Iconic characters for Poser?



  • Okay, I understand everybody's points.

    So, explain to me how this:

    http://www.sharecg.com/v/68055/related/11/Poser/12-Days-of-Princess-Snow-White

    has not only one, but clothing for 12 Disney princesses. The girl herself is quite generic and I think any young female model with big eyes and long legs will have the same effect, provided she gets the look-alike dress and a look-alike hair.

    That's all Mylochka's work (I love Mylochka btw), and I get the point that it's one thing to have a small vendor sell 100 units, and a different one to have SM sell 100,000. But, if I describe a long-legged blonde princess with updo hair and big blue eyes wearing a white princess dress... I could very well be describing 100 princesses. Then I name her "Princess 1" instead of Cinderella, and that's it, the user can rename back to Cinderella if he wishes.

    So I don't think it's impossible to do that, either through a license or through likeness. I think that's not done in Poser because the intended audience is older instead of younger. I know I'm old...



  • @fbs7 it's free and probably not an exact copy of the snow white dress. As I also understand it that the name "Snow White" and the story is from an old Brother's Grim story so Disney has now way of claiming that as IP.



  • @ghostship said in Iconic characters for Poser?:

    @fbs7 it's free and probably not an exact copy of the snow white dress. As I also understand it that the name "Snow White" and the story is from an old Brother's Grim story so Disney has now way of claiming that as IP.

    So it can be done in likeness. That should cover a lot of characters (although some unique ones may be forever out of reach). Consider spiderman; now take away the flashy texture; you get a creepy guy in black catsuit. Call him "Ninja 1". It would only need someone to make him a spiderman texture and rename to "Spidey", ergo you have it. And so on.

    I have no idea how IP works, but I suspect that if there was a will from SM it could do that, one way or the other. I suspect the main problem of the idea is who the target audience is; another is platform; and another big one is what I see in SMSI (Smith Micro) annual reports: sales down from $43M in 2012 to $28M in 2016, net income negative since 2012... brrrrr... I suspect no company would risk new ideas when it's operating on a loss:

    http://quotes.wsj.com/SMSI/financials/annual/income-statement



  • @AmbientShade said in Iconic characters for Poser?:

    @fbs7 Yes. And in fact there's a handful (at least) artists out there who have made huge $$$ doing exactly that via fan art.

    Lara (p@rn star) Croft anyone?



  • @fbs7 said in Iconic characters for Poser?:

    Okay, I understand everybody's points.

    So, explain to me how this:

    http://www.sharecg.com/v/68055/related/11/Poser/12-Days-of-Princess-Snow-White

    has not only one, but clothing for 12 Disney princesses. The girl herself is quite generic and I think any young female model with big eyes and long legs will have the same effect, provided she gets the look-alike dress and a look-alike hair.

    That this exists does not mean it is not a violation of a protected intellectual property.

    It is, however, an artistic impression of such. It is, importantly, not meant to be an "official" production of the license holder. It qualifies as "fan art." It is also not an egregious misuse of such an iconic figure, but rather an artistic impression that celebrates the intellectual property. The color scheme and design is not "exact", but a more realistic, modern, interpretation. (That's important, because it differentiates this product from an exact "copy.") (Btw, Disney even trademarks color combinations... or tries to. Actual combinations of colors... :) ) Finally, it is not being "sold" and there are no competing products produced by the license-holder, which means that financial "damages", as in the case of a lawsuit, would be difficult to prove even if the infringement was upheld, which it probably would be.

    In short - This is beneath the notice of Disney and presents some small difficulties in a lawsuit. However, it is not beneath the notice of a Cease and Desist "threat" letter, which would probably result in the host removing the items described. But, that's similarly not worth being noticed. Besides, it does "no harm", really, other than infringement by an enthusiastic fan.



  • I think we're getting too focused on the matter of licensing or do not. I think these can be overcome if there is a will. As my mom says, where there is a will there is a way.

    The real important matter is whether there is a market for anything like that. I reflect my own bias on the matter, as I love animation and all forms of animated movies, and I'm ready to spend even at my old age the time and money to pursue my hobby (btw, I'm just now watching agan "Aldnoah Zero", what a superb story it has!)

    But how many people really want to do any movies or renders out of their favorite characters? Any such thing involves quite a bit of work, and the impression I have of many young adults is that they would spend the 30 minutes that it takes them to go to theater to watch a movie with their toons, but how about spending a week to have a 20 seconds clip or a quality render?

    When I was like 16 years old I used to draw with pencils a lot, and I loved that. I'd make my own 2-pages comic stories. My friends would say "wow, that looks great!", but when I said "I can show you how to do it", they would say "no, thanks", and would instead buy the comic book in the near stand.

    So however much people love characters, maybe most people just don't have in them the curiosity and drive to spend the effort to produce art, but prefer to consume commercial art...


