Hasbro is going after a pony plushie maker on DA

[Wardah]

I was just wondering something else. Lets say someone made custom plushies and a customer asked them to do a character from the show. Would that be considered legal?

[Shaiyeh]

Well, if you normally don't do characters from the show , and don't get $1000+ for it, I don't think hasbro will come and bash you on the head. It's when you can make a living off of someone else's characters. At least they'd how I view it. I get commissioned to do fanart at times, but it's far from enough to live on.

Seriously, I'm sorry but I just can't let this go- I am so put off by the prices! That is soooo much profit! It's not that many working hours if she can make that much a month. I get the thing with eBay auctions because people will bid like crazy.
But even starting at such a price? They look great, sure, but how big are they even?
I seriously couldn't ask more than $500 for a commission. And that's far beyond my normal prices. I'm surprised she even get so many commissions with those prices!
As soon as it's on the brony scene, I guess.

[Moonracer]

DA closed the girl's page? What a shame...


Also, it just hit me: I remember there was once this girl on dA, who used to create chibi-style Transformers plushies (they were really adorable by the way ). Even though she was highly popular, and, from what I understand, she sold quite a lot of plushies to various people (also I remember seeing a photo of an Optimus Prime plush in Lauren Faust's dA gallery), her account strangely disappeared soon after her work became a hot selling item. Hmmm... makes you wonder. 

[moonflower]

I am on Hasbro's side on this one. I don't think it was just the fact that she was making FiM plushies, but the fact that she had a production line going and she was making lots of lots of them to sell for profit.

[lovesbabysquirmy]

Yep, don't try to "do it better than Hasbro".    I wonder if DA had to remove her pages because she was announcing that she would still do commissions privately but not sell them on the DA site.  That would really grate Hasbro the wrong way, I feel. 

[Megans_Cousin]

I don't think DA removed all of her pages. She just took the pics and commission slots off the first page and edited her journal.

[Emfen]

I just wanted to quote the artist;

I am hearing the complaint that my plushes sell for too much money.  I start my plushes on ebay for $75.00.  It is the fans that set the price. So you say" well only the bronies with a lot of money can buy the plushes".

She stated that here; http://whitedove-creations.deviantart.com/journal/Devious-Journal-Entry-283124098

It's the demand of good quality that makes the price sky rocket. And then famous pony related people bought her plush ponys, of course the price rockets even further!

customizing is NOT infringing.

Unfortunately, customizing a pony to be a hasbro character IS infringing on copyright if you are making a profit on it.

No not really, since you bought it you have legally right to do whatever you want with your pony. May it be burning it or customize it, you can claim the artwork design to be yours but not the actual design of the pony mold.
As an example was this man I read about. He bought an iphone and tinkered with it to make it work with his sim as apple had a deal where only one tele company may use the iphone for their sims in that country. However the guy found that the company having this deal was far too expensive, so with his skills  he unlocked the phone. This was something that annoyed apple and they filed a copyright claim, as this fella sold some unlocked phones. Apple didn't get the right in court, as the judge stated that when you buy something from a company for personal use it's not infringement. He was simply just making small modifies to his property and sold his property.


I was looking for a comment about her pattern but can't seem to find it, about hasbro buying her plush and stealing her pattern for their use.
Now that's a copyright infringement. You may say "but she did a pattern for copyrighted ponys!", it's a pattern yes and a pony one too. It's like lego, you could make a very unique design of a pony but with the same pattern you could also make copies of copyrighted characters. Depending on how you use the resourses it can be both. Hasbro have no right to steal her pattern as it is her design, they can claim copyright on WhiteDove's plush ponies of actual Hasbro design but not the pattern as in it's state as it's just pieces of lego.


In a way it's partly her fault as she could have prevented this issue by not putting her plushes on ebay, selling them for a set price and less publicly. In another way I feel with her as crafting a design that good takes effort and time! She spend about 16+hrs on a single plush, or so she claims making them very well made looking into every detail. Many of you seem to see her as some money greedy pony person, but I think not. She saw an opportunity and took it, just like those who bought lots of Ponies recently on taobao and sell them for a higher price. Don't judge her.
I think hasbro should try to work out a deal with this artisan and great designer, she could actually provide some great stuff to the actual toy line as she is considered one of the greatest plush makers around now and hasbro could use some great talent too. I still think Hasbro should have emailed her first as she is the one making them and not dA, that way it could have been discussed in a different way.

