WeiBes (Chris) openly admits he recast without permisson

[gino]

View this thread for all the documented proof you'd ever want.

http://whitearmor.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=2075

Here's a couple of quotes from another recent FISD thread.

"Yes i did. the helmet in the pic is the result of a recast helmet."

"AN old TE i had kicking around. No permission, did anyone ask Lucas for permission?"

"I am done speaking to you now [EDIT]. i am currently building an ESB Boba Fett display, the parts come from friends and the helmet is a SGT-FANG, when its done i will post pics of that too. no recasting of any parts.

just of Matts stuff, because i have never liked him."

This is about as clear cut as it gets.

I call for a banning.

[weiBes trooper]

Hey Gino, i am sorry you feel this way. Good luck on your eBay sales..

[gino]

If this guy belongs to the rpf or tdh, can someone please privately and confidentially pm me his board names on those forums.

[TD-1536]

This is about as clear cut as it gets.

I call for a banning.

Using your logic, we'd have to ban you, too. Please tell us, what moral ground does someone have to recast a screen used prop, but then demand that no one else can recast their work? You have no official license. You were simply at the right place at the right time and lucky. You have no real legal "rights" to your reproductions.

Personally, I don't think anyone should recast anything, regardless of origin. I think rampant recasting dilutes an item's lineage and detail. However, the leadership of this forum will not take a moral stance regarding this issue. Instead, we leave it up to the individual to decide if they want to support a recaster's actions or not.

We will only ban someone when they have recast another community member's original work.

[weiBes trooper]

Thanks Mike

[gino]

This is about as clear cut as it gets.

I call for a banning.

Using your logic, we'd have to ban you, too. Please tell us, what moral ground does someone have to recast a screen used prop, but then demand that no one else can recast their work? You have no official license. You were simply at the right place at the right time and lucky. You have no real legal "rights" to your reproductions.

Personally, I don't think anyone should recast anything, regardless of origin. I think rampant recasting dilutes an item's lineage and detail. However, the leadership of this forum will not take a moral stance regarding this issue. Instead, we leave it up to the individual to decide if they want to support a recaster's actions or not.

We will only ban someone when they have recast another community member's original work.

That kind of stance sickens me and tells me that you don't have a grasp on the bigger picture.

For the good of the hobby, people who recast like this should not be supported.

I realize that no one has the 'legal' right to make these things, but there is a code of ethics that reside in our hobby.

Within our hobby, you have to have permission from the one who first brings the item to the public if you want to recast one of their items.

Without this code of ethics, no one would be willing to bring new items into the mix because of the fear that people will recast them if they do.

For example, a good friend of mine has a screen used scout helmet. We talked about making some available. But he (so far) has been hesitant because he fears that the community will not protect the helmets from being recast.

Recasting without permission hurts the community, and the hobby. We all are affected either directly, or indirectly when someone does it and it is supported. People who are new to the hobby usually don't realize how much. I've been in the hobby since 1992 and I've seen the effects first hand over time.

So Mike, is it your 'stance' that it be open season on recasting all props as well if they aren't licensed or scratch built?

[TD-1536]

This is about as clear cut as it gets.

I call for a banning.

Using your logic, we'd have to ban you, too. Please tell us, what moral ground does someone have to recast a screen used prop, but then demand that no one else can recast their work? You have no official license. You were simply at the right place at the right time and lucky. You have no real legal "rights" to your reproductions.

Personally, I don't think anyone should recast anything, regardless of origin. I think rampant recasting dilutes an item's lineage and detail. However, the leadership of this forum will not take a moral stance regarding this issue. Instead, we leave it up to the individual to decide if they want to support a recaster's actions or not.

We will only ban someone when they have recast another community member's original work.

That kind of stance sickens me and tells me that you don't have a grasp on the bigger picture.

For the good of the hobby, people who recast like this should not be supported.

I realize that no one has the 'legal' right to make these things, but there is a code of ethics that reside in our hobby.

Within our hobby, you have to have permission from the one who first brings the item to the public if you want to recast one of their items.

Without this code of ethics, no one would be willing to bring new items into the mix because of the fear that people will recast them if they do.

For example, a good friend of mine has a screen used scout helmet. We talked about making some available. But he (so far) has been hesitant because he fears that the community will not protect the helmets from being recast.

Recasting without permission hurts the community, and the hobby. We all are affected either directly, or indirectly when someone does it and it is supported. People who are new to the hobby usually don't realize how much. I've been in the hobby since 1992 and I've seen the effects first hand over time.

