Would still buy a doll if the artist required a contract?

That's a lot of stipulations. This hobby is built around customisation, which includes hybrids, and every hobby has a buying and selling factor to it. If she doesn't want her dolls to be changed whatsoever, she probably shouldn't sell them at all. Going so far as to sue someone is just crazypants to me. I definitely wouldn't be buying!

 

In some situations it might make sense, like if these were ultra limited art dolls or something. However, it sounds like these are just normal artist bjds. According to Wikipedia,
"VARA exclusively grants authors of works that fall under the protection of the Act the following rights

• right to claim authorship
• right to prevent the use of one's name on any work the author did not create
• right to prevent use of one's name on any work that has been distorted, mutilated, or modified in a way that would be prejudicial to the author's honor or reputation
• right to prevent distortion, mutilation, or modification that would prejudice the author's honor or reputation

Additionally, authors of works of "recognized stature" may prohibit intentional or grossly negligent destruction of a work. Exceptions to VARA require a waiver from the author in writing. To date, "recognized stature" has managed to elude a precise definition. VARA allows authors to waive their rights, something generally not permitted in France and many European countries whose laws were the originators of the moral rights of artists concept.

In most instances, the rights granted under VARA persist for the life of the author (or the last surviving author, for creators of joint works).

Covered works
VARA provides its protection only to paintings, drawings, prints, sculptures, still photographic images produced for exhibition only, and existing in single copies or in limited editions of 200 or fewer copies, signed and numbered by the artist. The requirements for protection do not implicate aesthetic taste or value."

Unless I'm totally wrong, I think this means that unless there were less than two hundred signed and numbered dolls existing for exhibition only (aka art dolls) the artist cannot take legal action. It does state a little lower in the page that if the art isn't protected it the artist can still gain some benefits but it's unclear what these are. With all this being said, unless I'm misunderstanding this, I don't think normal non-art dolls could be protected under this. Therefore if one were to buy one of these dolls they could probably do whatever the heck they want with them and if worst comes to worse you could always try to fight with them legally. You could also bring up that different countries have different laws and thus if your country isn't under that law you don't have to obey.
However, unless I really adored the sculpt to the point where I couldn't think about anything else, I wouldn't get it. I really hate the idea of someone thinking that their doll is so perfect that if it doesn't appeal to everyone then those people are wrong and how dare they try to change such a master piece? It seems so arrogant, I don't think I'd be able to bring myself to support them. I genuinely hate when people try to do this sort of thing. A huge part of this hobby is customization, taking that away just because you think your art is perfect is wrong. So what if people want to customize and create using your creation as a base? What's wrong with that? I would get it if the original were somehow changed by this but it won't be. You'll always have the original, so what's the big deal? Different people have different tastes. So, I probably wouldn't buy the doll if someone even tried to do this (unless the doll is specifically made to be a limited art doll for exhibition only, then that makes some sense).

 

I think she's asking far too much. I'd say half of the doll I own are hybrids, so I just couldn't see buying a doll where the seller specifically condemned such things. If the item was OOAK and fully customised before getting to the buyer, I could sort of understand the desire to have a contract like that because of all the work involved, but I would still be wary of such a thing. I think anyone selling anything to someone else should be aware of the possibility that the buyer is going to change something about what they've purchased, and they have every right to. If the seller doesn't want to accept that, they shouldn't be selling.

 

I think it would be incredible hard for her to keep track of this to begin with, people can sell in private or places she doesn't have account or simple in a time she wouldn't see the post. And if people mod, it would be done, and she may never find out about it.

On the VARA I don't know how it would work, since the main part of this hobby is costumization, it seen against the spirit of it limit how much you can customize. But with a contract the artist could complain I suppose.

But I agree with such terms I just wouldn't buy it, no matter how awesome or perfect the sculpture would be. Even if I don't do mods, I just wouldn't want the headache to have to deal with someone that could nitpick what I can do.

 

I would roll my eyes and walk away. Additionally, what's to prevent someone from selling the sculpt and the new owner going cray with a dremel/epoxy? I can't see how the idea of no mods/hybrids would even be enforced under law. Once you purchase an item, it is yours to do what you will with it (recasting aside as that is a copyright violation). I think this artist is wearing the crazypants to even think that she could actually enforce this idea of hers. To quote my 4-year-old grandkid, you're not the boss of me.

