Mandala claiming Copyright on Real Life items πŸ˜‘

What can we say when a designer who is inspired by a real life item copies that item to the dot and then claim copyright in Second Life.

We can see that Mandala is hanging that copyright police all over the walls in his shop (two times on the same wall) , in his profile, allover marketplace and GOD knows where more when in fact most of his items are perfect copies from famous RL brandsπŸ€”πŸ˜ such as Dior items as shown above in the picture.

7 thoughts on “Mandala claiming Copyright on Real Life items πŸ˜‘

  1. Of course he has no legal standing here, the Marketplace Listing Guidelines has this to say:

    “Branding Guidelines

    Branded items may be listed or sold only by the brand or intellectual property owner or its authorized agents. A “branded item” is an item that:
    replicates or closely imitates the appearance of a real-world physical product of a brand owner (for example, items that replicate the appearance of brands of cars, jewelry, or shoes that are available in the real world)”

    However, we do not know whether Mandala has a license to use the Dior brand in SL, and if he has, then it would be acceptable to replicate the items in SL.


    • That rule is generally enforced more on items with branded logos such as Nike, Reebok, Apple, Disney, etc. If there’s no logo, it’s much harder to police up unless the actual designer files a report. It’s one of the reasons why you see real-life purses with logo prints on them everywhere, like Louis Vuitton, or with big bold logos on them like Chanel. It’s a part of the look that enhances the desire for it.


  2. It does seem a bit absurd to threaten to sue or file a complaint when it really wasn’t Mandala’s original idea to begin with – digital or not. I still love Mandala’s jewelry though and always have. I just wouldn’t want to be Kikunosuke if/when Dior ever gets wind of it. lol


  3. For copyright postings such as this, it appears to be directed towards the copy of the digital design itself, not the concept, since it is copied from a real design. This is to warn that their digital creation is protected and will be fought for if someone tries to copybot it. They don’t specifically say that this design concept of the jewelry is theirs and no one can copy it, so in that essence they are in the clear when it is true to life copies. As for copyright of a real life designer’s works, that can be debatable but the legality lies between the real life designer and them.

    Most clothing concepts cannot be copyrighted unless it falls under ‘art forms’ such as extreme avant garde due to clothing being considered an utilitarian item. Jewelry is copyrighted in a similar fashion but it too is hard to enforce unless the item is of an innovating and unique design. I brushed on this in a blog post.


  4. I would guess that he should be a little careful with the threat of cooyright infringement since his designs are copies of real life designs. I can’t even seem to justify threatening people in SL with cooyright infringement either since the design isnt technically an original SL design. I could be wrong though and I find this interesting. Anyone else have an answer?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s