Full-body costume puppets

[Buck-Beaver]

What most people (myself included) don't like is people creating Muppet replicas and selling them. I was actually interested in the fabric for making some kid's Hallowe'en costumes.

 

[fragglerockr]

Ok...I guess as long as it's not unlicensed Bert and Ernie costumes...



Fragglerockr

 

[fishbone]

dude, nobodies even talking about makin & selling muppets,or costumes ,so if you have no problem with it,why do you keep bringing it up?legal or illegal,it's not going to effect you,unless your a muppet.

 

[Puppetplanet]

Yikes!

 

[Show and Tell]

this just became a hot thread

 

[fragglerockr]

dude, nobodies even talking about makin & selling muppets,or costumes ,so if you have no problem with it,why do you keep bringing it up?legal or illegal,it's not going to effect you,unless your a muppet.

Fishbone,

I'm glad you re-read my comments and edited you post! Please know that I have no personal problem with you. That said, my comments were said to address a point that keeps coming up in these forums and posts.

So fan-costumes are ok, but just no puppet replicas being sold? What if you sell the costumes. Actually, by legal definition, making the costumes and making puppets would still be infringement. Why are we so willing to overlook that fact and simply tack on the justification, well, as long as you're not making a profit from it...it's ok. Like, it's ok to speed, as long as there aren't any cops.

I don't have any problems with any of it. I think it's a display of talent period to be able to replicate something that well. I'm a member of several fan communites and most encourage people to create replicas and fan-created items...even if they are to sell. People in this forum who create replicas in my opinion rock. I have several that I love and have several of my own creations but I'd be darned if I'll ever show them here due to the Salem Witch Trial-like attitude a few members have.

I don't understand the sense of entitlement that a few think they have to make judgements about copyrights and trademarks of the Muppets. I understand people have a deep connection to these characters but the reality is they don't belong to us. So let the over-priced corporate lawyers handle this...it's their jobs not ours. Besides no one is running a Kathy Lee Gifford sweatshop in Asia making hundreds of Muppets and making a dent in poor Disney's pocketbook.

We've all heard the stories of the performers who have gone to auditions with Jim and took their replica puppets. Did he chastise them with lectures about copyrights or trademarks. I think we could take a cue from him.

I think the few that have such issues need to relax...if you can't something nice...then say nothing. The people who want to comment and make a compliment, do so. I'm sure the artist appreciates it. If it's for sale great. It's probably the closest you'll come to get a three dimensional version of your favorite character.

You have issues with infringers...great but we got your messages 52 posts ago. Relax have a cup of coffee, read the paper, but easy on the attitude it's a real buzz-kill.

"And that's all I have to say about the war in Vietnam"

Now back to your regularly scheduled chat.

Fragglerockr

 

[Buck-Beaver]

So fan-costumes are ok, but just no puppet replicas being sold? What if you sell the costumes. Actually, by legal definition, making the costumes and making puppets would still be infringement. Why are we so willing to overlook that fact and simply tack on the justification, well, as long as you're not making a profit from it...it's ok. Like, it's ok to speed, as long as there aren't any cops.

Sigh. Here we go again.

This has been discussed to death umpteen millions times (which I realize newer members may not be aware of) but most fan produced items made for personal use and not sale are legal under copyright laws because they are considered "fair use." There's a thread devoted to this in more detail here. What's illegal is mass producing something or trying to sell a Muppet replica, like on ebay for example.

I don't understand the sense of entitlement that a few think they have to make judgements about copyrights and trademarks of the Muppets. I understand people have a deep connection to these characters but the reality is they don't belong to us. So let the over-priced corporate lawyers handle this...it's their jobs not ours. Besides no one is running a Kathy Lee Gifford sweatshop in Asia making hundreds of Muppets and making a dent in poor Disney's pocketbook.

Now some of us have agreed to disagree on this issue, and that's OK. Debate and discussion is important. There's a lot of good and bad trends in copyright laws these days and whether you're interested in them or not they're actually very important to the future of franchises like the Muppets.

I don't think anyone has a "sense of entitlement" and if any judgements are being made it's not based on an opinion or point of view but the fact that there are very specific rules and laws about what you can and cannot do with intellectual property. Some people don't care or don't respect that and obviously .

It's been my experience though that most people do have a poor or limited understanding of copyright law and most of the "52 posts" you refer to have been less about coming down on people and more about educating people about copyright law and debunking common copyright myths, like the one you mentioned. There's a lot of misinformation out there.

 

[fragglerockr]

Sigh. Here we go again.