Depending on where she is and who she's selling to, enforcing any kind of law in that regard (a signed contract to make no changes/hybrids to a sculpt) would get dicey as unless she plans to sell only within her country as getting another country's court system to uphold a ridiculous ruling like that (assuming it doesn't get tossed out for being a nuisance suite), would be very difficult. Court costs alone would likely have it being a one and done thing as well unless she's got stacks of money and has nothing better to blow the money on.

 

So, say I got one and accidentally broke, say...a hand. Since she does not sell parts, i could make the doll a hook handed pirate. Wait, no, modification. I could purchase another hand from a similar company. Wait, no, hybrid. So, I'd have a one handed doll I could not fix because I couldn't modify it or replace the part. Yeah, I'd steer WAY clear of buying one of those dolls.

 

VARA aside, an artist could probably come up with a sort of legally applicable ROFR, provided they had the desire and means to support and enforce it.

While I agree that it's not very business-friendly as far as this particular hobby goes, there's certainly stranger stipulations on animal sales/breeding/adoption, for instance.

 

@Melissa, I'm not versed in the law world, so correct me if I'm wrong, but I actually don't think she could get away with forming any sort of contract or "rule" like that.

BJDs are consumer items, and she would be selling them as such. Unless she was selling them for a different reason, like as a historical piece or a OOAK museum piece, I don't think she'd be able to do anything about it.

But putting all that aside, if I sculpted a doll and sold it (which is something I may actually try doing one day), I'd just be glad that anyone was interested enough to buy my doll in the first place.

 

Modification and customization is the spirit of the hobby. VARA is meant to protect exhibition pieces, not toys. Commissioned murals on public buildings, a statue outside of the Capitol building, these are things VARA is meant for. I think she should just be happy someone would buy her stuff rather than try to hogtie customers with litigation.

 

You sure that was an actual artist and not the person who posted something similarly - pardon my French, asinine here on DoA some time ago?

 

If it's a high-quality one-of-a-kind or limited doll that makes my heart flutter, I might sacrifice my ability to hybrid or mod in order to obtain it.

I think you should be given a discount for such a contract, to be honest. I am purchasing the doll, so I should be able to do whatever I want to do with it in terms of customization. If you want to maintain some sort of ownership of the doll, then you have to pay the price by selling it at a discount.

 

Quite honestly? I think about this the same way I thought about modelhorse artists demanding the same. It is unreasonable.

I, as a buyer, would also like some kind of protection that the company or artist, call whatever you like, does not run away with my hard-earned money.

It would absolutely drive me away from that doll, no matter how much I love it. If you do not want your dolls to be changed, don't sell them!

Anyways, I now go frankensteining some more dolls! One of the aspects I enjoy most about this hobby.

 

A contract that allows no modding, huh? I can't help but laugh at that, the arrogance is strong with this one
I don't think it's something that one can actually enforce, besides the fact I sure as heck won't buy a luxury product I don't fully own.
If you want to make a doll and have the vision be yours and yours alone... Well, you can't sell it. Simple as that.

 

Oh, no, I'd pass. I buy it, it's mine, no restrictions.
I wouldn't sign a contract to buy a doll, unless it's a financial contract to pay (do that anyway). Ridiculous! I'd never feel as if I actually owned the doll.

 

I agree with most everyone here. If I'm buying something then it's mind and I may or may not mod it. Anyone that sells me something with the rule "you can only do X, Y and Z with it" makes me just go somewhere else. While BJD is a small hobby it's not so small that I would be restricted to buy things from him/her. I would happily go spend my money elsewhere.

 

Well, doll companies themselves sell parts so one can mix them how ever they like. They give heads as extra and they kind of expect you to find a body for it. It's super likely that people don't choose the body that was made for the head. It's all about building yourself a doll you love.

An artist can view a doll as such a unique art piece that they don't want people to mess with it. But then again, I'm very much allowed to buy Mona Lisa and draw eggplants on it with super markers, since I own it after I've bought it. A unique art piece, yes, but the artist has no say in it (even if he was alive). I could just say Mona Lisa is safe and sound in my basement. No one would know. (this is an exaggeration, sure, but you get the idea) When it comes to bjds, the artist can make multiple casts. And I'm sure many people want to keep their dolls just the way they are as well.

