|
|
Post by browny87 on Jul 30, 2017 19:37:57 GMT
ooo TFNation exclusive toy!
|
|
|
|
Post by blueshift on Jul 30, 2017 19:56:27 GMT
ooo TFNation exclusive toy! Done by MAAS. What else have they done? |
|
|
|
Post by Pinwig on Jul 30, 2017 20:02:12 GMT
Nothing yet, they're new chaps (or an older company under a new name). This is a repaint/new head of their initial release, a Cybertronian Bumblebee from the cartoon pilot.
Which, it's worth pointing out, isn't on sale yet (although it's due now), so this TFN version might beat that one out and be their debut. 12cm - slightly under Deluxe height. I think it's intended to be Masterpiece Minibot size.
|
|
Dezzeh
Thunderjet
Wait, what?
Posts: 4,888
|
Post by Dezzeh on Jul 30, 2017 20:24:10 GMT
Probably going to pick one up, it's the only way to keep getting them!
|
|
|
|
Post by Kingoji on Jul 30, 2017 20:39:33 GMT
This is a repaint/new head of their initial release, a Cybertronian Bumblebee from the cartoon pilot. More accurately, it's a realisation of Don Fig's Bumblebee design from The War Within. |
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Jul 30, 2017 20:52:57 GMT
If it's based off of licensed TF media is this an official toy then? Was Don Fig paid for his design being used in this way or does his TF work fall under 'work for hire'? I ask out of curiosity (I'm not going to the con so I'm not part of the market for this item).
-Ralph
|
|
|
|
Post by blueshift on Jul 30, 2017 21:10:05 GMT
If it's based off of licensed TF media is this an official toy then? Was Don Fig paid for his design being used in this way or does his TF work fall under 'work for hire'? I ask out of curiosity (I'm not going to the con so I'm not part of the market for this item). -Ralph I imagine it's the same as all third party stuff, which is all very cough cough nudge nudge wink wink and no-one gets in trouble as long as they don't call them by their proper names. |
|
|
|
Post by Pinwig on Jul 30, 2017 21:14:05 GMT
Ah, right. Of course. That's why the promo pics for the Bee version were done with the Spark Toys Prime. I get it. Cool!
How exciting!
|
|
|
|
Post by blueshift on Jul 30, 2017 21:28:51 GMT
My only sadness is the lack of a gold face like the original, but I guess paint applications were limited (and they couldn't give her a faceplate as they were just using the Bee head)
|
|
|
|
Post by Kingoji on Jul 30, 2017 22:06:30 GMT
I was going to reply, it's really no different from all the other figures that have come from third parties that are essentially realising a comic-only design (the DJD spring to mind).
Rune's head is actually an entirly new sculpt for this figure. But yeah, I'd have prefered a faceplate too.
|
|
|
|
Post by legios on Jul 31, 2017 5:50:10 GMT
If it's based off of licensed TF media is this an official toy then? Was Don Fig paid for his design being used in this way or does his TF work fall under 'work for hire'? I ask out of curiosity (I'm not going to the con so I'm not part of the market for this item). -Ralph I imagine it's the same as all third party stuff, which is all very cough cough nudge nudge wink wink and no-one gets in trouble as long as they don't call them by their proper names. Technically that is, no-one gets in trouble so long as the legal owners of the Intellectual Property involved (presumably Tomy and/or Hasbro I would guess) choose not to bring suit. After all, it is a clear violation of someones Moral Rights as well as their Economic Rights. (Not just on the basis of being far too similar to a design covered by Copyright, but also in that it is being advertised as representing a character whom somepne else owns the copyright to). After TFNation did so well at staying on the right side of the law with their merchandise in their first year I am saddened. Karl |
|
|
|
Post by inflatabledalek on Jul 31, 2017 6:55:41 GMT
It's worth remembering that Don (or the other artists) doesn't get any money when Hasbro use his designs either. Something that's rather a point of contention for when when it comes to stealth bomber Megatron as he claims he designed that when he was "Off contract" at IDW and therefore it wasn't covered by the usual terms that let Hasbro do what they like with these things.
Still, he's not being worse treated here than he normally would be (and may even get a free toy out of it, which isn't always the case with Hasbro!).
|
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Jul 31, 2017 6:59:18 GMT
Two wrongs don't make a right.
