An aryballos shaped like a hedgehog
Weird Pollux question: where are my pot people?!?
Pollux says there is a type of jar called an ἐχῖνος, which LSJ glosses as a jar with a wide mouth. Why?! What is hedgehoggy about it? It does not appear to be hedgehog shaped and is just in a list of cooks’ equipment.
#classicsblueky
#Hedgehog alert!
A small, round clay pottery piece shaped like a hedgehog. It has zigzags cut over the surface to look like spines and a basic set of features. An opening in the pot forms the mouth and makes it look like it is gasping in shock.
Neolithic hedgehog jar has seen your fanfic reading list
Magical little spot. When I was there, I looked up and saw two eagles circling a nearby peak.
🔥🔥🔥
So much for "Don't flame me! I'm just saying this is a real topic that needs to examined."
Andy, creating a new work based on copyrighted work is a settled case of violating IP. The photo's subject is irrelevant.
A well-known example is the artist Shepard Fairey's "hope" poster for Barack Obama (see Wikipedia), also in my thread. I won't litigate this with you further. Peace out
Clearly, you disagree with that, but that doesn't make you "provably" right, either.
What we do know is that copyrighted photos were used to make another work, and that *is* an IP violation.
I have no more time for this, so carry on but I'm done.
2/2
Nor can you substantiate your assertions Andy.
It's an area not defined by name in IP law, because it hasn't been addressed yet, and that's what my thread was about.
If a private owner doesn't want others to make unauthorised reproductions and sell them for profit, I think that's up to them. 1/2
A shape cannot be copyrighted (that's in IP law). But it's not a general shape. It's a specifc and particular object, privately owned.
I have to get back to doing archaeology now.
The last thing I will say is that it may take a lawsuit to settle the IP case law going forward.
As eBay ruled it an IP violation, and (I'm told) the owner is getting a trademark, trend seems to favour ownership rights.
Any IP attorneys out there?
And what law are you basing this assertion on? "it's doubtful that making a model based on an object that appears in multiple photographs is a breach of copyright."
Copyright is copyright. "Multiple" is irrelevant. Public display is irrelevant. Seeing something doesn't make it public domain.
Explain how someone can make a 3D model of the dodecahedron in question, without using photographs, all of which are copyrighted?
They told me they did trademark it. The owners assert that they do own its likeness, and if they don't want copies sold, without their express permission, that's their right. Apparently, the UK IP law agrees with them. Also, don't come at me because of what the owners did. (Are you an IP lawyer?)
18) No one has really thought these issues all the way through, but it has happened before. Coins were faked in antiquity, 19th C foundries made thousands of replicas, and antiquities are faked today, on the regular.
17) This need for taking a position applies to many objects, now including those original artworks that only exist in 3D printing in art museums. Do those artists want the software the works were made from to not belong to them, because of the medium? Did they think about that?
16) Somewhere in between, some best practices need to be articulated around respecting owners' rights, making models available for education/research, and identifying replicas and differentiating them from ancient artefacts. It's really difficult. Currently, it's like the wild, wild West out there.
15) I also know (believe me) that there is a deep and evergreen interest in Roman dodecahedra by the public.
14) There are a fair number of privately owned dodecahedra out there, and their owners are concerned about the value, rarity, and authenticity of their objects, and that's fair.
13) But there's also an attitude—not so cool—that everything on the internet is up for grabs and copyright and ownership rights mean nothing. That's not okay. As archaeologists with an ethical code about proper citation, we should care about copyrights.
12) We are at a point in time when there is democratised technology for making things at home that used to be fiendishly difficult to create (I know, from experimental bronze casting doecahedra!), and that's cool.
11) I'm sure the seller on EBay isn't a big-time nefarious dealer in fake antiquities, but he's not just a hobbyist making one for his own pleasure, either, if he's selling them for money. He wasn't giving it away pro bono for the good of hard-working cash-strapped volunteer community archaeology.
10) I'm not excited about authenticating fake vs ancient dodecahedra for the rest of my career in archaeology.
9) People can and do sell fake bronze dodecahedra as authentic artefacts on eBay. I have tried to report them, with little success. (Note that EBay recently changed its policy on fakes, and now it only responds to reports of IP violations, which are clearly a liability to them because of IP law.)
8) Where there is a profit motive, fakes can and will be made and sold, which, yes, damages the owners and archaeology in general. It's simple to convert a plastic 3D model into a bronze casting and call it "real." Check YouTube. It's been done with dodecahedra.
7) What we're experiencing now with 3D models is almost identical to the proliferation of unmarked replicas of the 19th C in coins and figurines. In a matter of minutes, even with good intentions and acknowledgements by the first maker, these things rapidly become fakes in the marketplace.
6) I sometimes regret putting so much info about it on the PAS, b/c first, it wasn't a detectorist find, and second, the measurements just help people make copies for sale, which as I said above, the owners don't want.
3) As a result, the NDHAG has lost the opportunity to sell its own reproduction models as a fundraiser to finance continuing the dig. They toyed with it, but now it's not an option.
I am planning my ultimate dodecahedra tour for the Christmas holidays this year. I can't see them all, but I can tick off some of them...