As someone who's somewhat artistic I really understand not liking it when people change your art or do something to damage it. But the bjd hobby is all about customization. It's about the art of the sculptor just as much as of the one who buys a doll and completes it. This is a creative hobby, you can't really sell something meant for artistic use and say you aren't allowed to be artistic with it, unless you only do face ups. She's really preaching to the wrong crowd.

But there really is no way for the artist to keep track on how the doll is doing or if the buyer has done something to it. They can't harass the buyer or monitor them. And if they do- who wants to deal with that? And there's also all the trouble about selling the doll and accidentally breaking parts you can't fix and so on.
I would rather just buy elsewhere, even if I had no intention of modding or making a hybrid.

 

Personally, no, I wouldn't. I can see why an artist may want such a contract in place if they were selling a unique or very limited art doll where a lot of effort had been put into the painting/clothing etc., and I'm sure there would still be a market for such a doll if the artist was prestigious enough (whether or not said contact would be legally enforceable, I'm not sure), but it would kill my desire to own the doll - I like the creativity aspect of the hobby and am buying dolls to interact with and customise, rather than as art pieces.

Like others have said, it sounds like she is trying to target the wrong audience.

 

My doll, I can do what I want with it. You don't like it, come fight me!
lol.

Seriously though, it's mine. I paid money for it, it's now my property. I can wipe my butt with it if I so desire, I can throw it out a plane, I can do whatever because it's MY property. Only thing I can't do is recast pieces or attempt to make any sort of profit off it due to intellectual copyright laws.
But as an object? I can drill the face off, I can eat it (I wouldn't recommend that), I can cover it in mud and yeah, I can rip that head off and stick it on something else because it's mine mine omg so mine.
And if the artist has a problem with that, they're gonna need to go all over the world and fight people in person and who's got that kinda energy?
How would you actually enforce it? It's just silly.

 

The artist is over-optimistic thinking she can control the market this way. If you want to sell a doll that no one will modify, go ahead and make a super high-end limited that no one will change for fear of lowering the value. Like an Enchanted Doll $30,000 OOAK, for example. Until this artist is at that level, she's going to have a hard sell.

 

I neither mode nor hybrid dolls, and I still wouldn't buy a doll under those circumstances. Why worry about the hassle? If I style the doll a way she doesn't like or put some poorly made clothes on it, am I going to have to listen to complaining? I also wouldn't care to support that type of attitude in this hobby. There is no doll I need that badly.

 

A lot of us have stress in our everyday lives. I wouldn't want to buy a doll that I have to worry about.

 

I agree they're probably not marketing to the general bjd collecting public...

Personally, if the doll as sold to me is deemed by the artist as "perfect", and it speaks to me, and the price is right, then I would buy it, with the understanding that the artist is explicitly reserving her/his VARA rights even though against hobby custom. It would be documented as a piece of art I collected, and I would abide by the spirit of the purchase contract. I think it's important that a living artist can decide what is done to the product of their blood, sweat, tear / pieces of their soul, without fear of judgment and reprisal.

 

Yeah.... No. Nearly no one would buy a resin ball jointed doll with a special contract not to hybrid or modify it.

I recall this person's views and they are not shared by the hobby at large. BJDs are about customizing. If you don't want dolls you sell to ever be customized, you need to make & sell different dolls, not BJDs made of resin, because the BJD market isn't what you want.

 

I don't feel as if I would every buy a doll with this business model.

I think that BJD are very creative and artistic things that we put our personal touches on in any way we can. Limiting something like that would personally strip some of the soul from my doll even if I would never actually want to hybrid or modify the doll. Knowing that I wasn't allowed would just make me want to more! I can't imagine putting money into that sort of investment.

 

Back in the Mesozoic Era of BJDs, Hypermaniac tried to enforce a ban on resales of her dolls by refusing to sell a second doll to anyone who resold a Hyper. Within the relatively small (at that time) Korean BJD community, I think she must have believed she could track who bought her dolls and whether they put the dolls up for sale later on -- but even then it proved impossible for the artist to prevent resales, especially when collectors in other countries entered the mix.

