What makes a copy a copy - friendly discussion

As a note: I understand that this topic may raise certain feelings.  I request that we try to keep it as informative and non-reactive as possible.


We recently had an individual bring up that all animals poses are natural. And their argument was, whether or not we agree, that since they were naturally occurring, no animal pose could be a "copy" because they were obviously based off of nature.

I am neither agreeing or disagreeing as a whole. (And I would prefer this not to become an argument between the two) But it did raise an interesting point: How do we define something as a copy vs a traditional or natural pose?

Obviously, the legal rules vary greatly from country to country.  And the enforcement of such also varies.

There are overt copies, such the example MiniZoo gives where they found a horse that greatly mimicked the Schleich horse so greatly was probably cast from the original, where even the paintjob was a copy.

But there's a bit of a disagreement on what other items may or may not apply.

Subjects open to discussion are:

- How do we define something as a copy vs simply using a traditional or natural pose? (for example, the peacock or flamingo)
- Size variations and how that may actually apply
- The difference between mass produced, marketed under multiple names and copies.
- Known cooperative efforts where companies have shared/rented/sold/traded molds (AAA)
- Laws, company rights,  and artist rights.
- What makes the subject so frustrating for you, phrased as non-combatively as possible

Please remember there are a lot of viewpoints on this because of the international scope, experience, and how things are or are not enforced.  

Things to avoid
- any personal attacks (if you disagree, calmly say so and counter with stating your point. If you cannot, please click elsewhere)
- any sweeping insults (such as "if you people can't see this, you're obviously wrong")
- listing out copies beyond one or two specific examples that are established. (there are plenty of pre-existing threads)

In my understanding copy is when the mould is taken from the original model/toy/sculpture and the identical copies are cast. The same would apply if the model is 3D scanned and then printed in the same or in a different size. When the cast is made from something or a scan and print then the shape of an object is indeed the same. And if this is done without an agreement from the owner of IP rights of an original object then probably it would be considered as illegal copying in many countries.

If the two models show the same species in the same pose, same size and similar painting but were sculpted/designed from the beginning they would not be copies, in my opinion. As I think no one can reserve certain pose for a certain species or breed.

That's how I understand it but I may be wrong.

Ana wrote:

In my understanding copy is when the mould is taken from the original model/toy/sculpture and the identical copies are cast. The same would apply if the model is 3D scanned and then printed in the same or in a different size. When the cast is made from something or a scan and print then the shape of an object is indeed the same. And if this is done without an agreement from the owner of IP rights of an original object then probably it would be considered as illegal copying in many countries.

If the two models show the same species in the same pose, same size and similar painting but were sculpted/designed from the beginning they would not be copies, in my opinion. As I think no one can reserve certain pose for a certain species or breed.

That's how I understand it but I may be wrong.

I think you are right but i also think it is a western opinion. I am not sure about asian opinions :)

Ana wrote:

In my understanding copy is when the mold is taken from the original model/toy/sculpture and the identical copies are cast. The same would apply if the model is 3D scanned and then printed in the same or in a different size. When the cast is made from something or a scan and print then the shape of an object is indeed the same. And if this is done without an agreement from the owner of IP rights of an original object then probably it would be considered as illegal copying in many countries.

If the two models show the same species in the same pose, same size and similar painting but were sculpted/designed from the beginning they would not be copies, in my opinion. As I think no one can reserve certain pose for a certain species or breed.

That's how I understand it but I may be wrong.

It sums up all I can think of for my opinion/look at this point.