Wasted Fett Recasting MachineCraft Metal Parts

[Wasted Fett]

You forget where alllll the hero casts came from. And who Gino sold those to. And where you play in that game.

I don’t want anything from you. I’m confident you will lie regardless of the outcome. Thankfully this isn’t your first or even 2nd recasting offense, you’ve just been smart enough not to sell those things here.

I do not make, interpret, or enforce the rules of this board - The admins do. Looks like that is our next stop.

 

[Art Andrews]

Thankfully this isn’t your first or even 2nd recasting offense, you’ve just been smart enough not to sell those things here.

You forget where alllll the hero casts came from. And who Gino sold those to. And where you play in that game.

It was only a matter of time before "past sins" were brought into this debate, but they don't play into our consideration of the current situation so leave those slings and arrows at the door and let's stay focused on the issue at hand.

 

[Art Andrews]

They look strikingly similar, but not identical. Obviously, they're representing the same thing, so that's always going to occur, especially as they are fairly generic shapes. Surely, once the height and widths are the same everything else will be more or less the same on the back of it?

Not to derail the current discussion, but I want to speak to this as a notion in general as I see it posted often when there are arguments regarding recasting.

The general gist of the idea is "if you are both trying to replicate the same thing and you are both good, your items should be very close."

This is a reasonable assumption to make and feels logical on the face of it, but as someone who has spent years with the best possible technology, the best possible reference, and the best possible artists at my disposal, I can tell you that this is an erroneous assumption to make. Even with all of the above at my fingertips, replication is messy and far less precise than one might think.

From afar two replicas may look alike because both are replicating the look of an original, but they won't be the same and in fact, if you are able to compare them using tools like a 3D scanner, you will quickly find just how great those differences are even though to the eye they look strikingly similar.

Obviously, when it comes to turned metal pieces with precise measurements it is MORE probable that pieces will appear closer to one another and have similar measurements, but even then, it is very unlikely for them to be exactly the same or even exceedingly similar. A general inspection may appear that way, but when you get down to measuring each piece, they won't be unless 1) one accurately replicated the other or 2) they worked from similar base information. Don't get me wrong. It is entirely possible that two people will stumble upon an exact measurement without the above two, but extremely unlikely that they would create nearly identical items without one of the two above coming into play.

Also, the idea that measurements will "fall in line" if one or two measurements are known is not accurate. You can do your very best to determine unknown measurements given known, but even then, if you give known measurements to three different people, their findings for the unknown are not likely to be as similar as one might think, even if all three are talented and skilled at finding the unknown.

 

[intwenothor]

Thank you both for such detailed answers.

As I stated, this is far from my area of expertise. I based my view on having done applied maths at A level at school. This is sometimes called maths and mechanics. To me, my understanding makes mathematical sense.

I don't know what the US equivalent for A levels is. The point is that I'm pretty good at maths, and my view is informed by that. Other than art, and physics, which is almost the same thing in many respects, it was the only thing I was any good at. Whilst it's been a long time since I went to school, I'm sure the same principles still apply.

Anyway, what's the decision; has machine proved his case? My understanding, with recasting accusations, is that the onus usually lies with the accuser to prove their case, rather than for the accused to defend.

 

[Art Andrews]

Anyway, what's the decision; has machine proved his case? My understanding, with recasting accusations, is that the onus usually lies with the accuser to prove their case, rather than for the accused to defend.

We are still looking at the evidence provided... and you are correct. Per our Community Guidelines, Section 3B:

"If anyone believes their item has been recast by a member, they are encouraged to provide proof to our staff, with the understanding that the burden of proof lies solely with the accuser and that members will be considered innocent unless clearly proven otherwise by the aggrieved party."

 

[Art Andrews]

We have taken a thorough look at the accusations Machinecraft has made against Wasted Fett. After taking a careful look at Machinecraft's parts and Wasted Fett's part, we have found that Wasted Fett's replicas include virtually all of the measurements unique to Machinecraft's replicas.

Per our Community Guidelines: "Deliberately recasting another member’s creation without consent is not supported by our communities."

Because of these findings, we can no longer support allowing Wasted Fett to sell or promote his products here or on any of our platforms.

At this point, we consider this matter closed.