So Mike, is it your 'stance' that it be open season on recasting all props as well if they aren't licensed or scratch built?

Can you please post this "Code of ethics"? My bet is you can't, since I've never seen it. I'm sure it's an unspoken set of laws that many people understand and agree with... I'm sure I would.

Please understand that I must put my personal opinions and own morals aside when making a command decision. As I am the XO of the MEPD and this board is a detachment of the 501st, it falls under their stance on recasting. Which is "Buyer beware". We do NOT however, tolerate blatant recasting of another member's original work.

I did ban the person you're speaking of. But reinstated his membership after considerable thought. The "Genie is out of the bottle" so to speak. Banning members will not stop recasting. It is an inevitability... it's already rampant on ebay. Within ten years, I bet the Stormtrooper lineage will be so diluted, no one will know what is what and that is unfortunate.

Seth and I have made our final statements regarding this matter. We can debate it all you want, but the decision will still stand.

[TD-4935]

morals?? it least Chris isnt charging $1000 for a lid that is, however you look at it, a recast (and lets face it, the only reason you dont want people recasting your work is cause of money, be honest now)

He's also given more to this forum than just showing off, criticism and pitchfork waving.

Mike and Seth have made the right decision.

shouldnt you be checking your auction?

[gino]

What this stance in essence is saying is "we don't support the people who bring these authentic cast items into the community, and who cares if they bring in anything new because if they do, we will turn a blind eye to anyone who wants to copy it."

I can't think of a more effective way of stopping people from sharing "the good stuff" with those outside of their established cliques.

Can't you see how there is a certain amount of integrity lost by this stance?

And if you think this is all about money for me, then you simply don't understand the issue. I'll never have a problem selling the extremely small amount of helmets that I do offer, because they are geared for a very small group of people who are after the uber authentic and pedigree of pieces.

I am not in direct competition with anyone making helmets.

It's a much bigger issue than just a trooper helmet or armor, it's a philosophy of conduct, trust, and respect.

[Scott M.]

So here is something I was informed of recently that is similar to this issue:

Apple has had enormous success with the iPod, and many variations of the first release of this product. One thing many users like is the control wheel used to navigate the screens. Here is the kicker: Apple forgot to patent the wheel, and Microsoft jumped on it and filed for and received the patent rights.

Now, in my eyes, this was totally wrong; Apple did the work, made the product, and even sold tons of them. Should Microsoft have filed for the patent? Probably not, but it was granted to them, and now they have the right to charge Apple every time they make an iPod with that navigation wheel.

Morally and ethically, I believe this was not right for Microsoft to steal someone else's work, and profit from it; but they can legally. Now, in a gentleman's agreement, Microsoft does not really charge Apple for the use, but it can. So, who do we fault here? Even more curious, what would you do if you found Microsoft selling a product with Apple's navigation wheel? Some would buy it, other would shun it. Neither would have a legal fight over who is right and who is wrong.

In the end, it truly is not our products that we troop in. Some have spent a lifetime of hours working to get things right, and they should be commended and respected. But in the end, who should cast the first stone? I think until Lucas does; we cannot. I feel this is a slippery slope, and one that could find many people having to agree, when it comes down to it, most of us have items and replica props that are not licensed.

[gino]

You still don't get it.

[Scott M.]

Actually I do, but I just cannot figure out where it ends. Once you start down the path, who does it end with? If you say no recasting ever, does that include the GF, Gino and TE stuff also?

Now I do understand the work and effort it went into to get access to the screen used helmets, but was it recast? Did LFL give permission to recast it and sell it?

If the answer is no, then I think Seth's point about original work applies here. Unless it was an original sculpt, it either never starts or never ends.

[gino]

What you don't get is, in order for our hobby to have access to authentic casts, you have to exclude the rights of the studios.

Furthermore, for us to have any replica items in our possession outside of licensed pieces, you pretty much have to exclude the studio rights.

So I'm tired of always hearing the "do you have legal rights from the studios?" arguement because it is a cop out.

"Within our hobby", the person who first gets access to the authentic piece is the arbitor of recasting rights. It is up to them to give permission to people to recast or not.

If this isn't respected, then why would anyone EVER consider offering new pieces to the community and take the risk?

It is the only way to perpetuate the continual access of authentic pieces.

This kind of stance is only going to shut down those opportunities.

I know first hand as a matter of fact that it has a bearing on several very highly desirable pieces as we speak.