  • Poser Ambassadors

    @fbs7 If someone wanted to create their own version of Snow White and the story around her they could do so because the character and story is public domain. The problem comes when you make it look too similar to Disney's version. Same is true of Cinderella, Peter Pan, Sleeping Beauty. These are all public domain characters. Author Anne Rice even wrote an erotic trilogy based on Sleeping Beauty back in the 80s. It had no semblance to Disney's version though and she didn't require their permission. As many of the classic disney films were based on Grimms Fairy Tales, written somewhere in the 15-1600s I think - they don't own the characters, just their interpretation of those characters - and any additional characters they created for their version of those stories.



  • Getting Legal Advice from a Poser Forum is not recommended.

    If you have questions or concerns, I recommend you contact your Legal Consul that specializes in Property Rights for clarification of Copyright, Trademark, and other Intellectual Property Rights that may be assigned to creative works. Whether you think the issuance of these protections are right or wrong is not a factor in the validity of these legal protections provide to the holder of the Property Rights.



  • @AmbientShade Peter Pan isn't totally public domain, it's owned by Great Ormand Street Childrens' Hospital, as Disney found out once. JM Barry left it to them in his will. Their time owning the copyright on it is running out though.



  • The old stories from "Grimm's" are public domain, but copyright/trademark/etc exists for each interpretation of them. Disney deviated broadly from the original stories... The originals were not suitable for children. (Pretty darn bloody!)

    However, as seen here, Disney has the name "Snow White" trademarked in the US.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_White#Trademark

    You could include the name "Snow White" in a story, since they couldn't take it that far, hence the exclusion, but you couldn't include the name "Snow White" for a 3D character morph being sold. (It's limited to entertainment items, but that has a darn broad reach.)


  • Poser Ambassadors

    @morkonan Snow White and the Huntsman was not a Disney film. It's a Universal film. And in fact, Disney rejected it. Universal didn't need Disney's permission to make their film. Trademark is not the same as copyright, and can't be used to make a copyright claim against something. 3D characters would fall under copyright.


  • Poser Ambassadors

    @raven The rights on Peter Pan is an interesting batch. From what I've found the hospital only owns rights to the play. Literary works are different. A few years back there was a Peter Pan novel written where Peter was a sort of dark fairy that ate children.

    Granted, I'm not a lawyer, I'm just speaking from my own research on the subject as some of these characters are important to some of my own work so I've looked into what can and cant be done with them a bit.



  • @AmbientShade said in Iconic characters for Poser?:

    @morkonan Snow White and the Huntsman was not a Disney film. It's a Universal film. And in fact, Disney rejected it. Universal didn't need Disney's permission to make their film. Trademark is not the same as copyright, and can't be used to make a copyright claim against something. 3D characters would fall under copyright.

    Depending upon the contents and appearance, they could also fall under a trademark violation. "Perpetual Copyright via Trademark" is a dastardly mechanism, but it has become more rampant as copyright law continues to deal adequately with the new environment of information exchange.

    Try to sell a 3D "Barbie" figure. She's trademarked, as one would expect from a large, successful, company. Her shape is trademarked. The color scheme for her name, the font, etc...



  • Try to sell a 3D "Barbie" figure. She's trademarked, as one would expect from a large, successful, company. Her shape is trademarked. The color scheme for her name, the font, etc...

    But what stops one from selling a 3D "Claire" figure that also has big eyes, long legs and long hair?

    There's one thing I know as a fact: there is a very specific height/radius ratio for a cylindrical can that maximizes volume while minimizing area. I had that problem in engineering college. That ratio is an exact formula, which is explained for example here:

    https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1449563/height-radius-ratio-for-maximum-volume-cylinder-of-given-surface-area

    Now, I know that exact shape has a patent on it; but everybody else can make cylindrical cans that approximate that ratio, as long as it's not exatly the same.

    I suspect it's the same thing with dolls. You can patent/trademark/copyright a particular dimension (say length of the leg), but you can't stop other people from making dolls with legs that approximate that length.

    So a 3D "Claire" that looks somewhat similar to Barbie but not identical should not be a copyright infringement, correct? After all, one can't copyright the "doll of a girl" concept, as it's too widely used.

    Same thing for anime characters. Almost all of them are pretty generic humans, so there's no way to copyright them. Or a bambie. Or a bird. Or a siren. Anything that is realistic cannot be fully protected.

    But then Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck are unique, so I suspect are a much more difficult case for anyone to sell a copy. Maybe that strong copyright on such unique characters is a reason for Disney's attachment to them.



  • @morkonan said in Iconic characters for Poser?:

    The old stories from "Grimm's" are public domain, but copyright/trademark/etc exists for each interpretation of them. Disney deviated broadly from the original stories... The originals were not suitable for children. (Pretty darn bloody!)

    However, as seen here, Disney has the name "Snow White" trademarked in the US.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_White#Trademark

    You could include the name "Snow White" in a story, since they couldn't take it that far, hence the exclusion, but you couldn't include the name "Snow White" for a 3D character morph being sold. (It's limited to entertainment items, but that has a darn broad reach.)

    There is a Snow White character for Dawn at CP.