Crazy Doll Camping Pics

[MountainManJim]

I was taking some pictures for the Forum calendar contest. The pictures combined several hobbies of my wife and me. I then realized that the dolls that she collects would constitute copyrighted material so, we can’t use them for the calendar. Instead I’m posting them to the forum for fun.

Here are our photo shoot pictures. The Ladybug is really the wrong scale but, the Bug looks great as a doll knife.







Jim and Jen

[tonydahose]

kinda funny and creepy at the same time..lol i think Chucky would be better suited :p

edit: i don't think copyright laws would apply in just taking pics.

[MountainManJim]

edit: i don't think copyright laws would apply in just taking pics.

I agree. But, I don't think we couldn't sell a calendar with their likeness.

Jim

[jabba359]

After watching a documentary called Marwencol, I had a similar idea for the calendar contest. But, alas, I have no dolls nor a wife who collects dolls (nor a wife of any sort yet ), so I moved on to other picture ideas. I think that this is an excellent calendar idea and I like what you did with it.

After reading the a lengthy article (actually an except from a book called A Digital Photographer's Guide to Model Releases) about copyright, trademarks, and fair use in photography, it becomes quite clear that you can use the dolls in your photo for the calendar.

[gbelleh]

Cool pictures, but a little disturbing. I wouldn't want those things camping near me!

Where did you get those tiny Spyderco shirts?

[Butaangas]

Cool pictures, but a little disturbing. I wouldn't want those things camping near me!

Where did you get those tiny Spyderco shirts?

Me nether lol :D
I guess TS made them him/her self. Nice idea though. IF TS made them, good job!! :p

[MountainManJim]

I should have mentioned; my wife made the outfits for the dolls. It’s one of her hobbies, making doll clothes. The Spyderco logo was machine embroidered onto the handmade t-shirts.

Jim

[quattrokid73]

Those are some 1000 yard stares. Have these dolls seen duty in Da Nang?

[Fred Sanford]

C R E E P Y

:eek:

[cosmo7809]

Thanks... Now I wont be able to sleep tonight...

*Holds Millie and Surefire with a deathgrip, frantically looking around the room*

[MountainManJim]

Jeez, you guys are crazy. I'm subjected to these kinds of pictures all the time. Personally, I just roll my eyes. But, I really can't any find anything creepy about them.

Cute is how the girls see these. We posted these on her doll forum. They thought the camping pictures were cute but, were a little concerned about the knives.

Jim

[gunnut35]

I think they are really cool and love the shirts. Did you make the shirts?.
I need to find one of the shirts for my dog.......

[hiredgun]

Thanks... Now I wont be able to sleep tonight...

*Holds Millie and Surefire with a deathgrip, frantically looking around the room*

Look around the room all you want, but don't look under the BED! :eek:

[wvguy8258]

So what knives are those they are holding (assuming lady bug et al)? You didn't also model the knives did you?!?

[jabba359]

So what knives are those they are holding (assuming lady bug et al)? You didn't also model the knives did you?!?

Here are our photo shoot pictures. The Ladybug is really the wrong scale but, the Bug looks great as a doll knife.

The green knife on the left is the Ladybug and the silver one on the right is the Bug.

[I_like_sharp_things]

You certainly get points for creativity on this one. Maybe you should make sure and take the tiny knives away from them before you go to bed, just in case.

[WalzAaronFFG]

All I hear when I see this is "LA LA LA LA LA LA LA". Why do all creepy dolls remind me of ring around the rosie?

[SolidState]

My mom has dolls, and a honeybee for them. Personally, they're not my friends and they often startle my family dogs. When I lived at home, they creeped me out, especially her Gunzel dolls. Those things look like drowned children. It is really amazing how realistic some dolls can look.

[dj moonbat]

This will sound crazy, but it's true: taking photos of copyrighted material is an infringement, even if the photos are never sold (or even distributed!). However, the doll people are unlikely to object, since they are unlikely to find out.

Cool photos. How big are those :spyder: shirts? I could use one of those for my 10-month-old son.

[jabba359]

This will sound crazy, but it's true: taking photos of copyrighted material is an infringement, even if the photos are never sold (or even distributed!). However, the doll people are unlikely to object, since they are unlikely to find out..

Guess we all better stop taking pictures of our Spyderco© knives, Ford© Mustang™ cars, and Facebook© pictures of ourselves wearing a Nike© Dri-Fit™ shirt, Levi's© 569™ jeans, and Asics© Gel Nimbus™ shoes that one time when hanging out at The Hard Rock Cafe™. Not to mention the hassle of getting model releases from everyone in the picture, including those strangers in the background! :p (<-- Just joking of course! Or am I?:confused :)

Truth be told, photographers have a lot of protection on their side. While I'm not saying they can't be sued (people can sue over almost anything) or that there is no copyright protection for the copyright holder, free speech and fair use laws give the photographer an advantage. Since each case has to be determined on it's own merits, there is no 100% clear and foolproof determination for what is infringing and what is not.

Typically, copyright protection comes down to economic impact: does the image of the copyrighted item have an economic impact on the copyright holder's ability to sell the product? Does the use of the copyrighted product benefit the user of the photo economically? In the case of the dolls, there is little chance that the people purchasing the calendar (mostly men) are going to have their doll purchasing behavior changed by the image. Conversely, the particular dolls used in the photo are unlikely to convince people to buy the knives. Since there is no association implied between the two companies (it's not an ad for _______ Co. dolls, but for Spyderco knives that just happens to feature dolls and doesn't seem to indicate that _______ Co. endorses the Spyderco products), there is no change in perceived value of the knives or the dolls due to the presence of the other. The dolls are also generic looking enough that there is no implied sponsorship of knives by the _______ Co. that manufactures the dolls.

If -which they did- Mattel lost a case against a guy selling photos of Barbie dolls and utilizing the Barbie name (a much more easily identifiable and recognizable copyrighted product), I don't see how a case against a photo like this with a much less recognizable product would stand a chance. I'm not saying they couldn't win (remember, these things are handled on a case to case basis), but it's very unlikely. Ultimately, it would be up to Spyderco to decide if they like the picture and then determine if they think the very, very extremely slim chance of any lawsuit happening is worth it.

But there is a chance for a lawsuit in almost any of the pictures. There're many examples on page 7 alone. Maybe the barbwire manufacturers in jasonp1 or psmith27's photos could say, "Hey, that is our proprietary and copyrighted twist pattern" or the publisher of the particular volume of Sherlock Holmes in Mr. Blonde's photo could say, "We designed that exact gold gilding pattern on the cover and own the copyright". Does Jazz have clearance to use the font he did? Did Coleman approve of psimonl's use of their grill? What about Wardrummer72's stapler, electric pencil sharpener or presumably-a-Dell monitor (at least he blacked out the manufacturer logo)? And then kaniele's egregious use of the 500 S&W casing! I believe all of these are artistic interpretations of the items and are safe to use.