That would make a great self-watering Chia pet.
Why, is there a statute of limitations on creating figurines of iGadget idols?![]()
No, but apparently there's a statute of limitations on reading and/or understanding certain laws.
The law expressly forbids the use of person's likeness, voice, or signature without express permission of said person or their family for the person's entire lifetime and for a period of 70 years after their death. The creators of this figurine violated this law on two counts: likeness, and voice.
This is unfortunate (for those that really wanted one), but not unexpected.
I guess I don't know how I feel about such a thing being created. We can get figurines of various people in U.S. History, however, there aren't many business icons that come to mind.
I am curious as to how the IP on this works, because I have seen, and know people with Ballmer Bobble-heads (with a striking likeness mind you) that somehow came into production.
Versus said:What the hell is "creepy" about a realistically sculpted doll? All you people that collect iThings do realize that there are others out there that collect stamps, salt shakers, and yes, toys and action figures, right?
Is this "creepy"?
![]()
How about this?
![]()
I understand why his family would be upset, and I also get why Legal action could be taken. It's probably not a good idea to go making something like this without permission, especially from Apple, but to criticize anyone who may have wanted one is pretty hypocritical for a group of individuals who stand in line for telephones, no?
Just sayin. Now down vote away!![]()
You really have to be cheesy to think you can profiteer off his image and still be respected for saying you admire him.
Okay, let's be realistic. This was not motivated by any love for Steve Jobs. This was nothing more than a naked attempt to cash in on the emotions we all feel for an iconic man who changed the world. Had this truly been based on altruistic motives, the maker would have been donating all profits to pancreatic cancer research. Pure, naked capitalism.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)
Well the guy that wrote the biography is getting profit out of Steve Jobs, isn't he?
Yes, but the author and publishers actually had an agreement with Jobs to publish the book - They get to make the decision on when to publish.Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)
Again. You mean like hurrying the release of his Authorized biography? I don't really see a difference.
This is a very cut-and-dry case.
Try to make an Elvis figurine, and the Elvis estate will be after you.
Private citizens are protected. Notice how often this all persons fictitious disclaimer is used at the end of movies:
because the law states that for private citizens, which is what Steve Jobs is, you cannot use their likeness unless approval is given from them or their estate.
Public citizens, like the Pope, the President, a mayor of a city CAN be used. (Note that 'Public' does not mean the same thing as 'Popular', as movie stars are 'Popular' but not 'Public')
Unfortunately, the anti-Apple fandroids here don't get the difference.
Yes, but the author and publishers actually had an agreement with Jobs to publish the book - They get to make the decision on when to publish.
The book was pushed ahead yes, but the publisher has the right to do that usually.
Why, is there a statute of limitations on creating figurines of iGadget idols?![]()
Somehow this figure is creepy... >_>
I'm sure some Apple zealots are going to miss their 12 inches of Steve...
Apple and Steve's family have every right, both legal and personal, to not allow this figurine this soon after Steve's death.
Except the publisher was doing exactly what the deceased would have wanted. The family knew the book was going to come out anyway - it was fully authorized. I don't see this as the same thing since we are talking about something that Jobs knew and wanted to be released. You are quibbling about the date being insensitive. Trouble is, we are talking about something that was planned to be released anyway.BTW my posts were missing the respective Qoutes.
That's precisely the point, it was authorized, Yes. They get the decision when to publish, Yes, but they could have delayed the publication out of respect for the family's grieving but No, they decided they would sell more copies if they publish so close to his death.
Rumor doesn't equal fact.Wasn't there a rumor on this site that there will be a revised version of the book coming out with the missing bits they didn't finish for doing this? Double profits.