I'll leave my opinions on this toy there. I've made my point and I am not an attendee anyway.
-Ralph
|
|
|
|
Post by legios on Jul 31, 2017 7:52:53 GMT
It's worth remembering that Don (or the other artists) doesn't get any money when Hasbro use his designs either. Which is generally because they've done them under a contract which affirms Tomy or Hasbro as the "creator" as a matter of legal record - something which is legal under the Berne Convention and of copyright law more generally. Most jurisdictions allow the assignation of what are called Economic Rights. Generally these things are designed under a "work for nire contract" where there is an agreement to sell economic rights in exchange for a distinct sum of money. (In thise case, if there wasn't such a contract then the design itself is likely an infringement - being clearly derivative of a design someone did for Sunbow for their cartoon "The Transformers" back in the eighties - which is definitely owned by Hasbro) Where jurisdictions vary is whether they consider Moral Rights to be assignable (UK), not assignable (France, Netherlands) or practically non-existent (the US) - Moral rights covering things like the right to be identified as the author, the right to legal protection from someone else passing themselves off as the author, the right to protection from someone defaming ones creation and so forth. (The US position of Moral Rights is positively feudal and I find it horrendous, but until it changes to something less hidelus the law is what it is) Which I'd agree, if true, is skeevy business practices by Hasbro. But is also a separate issue to this case, and a matter between Hasbro, IDW, Mr Figouera and their various legal representatives. But It it is true then I'd like to see Mr Figouera properly compensated for any illegal actions by Hasbro In this case I'd say is hard to argue that the design itself isn't derivative of the Bumblebee design done for Sunbow's "More Then Meets The Eye" mini-series back in the 1980's, which means that Hasbro and/or Tomy have a right to sue in a civil court on the basis of "this toy is a depiction of a character and their distinctive features that we own, and it has been made without our permission. We want damages, and an injunction to prevent further manufacture or distribution" and would probably win. (If they wanted to/could make the case that its existence has prevented people spending money on legitimate product then they could make a case under Economic Rights which moves it into the arena of Criminal Law, which is a different animal entirely. Unlikely in this case as it would be hard to prove someone bought this toy instead of an equivalent legitimate product. Things like the illegal Bruticus et al would be much more vulnerable on this front). I've no problem with the persn who did the original design, as it seems to have been done quite legally under a proper contract. I just wanted to make the point that using that design to make a toy without the permission of its owner isn't legal, whether or not Hasbro/Tomy bring suit. Just because they probably won't sue doesn't render it a legal thing to do. I just means no one is going to be punished for it. (Look, I'm an Information Professional. I am ethically bound to defend people's copyights in my professional life, and this colours my reaction to these things. I'v said my peice, I'll get ou of folks way now) Karl |
|
|
|
Post by Kingoji on Jul 31, 2017 8:44:11 GMT
And here I was thinking this morning how nice it was that we've had no negative reactions!
It's a tricky line to navigate for a convention of our size. Botcon in particular has engrained a mindset in fans and convention attendees that an exclusive toy (or twelve, as it turns out) is not only desired, but should be mandatory for a convention to actually be measured by. People will always be more impressed by a con that has an exclusive toy than one that doesn't. And believe me, we have had massive appeals to provide one.
But there is no way a con of our size can provide an official licensed exclusive. Hasbro themselves have policies in place that make it impossible for us. Obviously we would all much rather have an actual HasTak product to share with people.
But this trend of smaller cons having exclusive versions of third party figures, not to mention the existence of most third party figures themselves, is so long standing and far reaching that to think Hasbro care is fairly naive. They'd have done something about it long before now, even something as simple as alter their policies to allow something small-but-official to smaller, well-meaning cons.
The truth of the matter is that in many cases third party products are useful to HasTak as a way of market research that they don't have to pay for. I don't think it's any coincidence that we got Masterpiece versions of Shockwave, Megatron, and Sunstreaker within a year of multiple third party companies each putting out their own successful variations of each, or that we got lines devoted to combiners and headmasters after third parties were investing so heavily in them.
tl;dr
We wish we could bring you a fully licensed and official exclusive, but cannot. This is the compromise Hasbro force upon us, and they are fine with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fortmax2020 on Jul 31, 2017 8:46:12 GMT
As someone who has worked as an Open Access advocate in the academic sector I am all for fair and free reuse of intellectual ideas and properties. However as Karl points out (far more coherently than I could) there are still boundaries that shouldn't be crossed even if they shouldn't exist. Which in this case they should.