I don't think an attempt to control what happens to dolls after the original sale -- whether that's resale or modding/customization -- is feasible now, any more than it was ten or twelve years ago. How does the artist described in this thread propose to enforce these "contracts"? Is it really possible for him/her to monitor the entire Internet in case some buyer posts a picture of modifications? And what will happen when the original buyer sells a doll on the secondary market -- will the artist try to track down the second owner and demand a signature on a contract?

I own a few beautiful works of art -- not in doll form -- and those professional artists never tried to control what happened to their pieces after the sale, or threaten buyers with VARA. It seems like a strange kind of tactic to employ, and I honestly wonder whether any collectors of art dolls would find it appealing.

And to answer the OP's actual question -- no, I wouldn't buy a customizable resin BJD with threats attached. Life is fraught enough without taking on needless stress and obligation.

 

I would absolutely not buy it.

I enjoy customizing my dolls, and I almost never like a fullset or company faceup enough to pay for one, even probably half of my dolls are hybrids or have feet/hands from another company. When I get a doll, I want everything about it to be "right', which often means I do have to mix parts or mod it. I'm also a very creative person who needs constant change to be happy, so with any doll I own, I eventually decide to sell it, change the eyes/wig, repaint them and even get a new body or parts.

There's no way I could enjoy having a doll that came with a contract. I'd feel like I was only caring for someone else's doll that I couldn't even handle. No way.

 

I've never done any modding or hybrids, but I still wouldn't buy a doll from an artist with such a business model. Even if I didn't want to do either of those things to the doll in question, I think it's wrong to try to limit what the owner can do with the doll once it's in their hands. If I buy a doll, then it should be mine to do with as I please, except for recasting of course. I'd understand it being frowned upon if it were one of those art dolls that are not meant to be customized (and even then, it's the owner's choice), but BJDs are meant to be customized and I can't imagine having a doll and thinking "Ah yes, I can customize this doll to look exactly as I please, except for this and this and that". Sounds like such a waste to me!

 

Okay... In reaction to the business model only then... Not only would I *not* buy a doll under those contractual conditions myself, I would strongly advise others against doing so as well. The sales terms are (to put it bluntly-) unrealistic, unenforceable and contrary to the normal accepted practices of this hobby.

 

As others have said, it's unreasonable to expect participants of a hobby based on customization to forego customization just for your very special doll. I don't care what the doll looks like or how much it fits what I'm after, if the artist is going to be so demanding and self-absorbed as to demand a contract that I change nothing about it, I want nothing to do with it. Not even if the artist paid me to take it. That's not what the hobby is for me, and it's not what the hobby is in general, and I expect any business that attempted to break into the wider hobby with such controlling practices is going to have a very rude awakening. And if they don't recognize and abandon the idea, I expect they'll be a very short lived company.

 

Some artists just go way to far... Like totally unenforceable. It's a consumer product, once you buy it, it is yours. Lol....just the sheer arrogance of that artist...lol

 

No thank you to a "no hybrid/mod" stipulation. I've seen listings of OOAK porcelain dolls that are museum quality, the sort that would be at home in a fine art gallery. However, that is a totally different case from what this hobby is about. My dolls are hybrids in one way or another, with the very least having jointed hands from other makers because their parent company doesn't offer them for that size.

Collecting resin BJDs is expensive enough as it is. Wouldn't want my already-limited funds to be spent on a lawyer if someone decides to raise hell and say I broke some contract.

 

Yeah that's the other thing- even if such a business model were enforceable- I don't know if I own a single doll I haven't modded or hybrid-ed. I could never promise Not to mod.

 

For one it would be impossible to enforce such a ridiculous rule. You'd be unable to sell to anyone under the age of 18, as those who are underage cannot be held liable for a contract they sign. On top of that there are no adequate ways to monitor such stipulations. I can only imagine the judge's face when they are forced to look at a doll someone owns and a doll made by this 'artist' and the owner goes "Well your honor...I dropped her and broke her pinky clean off. I couldn't find it, I looked mind you...and so I just sanded it like a little amputation because I couldn't buy a replacement part". Or "Well, you see her eyes were bothering me, one was a bit smaller than the other so I just made it symmetrical." Lord forbid "You see, I've had this doll for four years, she was exposed to the sun to the point her legs were horridly yellow compared to her body (The defendant then shows pictures) so I saw on a forum I could dye her with a "De-Zombification Serum"...and thought I should try it. I didn't think the artist would be offended"

