AA case begins

[Star Wars Helmets]

It isn't the same case people expected him to have though, Jez. The Ainsworth supporters thought he had claim because he was bragging about his work, how he was the original "assembler" of the helmets. Now, anyone in the UK can make these helmets, quite legally, if I am reading the ruling correctly. So, if someone comes along, recasts the pieces in question and offers them cheaper, they are well within their legal means to do so, yes?

That might be correct Qui, ultimately all we can do on this board is pontificate :lol.

However the one thing that kept going round in my head was how absolutely positive Ainsworth was that he was going to win, to the extent that he was prepared to bet everything he owned, including his home and a business he had run for over 30 years - on taking Lucas on. From very early on he engaged with the best legal council and it appears their advice was sound.

Clutch - yes I do think he tried to engage with LFL very early on but was brushed off. LFL only engaged with him when they started action in the US Courts. The only point I was making was that IMO people should try talking first!

Cheers

Jez

 

[Bobtherocker]

So lets say someone decides to set up shop for themselves with all the front and swagger that AA shows with website, mag ads, the works. Would they get away with it? Would AA try to kick off at them for muscling in?
I'd be interested to know how AA would deal with someone playing him at his own game.

 

[Jedifyfe]

So lets say someone decides to set up shop for themselves with all the front and swagger that AA shows with website, mag ads, the works. Would they get away with it? Would AA try to kick off at them for muscling in?
I'd be interested to know how AA would deal with someone playing him at his own game.

This is waht Lucas should do. Offer the most screen accurate helmets, armor and blasters for sale at an extremely low price and run AA out of business.

If I was George I would do this just to make a point to this chucklehead.

Brad

 

[Qui-Gonzalez]

This is waht Lucas should do. Offer the most screen accurate helmets, armor and blasters for sale at an extremely low price and run AA out of business.

If I was George I would do this just to make a point to this chucklehead.

Brad

Yup. Suits made directly from screen used items, helmets cast from screen used items and assembled on the cheap. If that is how the UK wants to play the game, I would do the same exact thing.

"Why buy from an assembler of costumes when you can buy items taken directly from screen used pieces?!"

Sadly, LFL has shown they handle their own IP very poorly in regards to their offerings. Shoddy QC and such has not endeared them to many people. On the other side of this equation though, the mass produced items would go to the people who are NOT as anal as we are.

 

[Mr. No Stripes]

this is still a thread? wow... came back from the dead

:lol

 

[Star Wars Helmets]

This is waht Lucas should do. Offer the most screen accurate helmets, armor and blasters for sale at an extremely low price and run AA out of business.

If I was George I would do this just to make a point to this chucklehead.

Brad

Agreed - Produce the best product for the best price and let the consumers decide.

Cheers

Jez

 

[sskunky]

Unfortunately we all know this will never happen. It hasn't yet.
If you want screen accuracy you have to buy it here.....:lol

 

[Arketh]

Copyright and design law is a pain. it's even more of a pain when you've got two differnt companies systems.

The biggest issue, and probably what prevented Lucas from winning the case is Section 52 of the UK's Copyright, Design and Patents Act.

http://www.jenkins.eu/copyright-(statutes)(1)/part-1-copyright-.asp#s52

Section 52: Effect of exploitation of design derived from artistic work.

52.-(1) This section applies where an artistic work has been exploited, by or with the licence of the copyright owner, by-

(a) making by an industrial process articles falling to be treated for the purposes of this Part as copies of the work, and

(b) marketing such articles, in the United Kingdom or elsewhere.

(2) After the end of the period of 25 years from the end of the calendar year in which such articles are first marketed, the work may be copied by making articles of any description, or doing anything for the purpose of making articles of any description, and anything may be done in relation to articles so made, without infringing copyright in the work.

(3) Where only part of an artistic work is exploited as mentioned in subsection (1), subsection (2) applies only in relation to that part.

(4) The Secretary of State may by order make provision-

(a) as to the circumstances in which an article, or any description of article, is to be regarded for the purposes of this section as made by an industrial process;

(b) excluding from the operation of this section such articles of a primarily literary or artistic character as he thinks fit.

(5) An order shall be made by statutory instrument which shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament.

(6)In this section-

(a)references to articles do not include films; and

(b)references to the marketing of an article are to its being sold or let for hire or offered or exposed for sale or hire.

The original designs and molds would be protected from copyright, but after they made a pull from the molds, if they sell, rent or attempt to do either with the results, it seems to fall into the Industrial Design catagory.

