underline that ideas are born simultaneously all around the world. This is due to new production techniques, new materials and trends that will lead designers to somehow think in the same directions at the same time. I have seen it several times. Designers that would never have been able to know about each others ideas and sketches but suddenly are about to launch very similar products. But in this case we are talking about coincidence and not deliberate theft. You will most likely be able to find such cases on Shapeways as well but those are not not the problem. The problem is when someone deliberately tries to earn a success by making variations of someone else's products/characters or uses a trademark/brand in the marketing of their own products.

...finally but not least I have to agree with Bathsheba... Try to unplug yourself from all internet devices and TV for a while... then grab your pen and start designing your own stuff.

Mike

Here some books for the ones that think "I can`t draw" :

Perspective made easy - Ernest Norling http://books.google.ro/books/about/Perspective_Made_Easy.htm l?id=i0mdk7FvSzIC&redir_esc=y

Fundamental book for design.

It can be complemented with Andrew Loomis - Fun with a pencil https://archive.org/details/andrew-loomis-fun-with-a-pencil (internet archive)

... it takes 6 - 12 month to learn the basic drawing ability you need to be creative

@MrNibbles Nature it is "Public Domain" , works dated 100+ years are Public Domain , works of art 100+ years are Public Domain. You can use old books and stuff to inspire you , just not use 21 century works and not early 20 NOTE: ALL DATED +100 years from the DEATH OF AUTHOR

Like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonardo_da_Vinci ... you get the idea ?

Copyright it is not forever , it is meant to protect the children of the author to have a income after parent death , and to give the author an income ... some author become known after death yet children got income the rights on the works ...

And expired patents.

So there it is not like there it is no way to make it legal , the option it is and it is no hard , to look in Human History. The problem it is combining 5-7-10 ideas in ONE to make an Original Product. Heh.... But that it is why you ask a price on it ? It is research work 98% , 1% drawing ,1% 3D modelling.

Why people see Copyright negative ? It is not!

Stealing it is negative and hurts the income of the employee and the author and hurts the economy in long run.

Example : If a singer publish an album , and he has no sale , that means he can`t afford to hire a "dancer girl" or "more" , that means no job for a girl that has no ability to do more than that , that means the artist has low income and low popularity , and that means artist quits doing what it is good at.
Not all musicians become rich , but yet at minimum success they can hire some like 3 people .... now due copyright stealing they can`t hire none.
The real motive behind ACTA and other papers.

100 years? Mexico? Or already working in the next retroactive extension? What about corporate authorship?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries%27_copyright_ lengths

In letter, but it just gets expanded now and then, making it forever so far. Some things that had expired even went back into protection in some places.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act

100 years for "safe zone" regarding international differences in years and stuff.

Due the fact ... there is Mexico ... there is .. different places different year count written in copyright law. There are places where differences go high ... I guess I`ll write a book about it in future ? ...nah for now back to design.

That would make a great opening quote for the tutorials page...