Just out of curiosity, is it legal to sell -- say -- a replica Star Trek phaser (not a master replica or official version, but a scratch-built fan replica)? And, if so, how is it any different than selling Muppet replicas? Is it the difference between a copyrighted prop vs. a copyrighted character? Or is it that Disney/Henson is more protective of the Muppets than Paramount is about Trek?
I don't support Muppet replicas, especially when they're custom jobs and the makers charge tons for them. I just know that replicas from other shows have run rampant for years and I've never heard anything about them being illegal, but Muppet replicas are automatically flagged as contraband.
Under that logic you can say anyone who makes a puppet in the style of a muppet is breaking the law, even if it isn't an exact copy. Marvel Comics went down this logic and eventually lost.
You can't tell me that people who make puppets for a living don't use muppets as a reference for some of there styles. There are several Monster Muppet style puppets on ebay right now that any lawyer could make a case is a Muppet knock off.
I was just asking if anyone had a reference to this gentleman's work, and seem to have gotten only information about him being sued. I guess no one here has actually done business with the guy.
This issue is SO-O-O-O old, and has been covered in great detail on this board SO-O-O-O many times.
In a nutshell, it all comes down to money. Someone who scratch builds a STAR TREK phaser is almost certainly a hobbyist who spent incalcuable unpaid hours creating the facsimile. He could never sell it at a real profit. He's in it for the satisfaction of recreating something from a favorite sci fi franchise.
Michael Lisa and his cohorts on the other hand, are clearly making unlicensed replicas FOR PROFIT. They are not making one-offs for their personal collections, then selling them - they are manufacturing and mass-marketing their replicas with big price tags. Vault of Puppets/Oliver's Creature Shop were stupid enough to advertise on high-profile/high-volume public marketplaces like ebay and Amazon. What were they thinking? That Disney doesn't monitor such places for rip-offs? That Disney lawyers would ignore such flagrant violations of intellectual property rights?
You will probably never get anyone on these boards to admit to buying one of "Oliver's" replicas - even though they almost surely have - because this is such a hot issue, and there are so many professional puppeteers and puppet makers who frequent this board who share my opinions. I personally have only seen one of his creations - it did not look much like his posted photos at all, and was not especially well made - in my opinion.
As for thinking "a puppet in the style of a muppet" is a copyright violation, this is almost entirely unenforceable legally. Mostly because - let's face it - what does a Muppet really look like? What are the features that define a Muppet? A moving mouth? There were moving mouth puppets long before Muppets. Buggy white eyes? EMMETT OTTER puppets have little black button eyes - are they less Muppets than Fraggles are? Um, is a Muppet worn on a hand? Hand puppets certainly pre-date Muppets by centuries, and that definition would exclude Sweetums and all the Doozers, who were rod puppets. A STYLE is not really copyrightable, neither are the materials from which something is made (which, incidentally, is the principal ingredient in the look of the Muppets - what they are made from) - the appearance of a specific character IS copyrightable. A piece of music written in the style of jazz can be copyrighted, but the composer of that piece can't sue everyone who composes jazz-inflected music. Marvel can't sue DC for creating a character "in their style," but if DC put a red and black spiderweb-veined suit on someone and had him swing from building to building on a web, Marvel could probably take DC to the cleaners.
The MAIN reason not to do business with "Oliver" is that he is a liar - he says on his website the Muppet replicas aren't for sale, but on ebay he says they are. For ages the Kermit replica on his site that he said he built was really a gutted MR Kermit poser and the Fozzie he showed had the face from a photo of a REAL Fozzie pasted onto it. He is a scoundrel. He is being sued by Disney, he's too stupid to stop doing what got him into legal trouble, he is dishonest, AND he charges too much for work that is only just acceptable.
Just to give you an idea of who this guy is, on a prominent replica prop forum - from which he is now banned - he created several fake identities for the sole purpose of posting glowing reviews of his own puppets. He posted conversations between his aliases - "Gee, Bob, your puppets look great!" "Thanks, Biff, they're made of the finest materials available!" - how psycho is that?
'Nuff said.
Welcome to the Muppet Central Forum!.jpg)
Christmas Music
Jim Henson Idea Man
Back to the Rock Season 2
Bear arrives on Disney+
Sam and Friends Book