I think that's about all I can put into this debate, I see this thing as a lose-lose at the time. Maybe they can turn it around to be a win-win? What if she got a special licence, for making plushes and some of the money would go to charity? There's a lot of things hasbro could do about this current situation, I personally would love to see a line of charity ponies if possible. But I think WhiteDove have been bashed and criticized enough, she pulled all information about commissions off her dA and only left contact info "for talk about ponies". She do not mention anything about commissions there. She isn't banned, she just decided to hide all content on the gallery front page except her journal.
Peace.

[Elisto]

Who's bashing her? Her plushies are amazing, and no one's criticizing her for selling them. Just pointing out that it's not legal, and even those others of us who've sold fan art acknowledge that. I've not even seen too much criticism of her prices, just that of course, with prices like that, it's not surprising Hasbro would care, and many of us would never pay that much, even acknowledging the work that went into them.

But I haven't seen much criticism or negativity toward the artist herself.

[Wardah]

customizing is NOT infringing.

Unfortunately, customizing a pony to be a hasbro character IS infringing on copyright if you are making a profit on it.

No not really, since you bought it you have legally right to do whatever you want with your pony. May it be burning it or customize it, you can claim the artwork design to be yours but not the actual design of the pony mold.
As an example was this man I read about. He bought an iphone and tinkered with it to make it work with his sim as apple had a deal where only one tele company may use the iphone for their sims in that country. However the guy found that the company having this deal was far too expensive, so with his skills  he unlocked the phone. This was something that annoyed apple and they filed a copyright claim, as this fella sold some unlocked phones. Apple didn't get the right in court, as the judge stated that when you buy something from a company for personal use it's not infringement. He was simply just making small modifies to his property and sold his property.

It isn't the customizing that is infringing but what it is being customized into that could be infringing. It is the same difference as selling a painting that is 100% original and selling a painting of Minnie Mouse on ebay, for example. In the second case Disney has every right to have ebay give the auction the banhammer because they own Minnie Mouse. Hasbro currently owns the characters from FIM and G3 (tho they lost the rights for the G1s) so it is infringing if you make a G1 Pinkie Pie whether they want to say anything about it or not.

[Emfen]

Who's bashing her? Her plushies are amazing, and no one's criticizing her for selling them. Just pointing out that it's not legal, and even those others of us who've sold fan art acknowledge that. I've not even seen too much criticism of her prices, just that of course, with prices like that, it's not surprising Hasbro would care, and many of us would never pay that much, even acknowledging the work that went into them.

But I haven't seen much criticism or negativity toward the artist herself.

I went on equestria daily a while ago  and some "fans" seem to consider her money greedy. The discussion's very rough and it just felt nasty reading some comments on the article about her, but most are very positive.
She could have just sold the plush for her regular price which is 75$(as she stated in a comment at deviantart) and not on auction.

I do understand the whole copyright thing, but I think there could have been an other way out. As I've been following the piratebay issue a few years, I think copyright laws need a general update, they don't seem to fit with how internet works. Being born into the generation where digital media is easily accessible kinda changes ones aspect, I'm a bit more free minded. Of course I've been victim of art theft but I figured it wasn't much of a bother as the person used it in an art article stating it was mine and ugly, but that's another story.
She may have done wrong, but hasbro never really told us "hey, we know you love ponies but we can't accept you doing this or this" so the market for ponies is quite blurry. I think if hasbro did go out with something like that on facebook or any other media the fans would have accepted it. I think it was an error by hasbro not saying anything, as they generally are very silent but a li'l info about their standing officially would have solved a lot.

It is the same difference as selling a painting that is 100% original and selling a painting of Minnie Mouse on ebay, for example. In the second case Disney has every right to have ebay give the auction the banhammer because they own Minnie Mouse. Hasbro currently owns the characters from FIM and G3 (tho they lost the rights for the G1s) so it is infringing if you make a G1 Pinkie Pie whether they want to say anything about it or not.