It's been my experience though that most people do have a poor or limited understanding of copyright law and most of the "52 posts" you refer to have been less about coming down on people and more about educating people about copyright law and debunking common copyright myths, like the one you mentioned. There's a lot of misinformation out there.

Buck,

That is not a myth. I work with attorneys all day on my 'real' (mon-fri) job. And like any and all law, it all is open to interpretation of the courts. So, please don't tell me how a law is and is not read! I do respect your opinion but I will not and do not agree with you. If we're going to follow the letter of the law then why is ok to make copies of cd's & movies for trade or at cost in this forum but filesharing is balked at and is considered a no-no.

Yes, I have been present for the other 52 other discussions or so (and yes I was being sarcastic but it does seem to come up very often here) and I see that we will never see eye to eye. Also, fine. But again the Muppets are not our property to worry about so I think we need to let the respective copyright holders take care of their own buisness and stop acting like the 5th grade class tattle-tale.

Perhaps we should add it to the Muppet Central FAQ so we wouldn't have to hear the same old lecture over and over again. Then people can make their opinion based on that knoweldge rather than being jumped on by other members and told what is or is not right for them. Then let them make a moral decision of their own. Then perhaps add to the rules that the selling of replica puppets is off limits. But then I suppose it'll be ok if it's a trade...

If someone were trying to infringe on Beartown then by all means take action. Likewise, I might if someone were trying to my copy my designs. But unless they were making hella' dollars off of it, or claiming it as their own, I doubt I'd care. To me, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

Let me pose this question to you and then I'm done with the subject matter:

How would you handle this situation? Suppose you (not that it would ever happen to you) were to create a Muppet replica. It took you lots of time to make and create and you are very happy with it. But let's say, for whatever reason, you are forced to part with it. You still care about it and don't want to toss it out. You want to find an appropriate home for it. Someone who will take care of it.

Being that it cost you blood, sweat, tears, and some considerable financing (Antron Fleece is not that cheap) How then do you get rid of it? It has value but according to you, you can't sell it. (That would be illegal and unethical) So, donating to Goodwill or some such other place is out becuase undoubtedly someone will let it become trashed like most stuffed toys end up...what then? Suppose you don't know of anyone locally to give it to or would want it near you. Not everyone is a Muppet fan you knoe. I guess the staunch moral thing to do would be to throw it out and into the garbage but I certainly know, I wouldn't.

Fragglerockr (who is done making his point)

 

[Buck-Beaver]

I'm not sure why the hostility has been ratcheted up so high all of a sudden - 5th grade tattletale? I absolutely resent that.

Given the opportunity I can cut it down with the 3rd graders (at least).

Look, I think we're arguing two sides of the same coin here. I've never claimed to be a lawyer, but I do deal with intellectual property law issues professionally and have a pretty solid understanding of the laws and the relevant case law which - as you pointed out - governs how those laws are interpreted. It sounds like you do too and obviously don't agree with the literal interpretation of them. I don't either. The copyright system is really messed up and the current laws betray the spirit of what copyright was supposed to be about.

You're right that a lot of these issues are open to legal interpretation. The sad fact is though that the US courts and Congress have increasingly eroded "fair use" which effects the average fan by placing legal restructions on how they can use copyrighted material. Can you just ignore the laws within reason? Sure. But you shouldn't have to and if more people are aware of how outrageously restrictive the system is maybe it will change and this can be a moot debate.

You mentioned my Bear Town thing and the main "bad guy" character is a white polar bear named Big Bear which I've had in place (and in use) for many years. Awhile back, Steve Axtell's company started selling a white polar bear puppet named, yup, Big Bear. Now technically I could have a made a huge issue out of this - a case could probably be made that there could be confusion in the puppet market - but that would be silly. The name "Big Bear" is sort of generic and a white polar character is not exactly original (Steve btw is a very good guy and I'm sure was totally unaware of my Big Bear when that product came out).

So if you have the impression I'm real fanatical about copyright stuff you're mistaken. I do tend to point out when misleading copyright info is posted, but I also got to great pains to explain the difference between the letter of the law and the application of the law which as you mentioned are often two different things. And I've got better things to do than worry about Kermits people are whipping up in their basements.

What did this have to do with full body costume puppets again?

 

[Buck-Beaver]

P.S. ~ I think a copyright addition to the FAQ is a great idea Fragglerockr. Both sides of this debate to get covered over and over again...mostly because of newer people I think.

Oh, and those Hallowe'en costumes - they're fair use. See? No hypocrisy whatsoever.