Its unrealistic. Dolls are art, sure...people work very hard on them...but they're not meant to be in a museum collecting dust. Thats like buying a rug and expecting that, in the rugs life time, it will never get dirty AFTER putting it on your floor in the middle of your living room. As so many people have said Dolls are meant to be played with, everyone in this hobby (okay, maybe not everyone) wouldn't shy away from the thought of buying a cheaper body for a more expensive head, adding fantasy parts to a "nonfantasy" doll.

The idea of a seller trying to tell me what I can do with my property after I purchase it is asinine. Warner Brothers doesn't get to tell me that I can't make a reflective art piece out of my DVDs when I switch to blu rays. Gucci can't tell me I have to buy a new purse just because my pen exploded inside of it. I could scribble a mustache on my Holographic Charizard Pokemon Card and there is nothing anyone could do about it. All of it is artwork, all of it his valued at high prices (depending on how you look at it. Movies cost a lot to film, Charizard was once worth a lot...I haven't collected since I was 10).

The mere thought of an artist mentioning such rules, even if they don't actually commit to them (This is hypothetical) would keep me from buying any of their products. It could be a painter trying to sell me a fingerpainting with such stipulations and I would refuse to purchase their landscape paintings. A BJD artist trying to cast their first doll and I wouldn't buy eyes/clothes that they created.

SOOM could come out tomorrow with this ridiculous rule and I would never buy another single thing from them (or any other company foolish enough to do such a thing).

Personal preference is one thing, thats fine. Pushing your personal preference on me is another. I refuse to sign contracts I don't 100% agree with and refuse to do business with companies that I don't trust. I couldn't trust someone who didn't allow me to do what I wanted with something I purchased.

 

No. I'd never purchase from such a shady company. Those kinds of rules sound like I might not even get what I ordered unless I agreed to those rules.

I have three hybrid dolls. If the person had a problem with that I'd wish them luck and then make sure everyone knew what I thought. I don't mess around. You can't force someone not to do something with a thing they bought.

 

For me, it's like...as an artist, your goal can either be to make art for your own personal happiness and gain, or make art to make money. (These can be combined, of course! The best thing would be to make art and be happy and make money from it, obviously. But anyway-) If you want to make art just to make you happy and because you love to do it, then great! Keep those pieces and smile whenever you look at them. If you want to make art to make money, however, you're gonna have to make some sacrifices, and one of those is accepting that others can do whatever they want with your art. Most artists that are now famous (Van Gogh, Monet, etc.) originally tried to sell their art because, though they loved making art, they needed to support themselves. (Some of them had a very hard time doing even that.)

So...yeah, I don't think this business model can work. If you want your art to remain your own and only your own, never to be changed (other than copyright violations, of course), then you can't sell it. If you want to make money on your art and support yourself, then you have to accept that someone may do things with it you don't like. End of story. From my point of view, at least.

I mean, you can try to bind someone into a contract to not change your art, but...? Are you gonna get much business? Obviously not, especially not in a hobby like this. It just seems kind of dumb to me. If you want to make money (and if you're selling dolls then you obviously do), you have to have a model that works, and this doesn't seem like a smart way to go about it, in my opinion.

 

I think that this is absolutely ridiculous in ANY context honestly, even for pieces of true fine art or other incredibly detailed handmade artist dolls. If I buy an item, it becomes mine entirely. Obviously I don't own the concept of the item or any kind of copyright and I can't, say, send the doll off to be reproduced and resold for my own profit but if I want to take the object I just spent several hundred dollars on and repaint it or hack it apart with a dremel or toss it in the driveway and run it over with my dang car, I'm going to! If you are an artist trying to start a business selling your art, you cannot think of every item/piece you produce as your special baby that you are going to watch over and protect forever. There is no way to even ENFORCE the rules you might make up against modification to your items unless you plan on literally following everyone you sell to around until the end of time with, like, a spray bottle or something so you can squirt them like a misbehaving cat any time they go near some Winsor & Newton or sandpaper.