Third Party folk have been getting away with crossing those boundaries for a while now and may feel 'safe' or justified doing so, but having this toy as an exclusive TFN product is like shoving the issue into Hasbro face. I'm pretty sure it would be better to take the initiative of staying on their good side.
If the matter isn't dealt with directly by them it can be done more subtly - like guests being told not to attend futures cons etc. It seems like a risk not worth taking as well as losing the chance to advocate a more wholesome approach to the fandom.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fortmax2020 on Jul 31, 2017 8:48:56 GMT
And here I was thinking this morning how nice it was that we've had no negative reactions! It's a tricky line to navigate for a convention of our size. Botcon in particular has engrained a mindset in fans and convention attendees that an exclusive toy (or twelve, as it turns out) is not only desired, but should be mandatory for a convention to actually be measured by. People will always be more impressed by a con that has an exclusive toy than one that doesn't. And believe me, we have had massive appeals to provide one. But there is no way a con of our size can provide an official licensed exclusive. Hasbro themselves have policies in place that make it impossible for us. Obviously we would all much rather have an actual HasTak product to share with people. But this trend of smaller cons having exclusive versions of third party figures, not to mention the existence of most third party figures themselves, is so long standing and far reaching that to think Hasbro care is fairly naive. They'd have done something about it long before now, even something as simple as alter their policies to allow something small-but-official to smaller, well-meaning cons. The truth of the matter is that in many cases third party products are useful to HasTak as a way of market research that they don't have to pay for. I don't think it's any coincidence that we got Masterpiece versions of Shockwave, Megatron, and Sunstreaker within a year of multiple third party companies each putting out their own successful variations of each, or that we got lines devoted to combiners and headmasters after third parties were investing so heavily in them. tl;dr We wish we could bring you a fully licensed and official exclusive, but cannot. This is the compromise Hasbro force upon us, and they are fine with it. It is not a negative reaction to point out this idea crosses lines it shouldn't. Hasbro have not forced this position on to any one so they can't be blamed. It is a choice TFN has taken to appease a section of the fandom. Have Hasbro stated to TFN they are happy with this approach? If not you can't assume it. |
|
|
|
Post by Kingoji on Jul 31, 2017 8:57:52 GMT
I do want to clarify that this is all my personal reasoning and understanding, not the econvention's official line.
|
|
|
|
Post by blueshift on Jul 31, 2017 9:35:25 GMT
Oh yes, don't think of it as negative comments (facts can never be negative after all!) just people being a bit concerned. Hasbro's been chill with stuff for a while but the more conventions keep poking the sleeping giant and seeing what they can get away with, the more likely Hasbro will come down hard. If a small convention invests heavily in stock that Hasbro then comes down on and says they can't sell, than that would be awful for the con.
Personally I think if there is an issue it will rear its head in the US first, as the US conventions are big and have regular exclusive third party toys. Hasbro seem happy when things are kept at a small scale (and it would be so easy for them to just hammer down on conventions/retailers with these third party toys, and they don't). I do wonder though that with the rise of Hascon, if Hasbro might be a bit stricter with what they'll let people get away with as they'll be directly competing with Hasbro. But again, we'll see that in the US first.
Honestly the thing that worried me a bit more was the Animated comic because all the publicity made it look official, and all the news sites picked up on it as an official thing. I know the 'this is an unofficial fan thing and is non-profit' got added quickly, but still... The only time I'm aware Hasbro has recently slammed a cease and desist on a fan project was when it infringed on one of their licensees rather than Hasbro itself (that was the Fighting is Magic game, big non-profit high profile fan thing but at the same time Hasbro was doing deals with game developers). I'm sure now those clarifications have been made it will be fine, as long as IDW didn't freak out!