[weiBes trooper]

You still make (authentic helmets) no one is stopping you. what about the people including my self who dont want to py $1000.00 dollars for a helmet? i geuss you dont consider thier need either? just the top dollar payer that can afford. no one has taken away your rights to that, or the other guy. Why cant i have a replica for less money and mabye less accuracy? one for the other.. Its funny Matt stepped in his own poo pile and said he sent me 2nd gen helmet and armor because he knew i was a recaster. I didnt even buy it from him and its a 2005 suit and i wasnt even around then. my son got me into this stuff and i thought it would be a good way to share something we both like and learn something new at the same time. Share Gino, share!! Kindness and respect for those who want to know! what part of that dont you understand. We all want the same thing, but you two are losing face because of your greater than you attitude, dont you see? I personaly dont care what you own or where it came from, it dont matter to me or alot of other people. you guys think you are the only holy two that has or can cast an original. dont think so!! I am going to bring down the walls and share with the world all of the BS you hold so dear..

[TD-1536]

What you don't get is, in order for our hobby to have access to authentic casts, you have to exclude the rights of the studios.

Furthermore, for us to have any replica items in our possession outside of licensed pieces, you pretty much have to exclude the studio rights.

So I'm tired of always hearing the "do you have legal rights from the studios?" arguement because it is a cop out.

Gino, what you're basically saying is, "It's honor among thieves."

You have the option to share your coveted find with people in the community or not. I don't think your fear of it being recast should prevent you from sharing it. After all, you didn't design or sculpt it.

[TD-1536]

What this stance in essence is saying is "we don't support the people who bring these authentic cast items into the community, and who cares if they bring in anything new because if they do, we will turn a blind eye to anyone who wants to copy it."

No, the really is, morally, anyone who recasts a screen-used prop vs. recasting a fan sculpt is the same. IT'S STEALING. What you have a problem with is that your Code of ethics is nothing more than Honor among thieves.

With that said, if I have to ban Chris, I have to ban you. You're both recasters... only this "code of thieves" says who's morally just.

The exception is the recasting of another community member's hard work, a fan sculpt as we call them. I think we all agree that is unacceptable.

[TD 8733]

I have to agree with Mike on this. At the end of the day should we even be discussing this? We all know people who have been sued by Lucas Film

for doing exactly the things that are being talked about. Cast from original

or recast the studios attorneys don't care. They will file papers on you and

your opinion will mean nothing in court. Maybe a better stance for the boards

is that we don't allow posting anything that could encourage a law suit.

Share ideas show your work off but sell and discuss casting ect by PM only.

Please guys don't place your neck on a chopping block.

[tk7602]

this recasting thing frustrates me to no end.

i don't really get why people care so much.

i've made a couple of things on my own so far. one is a pistol from serenity. i couldn't care less if someone recasts it. i did the work because i wanted to, i shared it with RPF because i wanted to.

i've gotten everything out of the project that i wanted. if someone recasts me... how does that hurt me? i'm not looking to make a profit off of anyone... i just wanted to make a nice prop. i sold them for $25 shipped... and spent about $20 each on resin. i think i lost money on them, but whatever

i did my own drawing of some of the art from serenity too. and posted the high res graphics as soon as i could, in case it would help anyone.

i bought a can of peaches from serenity, and shot about 50 different pics of it to help folks trying to duplicate the labe.

i just do NOT understand the idea behind keeping things private.

you have access to an original helmet to mold... why *not* share that as widely and openly as possible? isn't that better for the community than honor amongst thieves?

that's the part i'm always stuck on.

i got access to some LFL archive photos of the AT-AT driver. i was asked not to post them anywhere public, so i respect that. but i've passed them on privately to anyone who has asked.

i would think the good of the community would be sharing as much as openly as possible.

i wouldn't recast someone else's work out of respect for the fact that folks don't feel the way i do about the sharing part, but it just gets under my skin.

suffice it to say that if i ever get access to anything cool, i'll share as much as i can!!!

anyway... i always swear i won't get into these discussions, but sometimes i get dumb.

[gino]

It's the people who feel this way who never get 'anything cool'.

And by way of cool, I mean original pieces or cast off original pieces with solid pedigree.

Because no one trusts them with it to begin with.

Kind of a catch 22 huh?

[Hellraiser]

What this stance in essence is saying is "we don't support the people who bring these authentic cast items into the community, and who cares if they bring in anything new because if they do, we will turn a blind eye to anyone who wants to copy it."