 

Mess! I could never purchase a doll under those conditions! It would feel too much like having a second mother! I'd be way too stressed to handle a doll like that for fear that the artist might be lurking in the bushes somewhere ready to press charges on me if I so much as sand an elbow! And unless the "Don't" rules are written in the most specific manner possible there just seems like there's too much of a chance to "ruin" her vision.

It's all groovy or whatever that she's anti mod, but what does "mod" even mean?? I mean, to me something like opening an eye isn't a mod, I look at it and call it "eye opening" but won't necessarily jump to call it an "eye mod". But what about her? I haven't the slightest clue what her own personal definition of mod is, so there I'd be, thinking that sanding a joint for mobility reason is just me making the posing easier, but the artist could very well run out of left field shouting "that's a mod, I'm calling the police!" and I'd be left confused at how repair work could be so vilified!

Honestly, where is HER line? I'd need to know her frame of mind extensively just to make sure I never cross over it!

*Quietly whispering* also I'm an artist too and would like to be given the chance to use a blank canvas to my discretion, even if that means tearing it down and rebuilding it.....

 

Yeah, they wouldn't be getting my money. No way I am buying from anyone who would presume they have a right to tell me how I play with a doll I bought with my money.

And good luck to this person if they think they could enforce their silly rules.

 

If they're doing one-of-a-kind sculpture pieces, then yes, I 'd agree to something like that; I'm likely to just resell it as-is if I decided it was no longer right for me. I think it's also fair to have these restrictions placed on, say, public sculpture; obviously you don't want someone graffiting slurs or whatnot on a finished piece. I think a good example of a case which these restrictions apply to is the bull on Wall Stress.

Personally, I'm much less likely to want to mod something if it comes to me "complete" as an art piece or sculpture as-is. But if this artist is selling blank sculpts, or pieces (heads, hands, bodies etc.) separately, then they're being sold for customization, and to claim otherwise alienates the audience.

 

(I like how MY comment was the only one to get deleted, but whatever... )
I still stand by my original opinion in that I would ABSOLUTLY NOT buy from an artist that demanded such a thing from their buyers, I mean how would someone know for certain that the people they sold to weren't modding or hybriding their doll? Would they stalk their buyer's online accounts and demand to see pictures of the doll regularly? Even so, unless the buyers posted pictures of their mods/hybrids the artist would never know for certain if someone had changed the doll to their liking...

Also the thought of trying to take people to court over a simple thing like hybriding a doll makes me laugh (I really like @errinreynolds scenario of how that would go down ), I mean, how would that work with an overseas buyer?

So really, like everyone else here has said, this is not the best hobby to try and enforce that kind of mentality. I'm sure there would be other doll hobbies where changing the way a doll comes originally isn't as commonplace but for BJD's it's pretty much 'the norm' and can't be controlled (nor should it, stunting creativity is super negative imo).

 

My comment was also removed, so don't feel bad. The moderators are just trying to do their job. It could have turned ugly and they have to be fair.

It really would be impossible to uphold certain laws, dolls like these would be high on the 'recast' wanted list because those re-casters don't have to demand one follow a contract. Depending on where they are based there would be ABSOLUTELY NOTHING that could be done about it. Its how sites like Alibaba maintain their business. Countries that can copy your items and sell them for pennies without legal repercussion do so. All you can do is grit your teeth and pray your customers prefer the real thing.

Excluding members of a hobby (especially a majority) is just asking for trouble.

 

Yours wasn't the only one, Odii. My initial reply to the thread was hit with the mod-hammer as well, though I'm still not sure exactly why. I said nothing particularly "personal" about the seller in question.

In any case, the terms they're demanding simply aren't practical or realistic, so I doubt there's any real chance of them being enforced. Like the situation with Hypermaniac and her opposition to resale, there's just no way to pull off that level of owner/market monitoring.

 

It'd have to be about the equivalent of plated in gold (so not actual gold, because I don't care, but perfect in every way), and still I wouldn't guarantee I still wouldn't do what I wanted with it, never post photos online, and tell everyone who saw it that it's a Pullip.

I'd probably wait to buy it off somebody from the secondhand market, however, just to avoid the artist--scary that people think like this! So vindictive! (Although perhaps my plan is similar right back.)