Copyright is a very difficult thing.
Not trying to dwell too much into it but I remembered once I saw a chair, the thing with this chair was that it was a designer one. It was featured on a show about design. The thing was It certainly was a Mickey chair, but on the other hand not. It was abstract with a yellow arch on one end of the leg, a red seat with a dot and one shape like a circle or square poking up at the back which was black. You could say it's mickey, but not too. What if someone does art in a similar way? It makes me look back at the pattern statement, it's abstract but if put together correctly it can replicate something desired and copyrighted.
Maybe I'm totally out of the water, but I don't see why they can't make a benefit of her work. Like many popular youtube singers getting signed?
And what if someone decide to sell a very abstract pony painting? I found this image and kinda thought about it. http://fc05.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2012/021/7/6/abstract_mlp_wall_by_wear0n-d4n3sy0.png
What if I'd paint a pony with simple shapes, and did it in a similar fashion to that chair? Copyright is a confusing thing and sometimes lies like a string before your feet.
It was foolish of her putting them up for auction, I'd be okay with it if she was doing ooak ponys but she should have put them on BIN. There's still other plush makers making ponies, including me.
(I hear hasbro still have the rights to the G1s, but I'm not too sure. Getting mixed messages, anyone who can provide actual info on that?)

Not gonna push my argument further tonight, as I'll need a rest.

[StoryDreamer]

This attention is probably going to skyrocket her business.

Yes Hasbro owns the rights. That whole "lost the copyright" business was probably heard incorrectly, as Hasbro has a lot of product featuring G1. 


edited to add: They have to. Copyright and trademark laws basically require it.  Look at xerox and kleenex. They lost their brand name as a trademark.


It's much easier to go after somebody on DeviantArt than a faceless, nameless Chinese reseller/fakie producer/etc.

[Gypsy]

I just saw this, apparently Hasbro is on the warpath over 3rd party stuff, they went after some 3rd party Transformers manufacturers as well earlier this year. Which made no sense on one of them cause they could have made money doing nothing if they had just liscensed the partys awesome product.  If it gets popular and makes money they step right up and take notice apparently I haven't heard them going after any of the dollar store fakie producers?   Hugs, hope everything works out!

[sabathamk]

I couldn't read everything, so I'm sorry if this has been mentioned, but I have to wonder...

I understand that what she was doing was infringing on copyrite material.  Those specific ponies were being used by hasbro.  I'm wondering ... was she making them, posting them, and selling them as posted?  Or was she taking commissions where people would ask her to make a RD plush for example?  In all honesty, if friends or family wanted me to make a plush of a certain loved character, and I made it and sold it to them (as per arrangements), I hardly see that as infringement.  Now, if I made them in advance (and in bulk) and posted them online as items for sale with certain numbers left and a waiting time for more, I can definetly see that as being a business that Hasbro should have every right to shut down.  Thoughts?

[cesprins]

Greedy?

She's making artwork. Trying to reduce artwork to just cost of hours and materials is cruel really. An artist spends their entire life learning and crafting. You are not just paying for her time during the particular pieces, but her lifetime of gained knowledge of craft and design and potentially any art training they've paid for. Furthermore, a piece's value depends entirely on the popularity and notoriety of an artist.

It is not excessive if there is a buyer willing and able to pay for it at the right time. Don't get mad just because you can't afford it. She isn't hasbro who can mass produce and cater to everyone, she is a single person. So if her work is good and desirable by many, it is expensive to narrow the audience.

Too bad Hasbro is shaking their finger at her. But, maybe that means they're noticed the value of show-accurate toys, eh?

[TokiBear]

Too bad Hasbro is shaking their finger at her. But, maybe that means they're noticed the value of show-accurate toys, eh?

I know its been said multiple times in this thread, but one of the biggest reason Hasbro most likely went after her is because they can't lose their trademark for the FiM characters.  WD was making a lot of money from these plushies because there is such a high demand for show accurate ponies and failure to take action against her once they were made aware of her would cause them to lose their trademark.  I wouldn't be surprised if we don't see more of this going on in the future.


Trademark law “places an affirmative duty upon a licensor of a registered trademark to take reasonable measures to detect and prevent misleading uses of his mark by his licensees or suffer cancellation of his federal registration”... failure to police the use of a mark by unauthorized users can result in a court ruling of abandonment.


I do hope that this may also mean more show accurate plushies because right now, I am refusing to buy any Hasbro plushies.  They are just awful...