(Now this is going more into third party generally, so apologies)
The whole third party thing is a bit of a mystery to me really. I can see why Hasbro were happy in the early days but now it seems like there's a lot more direct competition with Hasbro, but they've done nothing - they could crush the market in an instant by refusing to deal with retailers that stock them, pulling guests from cons that deal with them (which they've done with other stuff in the past) and taking legal action within the US. So I guess they're happy as long as no drama is caused. You can't really get away with the excuse that "well, Hasbro would never do this" because they're doing pretty much all the crazy stuff now, but they're only doing it cos the third party stuff showed it was viable.
But companies keep pushing Hasbro more and more. Someone will mistake inaction for not caring and cross the line and ruin it for everyone else. And that will be:
- Straight out using copyrighted names/concepts (ie Optimus Prime rather than RED BOX TRUCK HERO)
- Use a concept that Hasbro can't ignore - probably a licensed car design or a movie design owned by Paramount
- Do something seen to be damaging to the brand. Like something rude.
Then again those Animated Mario-inspired toys at AA in uh, 2015 (?) got away with it, and Nintendo are infamously litigeous!
|
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Jul 31, 2017 9:38:02 GMT
Oh I had assumed the Animated graphic novel was official the way it was advertised!
-Ralph
|
|
|
|
Post by Fortmax2020 on Jul 31, 2017 9:58:21 GMT
Arguably Hasbro have done something in response to 3P folk - Prime Wars. A softly softly approach to getting fans back onto official toys by trying to pull the rug out from under the third party market.
It clearly hasn't worked though and with the changes at Hasbro (Hascon, shared universe in IDW, etc) don't be surprised if their approach becomes more aggressive in the near future.
Third party toys at cons are a red flag towards this. A risky game to be played even aside from whether it is legal or ethical to do so.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Jul 31, 2017 11:28:38 GMT
Oh I had assumed the Animated graphic novel was official the way it was advertised! -Ralph My mistake. It is indeed clearly non-profit. I presume the toy is too? -Ralph |
|
primenova
Fusilateral Quintro Combiner
Posts: 6,057
|
Post by primenova on Jul 31, 2017 11:29:38 GMT
Wasn't the issue with Don's design that he did it up & IDW said we are not using it. Until they had a plot hole & did use it & then Don quit.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Jul 31, 2017 11:39:13 GMT
Putting to one side the legality of the toy, do such items really drive attendence numbers for cons? This one was announced two weeks before the convention. I would have thought most people would have made their booking decision by now (when there was no toy to factor into personal decisions). Or is there usually a surge in bookings this close to an event? I ask as I have no experience in organising cons and am interested. I'm just wondering what difference having a toy makes to a con? I recall when AA had recolour 3p not-Jumpstarts as the event's official toys and they didn't seem to be shifting.
-Ralph
|
|
Dezzeh
Thunderjet
Wait, what?
Posts: 4,888
|
Post by Dezzeh on Jul 31, 2017 12:18:45 GMT
Two weeks to go guys, and all that matters is what's on the ToyFu table this year?!
|
|
|
|
Post by blueshift on Jul 31, 2017 13:24:28 GMT
Two weeks to go guys, and all that matters is what's on the ToyFu table this year?! It's just a mountain of Cybertron Blasters and Universe Strafes!  |
|
|
|
Post by blueshift on Jul 31, 2017 13:30:00 GMT
Two weeks to go guys, and all that matters is what's on the ToyFu table this year?! It's just a mountain of Cybertron Blasters and Universe Strafes! Though seriously there's some stuff so amazing I'm worried a fight will break out! |
|
|
|
Post by Pinwig on Jul 31, 2017 13:43:09 GMT
Two weeks to go guys, and all that matters is what's on the ToyFu table this year?! Blueshift will be draped across it wearing a coat made of Armada Sideswipes. |
|
Dezzeh
Thunderjet
Wait, what?
Posts: 4,888
|
Post by Dezzeh on Jul 31, 2017 13:44:37 GMT
I would donate generously for that!
|
|
|
|
Post by Philip Ayres on Jul 31, 2017 14:01:21 GMT
Two weeks to go guys, and all that matters is what's on the ToyFu table this year?! Blueshift will be draped across it wearing a coat made of Armada Sideswipes. bad image, bad image, make it go away! |
|