I can't think of a more effective way of stopping people from sharing "the good stuff" with those outside of their established cliques.

Can't you see how there is a certain amount of integrity lost by this stance?

And if you think this is all about money for me, then you simply don't understand the issue. I'll never have a problem selling the extremely small amount of helmets that I do offer, because they are geared for a very small group of people who are after the uber authentic and pedigree of pieces.

I am not in direct competition with anyone making helmets.

It's a much bigger issue than just a trooper helmet or armor, it's a philosophy of conduct, trust, and respect.

The whole subject is just silly to start with...besides Mr. Gino those that live in glass houses shouldn't blast away at others. Just Sayin'.

The bottom line is...who cares who casts/re-casts whatever? None of them now or in the past has a 'right' to do it. The rights rest with Lucasfilm LTD. Those that are willing to risk their investment and risk being sued (you should well know this) are rolling the dice...same as you.

We, as the 'End User' just decide whether it's worth our $$$ and that's it. If it's a good cast, then why not consider buying it? If it's bad, then the people will speak with their money or not.

I think, YOU SIR, have an agenda. You are trying to protect what you consider your 'turf' and that's pretty transparent despite your assertions to the contrary....

I support and agree wholeheartedly with the MEPD's policy.

BTW: I own one of your first run helmets and I like it just fine!

[Vadersf15t]

And another reason why he shouldnt be expelled is voiced right in the Legion Charter:

It is also stated that the Legion does not endorse the creation of props, costumes, or materials for sale to others. Any items created are for the express use of the creator. No provisions are made for the creation, sales, purchases, trades, or exchanges of any kind of costumes, props, or materials. Legion rules do not extend to any disputes related to these matters.

So there you go Gino, by this you have that right to sell your ridiculously high end uber accurate armor. Quick question for you about that armor though. I understand that it takes money to be able to buy anything screen used from star wars, it takes money to have a vacuum forming oven. ****, it takes money to afford the supplies. You said you've been doing this since '92 right? do you feel like you've made that money back yet or are you just continuing the same prices cause you've been doing it like that all along?

That same quote directly from the legion charter also answers your request for having Chris expelled."No provisions are made for the creation, sales, purchases, trades, or exchanges of any kind of costumes, props, or materials. Legion rules do not extend to any disputes related to these matters." So why would the MEPD take a stand on this when the legion charter itself says it wont get involved?

So who is "Gino" to say who gets expelled or not? Mike and Seth's standpoint is fully justified and theres your "big picture."

[Daetrin]

For those who don't cross dress...

I've spoken to Mike about this issue quite a bit, and we on the FISD leadership team have reached the same conclusions as Mike.

In short: the recasting policy for FISD is the same as that of MEPD. Heck, I "recasted" Mike's written effort. Well, I guess it's plagiarizing, but at least I got permission.

[fon]

My, my.. how far you've all fallen when it comes to recasting. Its sad. Gino's right you guys DON'T "get it".

[TD-4935]

We do get it. We understand the "elitists" dont like having their wares shared we also understand that it's perfectly fine to recast aquired studio originals and charge ridiculous prices or showboat about owning said original item but claim it will never see the light of day but lets be clear about why its not cool to recast the recasters.

Its got to be about exclusivity. With so many so called "cast from a screen used " helmets doing the rounds and as many molds to equal this (most of them probably made by Matt shortly before he sold his "only molds" to some poor bloke) this really is a moot point now.

If its about sharing an exciting find with the community and not about money then if someone recasts the recast the issue should be about dilution of quality and thus a simple "buyer beware" not a moral crusade. i've paid for a few turkeys in my time and it was down to my ignorance at the time but if an item looks good and is reasonably priced, i'm gonna buy it regardless of origins. i'm a costumer as well as a collector so the source is important to a degree but when the elitist circle decide to monopolise and covet while charging silly money i'm gonna look elsewhere.

I cant buy a Gino lid a) because he doesnt sell stuff to people who argue with him i could buy a whole load of TE2's for the pric of one of his lids and c) i'm a firm believer in ethical buying and thus wont put money into the pocket of a hypocrite elitist snob.

thats why i go TE2 every time. the name alone counts so much more to me than "accuracy"

believe me, we peasent folk do get it.

[tk-4224]

a collector will always collect things from well known artist

a normal guy would buy something which is available but wouldn´t have something special and is pleased to be a supermarked trooper

he would never buy a high accurate piece for a lot of money

so i see no problem

but argumenting in this theme would be ........