(Even after telling them, most of my family thinks my dolls are Pullips--apparently learning the name of my newest doll hobby is hard, which is fine, as I can't remember the model of my dad's tractor either.)

But perhaps I'm a bit too contrarian. Since a doll that's perfect in every way would never exist (I hybrid most of my dolls, some of which are 3+ colonies), I know I'm pretty safe to talk tough. (Although I'm not lying--if it was extraordinary I might be that one stubborn customer.)

For anything less than perfect I'd probably just ignore it, honestly. You can't reason with this type of...logic...and it's not worth the brain damage for "not my circus, not my monkey, not my problem."

 

Honestly, as surprised as I was to see the post deleted, it doesn't really matter... In the grand scheme of things, it's a minor point.

Anyway, you're right about the materials. If someone's really serious about the no-repainting/no-mods thing, resin just doesn't seem like a good choice, size and engineering aside. Maybe it's a "But I want it to be on-topic here for sales and marketing purposes"- thing?

Which brings up another interesting question... Would an unmodifiable resin doll( if that could somehow be in any way enforced), actually *be* on-topic? Things like changeable hair and eyes at least used to be on the requirements list.

 

HAHAHAHAHA! No. Two thirds of my dolls are modded and nobody tells me what to do, noooobody! Seriously, any company or artist that had a contract and said they would sue me for customizing my own dolls to my liking would not get my business. I buy a dress from the store, I expect to be able to shorten the skirt, change the sleeves, do whatever I want. I buy a car? I expect to be able to change the paint color and the rims and whatever I like. I buy a doll and even more so I expect to be able to add scars, elf ears, amputated limbs, cyborg parts, open or close eyes, etc...whatever I want since I bought it and I own it. I don't understand the mindset of not wanting people to customize the dolls you sell them, you're losing nothing. You still have the original and as many duplicates as you want, why do you care if one of the copies you sold is floating around out there with a unicorn horn or something? With that mindset, the company or artist should do OOAK statuettes that wont be customized, they shouldn't be doing BJDs which are all about customization and bringing your own imagination to life.

 

I personally would not buy a doll from a company with such rules. It's silly and unrealistic for this hobby.
Even if I was a doll maker and was proud of my work enough to sell it for a high dollar value I still wouldn't add a contract. I got my money from the customer, after that it's out of my hands. If I wanted something to stay in its original unmodded state I would not sell it and just have it in galleries.

It's not like the doll maker will knock on your door every month and ask to see your doll to make sure you didn't mod it or hybrid it! They wouldn't even have a way to find out about it if the owner wasn't into social media or didn't share their pictures anywhere.

 

Absolutely not, I would never even consider it. The beauty of BJDs is customizing them! If this artist wants to sell unaltered works they should sculpt stationary statues or something. I think the only restriction I would accept to a doll I bought is if the artist wanted to add a "if you are caught sending this doll to a recaster you're in shit" clause, because that's fair. Hard to track, but fair.

 

The artist is free to stipulate whatever rules they want, but they would definitely struggle to enforce any of these rules once a doll leaves their hands.

The artist would surely also want to know how any buyer interacts with dolls outside of the one they are buying from them, to avoid selling to someone who may mod or hybrid the doll.

Personally I wouldn't want continued contact and possible monitoring from the artist for any purchase made via them.

 

I would never agree to such a contract, no matter how much I might like the doll.

I came into this hobby from a love of modification, doing my own styling, and kit-building/kit-bashing. I love getting "kit" dolls the best, just a blank bunch of parts that I can do with as I please. There was a focus on that in the early days--Volks' motto was (and still is, mind) "We Seek Creativity." At the NY Dolpas I've been to, the Volks designers and sculptors were very excited to see what people had done with their dolls, limiteds included, modifications and body-swaps included, repainted dolls included. It would have been a very boring affair if everyone had brought in a bunch of perfectly-kept full-sets, each one exactly like the others.

In twelve years in this hobby, I've never known an artist or known of an artist who was *genuinely* resentful of what a doll's owner might do. Or if they did have problems, they have been pretty mum about it. For an artist to suggest such a contract, it strikes me as an insecurity about their own standing as an artist. And where does one draw the line? If the doll comes with a full-set outfit, then are we to never change clothes or wigs or eyes? Because those could be considered types of customization, and under such a contract be forbidden.