 

[TK765]

I'm not sugar coating anything or defending him. I know it's wrong, his claims.
I'm curious to know how you know that he has no original molds? Have you seen them? Been to his workshop? If you are trying to compare 30 year old HDPE heavily painted delapitated helmets to new acrylic capped helmets then that is just hearsay. Not proof. HDPE stretches when vac formed and some of the helmets had up to 30 coats of paint on them brushed on with paint brushes because they couldn't get it to stick.
I feel just because you like to believe he has no original molds then he doesn't. He had two original helmets he sold at auction maybe he recasted those? I don't know. He told me that he cast the molds from protective casings which I presume were vac pulls placed over molds to protect them. They had to be remade as the old molds were shot. Maybe they were cleaned up? I don't know, neither do I care. It's his business not mine.
What I do care about is the fact that because I know someone I'm a bad person. I'm not. I love this hobby.

The mold issue was debated here ad nauseum, go learn some history before you start spouting off more innacurate facts and doubt. Its now realized by most that he doesn't have them, the inaccuracy and flaws of his helmets was more than enough proof to many here. Unfortunately many refused to believe the truth because of their then HERO worship.

The man charged a premium for his helmets on a lie and that makes him nothing more than a con man.

You love the hobby, good for you. But if you associate youself with someone that lied and ripped off many people on this board and then say you "don't care" don't be surprised when people have a negative opinion of you.

 

[Dpp1978]

Copyright and design law is a pain. it's even more of a pain when you've got two differnt companies systems.

The biggest issue, and probably what prevented Lucas from winning the case is Section 52 of the UK's Copyright, Design and Patents Act...

...The original designs and molds would be protected from copyright, but after they made a pull from the molds, if they sell, rent or attempt to do either with the results, it seems to fall into the Industrial Design catagory.

S52 is important, and was part of the defence. The case was decided on the artistic work issue and the provisions of s51 relating to design documents before the s52 issue needed to be examined.

It was stated that if the decisions were wrong he would still have a defence under s52. In fact the level of industrial exploitation required is surprisingly low; only 50 items need be made before s52 bites.

The term runs from the date of exploitation not the date the art was created. Where different designs are exploited at different times there can be a number of different terms of 25 years to keep track of making a confusing system even more so.

 

[JoslinFX]

The whole law case, final results, in a simple nut shell explination

1] Mr Ainsworth, and his small company Sheperton Studio props won the case against lucas film just before this christmas in a UK court, because of an EU juricdiction issue, explained in part 6] below.

2] The trooper suit was never patented, neither in the UK or US, it only has existing design rights, and rights as art in the US. If it was patented lucas would have won imideately, cause the patent office is world wide.

3] Lucasfilm lost because there accusation that the orignal pattern masters were defined as sculptural art from its orginal sculpture. The UK court threw this idea out of court becasue UK law defines a piece of art as something that is created specifically with a sole or main purpose of apeasing the eye. Not something that has a main untilatarian purpose of defining a who the bad guys are in a motion picture. Because this was thrown out, the design rights of the trooper suit and specifcally the helmit, was reduced in UK law as industrial design, not a piece of sculptural art.

4] So lucasfilm tryed the design rights being breached to get Mr Ainsworth, and failed because in UK law, industrial design, which the trooper suit was now defined under in this case, only has a life span of 15 years, which is "unrenuable" after it expires. And lucasfilm registered the design right in 1976, and Ainsworth started publicly producing trooper suits in the late 90's. Do the math, and design rights have expired.

5] Aisnworth stated the interlectual pattern rights were his. In The UK, when any film company, or any company, or even an indavidual person, hires an artist to product a product, if that company or person does not produce a legally binding contract on rights of any kind, then the interlectual pattern rights belong to te artist, regardless wether it is or is not defined by law as art. The film company may retain certain design rights, if the design it self for the product wasnt designed by the artist. [IN UK LAW] Unfortunately for Lucasfilm, they couldnt prove any legal contract, cause none actually existed. Leaving only the design rights registered and held in the United States.

6] Lucas lost on that ground of international copyright over seas breech, when he wanted the case brought back the US, to be trialed in a US supreme court after loosing the design rights in the UK. But unfortunately, the United States Of America, is not a memeber state of the EU. When any law of another country out side memeber states of the EU is breeched in side an EU memebr state like the United Kingdom but without breaking any UK laws on the same issue, the juridiction of judgement lays in the hands of the courts of England and wales. And no EU special unique law is gonna be written for Lucasfilm sake.
This is why, even though lucasfilm won the original United States Court hearing, it could not be brought to trial because of this Juridiction issue, and refused to award Lucasfilm the 20mill for the breech, also US court judges were in two minds over the issue of the trooper pattern being defined as sculptural art.


As for Mr Ainsworth, hes happly making trooper suits legally at his company shepperton Props. His only legal failier, is that he is no longer alowed to sell the US. As you will see with the link to his online shop.

http://www.sdsprops.com/prodotti.html


The final court case findings on pdf can be downloaded from here

http://www.originalprop.com/blog/tag...esign-studios/


Case dissmissed.... lol

Jonathan