If this is an artist's feeling, then they need to consider a different medium through which to express themselves. As others have suggested, porcelain art dolls might be a better choice. But not resin BJDs, which from the early days have frequently been intended as a blank canvas, and indeed are frequently sold that way.

The owner's touch is what gives so much of the beauty and personality to these dolls, and if an artist is uncomfortable with an individual owner putting their own twist or interpretation on a doll, then that is very unfortunate for the artist, but also this is the absolutely wrong community to try to enforce such a narrowing mindset.

 

I think it's a hard one to really keep an eye on from the artists part. If she only sole 1 or 2 dolls then it's easy, but if she sold hundreds or thousands she never really know if what's being done to each doll.

And I doubt she'd have a legal leg to stand on. Once the object is modified it is no longer her creation it's now the intellectual/artistic property of the new creator/modifier. Take Warhol for example. His Campbell soup can is a clear ripoff of the promotional ads. But no legal action happend (partially because it's free pr, and partially because he changed it enough to not be a clear copy)

I'd venture that if you'd moded the features enough on the doll that if she was to take you to court over it l, she'd be laughed at.

As far as ordering from the artist I wouldn't bother. I hate stipulations, especially on my own property.

 

The whole BJD hobby was created by/for people who wanted customizable dolls. If someone was selling a resin cast doll with the no mods/ no reselling/ no hybrids stipulations I would probably pass on the doll. I mean, I if I didn't have the option to customize the doll to make it my own then what's the point? But I don't see how such a 'contract' would be enforceable anyway.

 

I don't think there would be anyway of them enforcing this, it would just be their preference that the dolls sold remain unmodified. That said I would not purchase a doll from them as I would not support them giving them money when they are employing scare tactics threatening you with the law because you modified a doll you bought.

 

Short answer: nope.
a seller can't make me pay full price for a product, but act as if they still own it and I'm just borrowing it. :T
If you lend your lawnmower to your neighboor and they break it, they owe you a lawnmower. If you GIVE or SELL your old lawnmower to your neighboor and they break it or take it apart and give the motor to their brother-in-law, they don't owe you sh*t!

 

Um....no.

To me it would be tyrannical for a company to demand a no mods or alterations clause on a product they are selling, whether it's shoes, purses, video games or bjds. I can understand copyright infringement issues, but commercial art being sold for a profit is mainly that--art for profit. Once it leaves the artist's hands and goes to a company/caster to be reproduced and sold, it loses their personal touch and therefore isn't really their art (in the personal sense anyways) anymore.

It's more understandable on OOAK pieces and works released in very limited runs, possibly meant for museums and exhibitions, but even then it isn't free from the possibility of being altered. Would the seller sue somebody for natural wear and tear or aging? For any possibly damage that might occur unintentionally? If, say--Picasso came back from the dead to see one of his works on display accidentally fall off and get damaged, would he pursue a lawsuit over the matter? Or DaVinci? Van Gogh? Probably not.

For me, personally...I wouldn't purchase something with such restrictions, especially a resin bjd. Customization is at the core of my interest in the hobby, and taking that right away from me drives me away from a sale. I'm not collecting bjds to sit and look pretty on a shelf with another person's vision. I'm creating characters with my own personal touch. It just wouldn't work for me.

 

It worked for Frank Lloyd Write. He nailed the furniture to the floor so folks could not RUIN his vision of what their house looked like. Changing the wallpaper was forbidden too.

I'm betting she's NOT Frank Lloyd Write and will have a hard time getting anyone to sign the contract!

I certainly would not.

 

I've already read something similar here while looking for random stuff in older threads. Some were against people modifying dolls and they talked about it being disrespectful to the artist.

As an artist myself, I ask: why?
I mean, if someone bought a work of mine and changed it to fit even better on their interests... that's good!

Think about it, there's so many stuff out there, but still a person have chosen your work to adopt and be creative around it. It's a part of you, your creation, that intertwines with someone's else creativity to become something new! Honestly, I can't think of it being anything other than flattering!

Answering the topic then, my answer would be no. If you create something for a market you need to be aware that people will embrace it in different forms, too much rules around it will bring many problems like the ones described by Velicifoxtor.