Currently I created an extremely accurate re-creation of the domino crown, and are wondering if this can get me thrown at a wall for being published if a foolish user decides he doesn’t like the way my item looks.
Re-Creation Shape:
Official Domino Crown Shape:
If you’re asking this, it implies you know that this is probably against the rules and is dubious.
Copyright and IP is complicated and there’s no one answer. If you absolutely HAVE to “recreate” something, doing an original spin on a concept or notable deviation is probably the best path forward. However, even then you’re still opening yourself up to risk. You might be fine for days, weeks, months - then suddenly you get a takedown years later. You’re actively preparing a timebomb that may or may not go off at any time.
TL;DR: Would advise against making ripoffs. Make something original. Better for you, better for the community.
Most hats get taken down because some people feel like they control the Moderation Team due to a simple form that they’re abusing, this question could go for anything remotely similar to a Real Roblox Item, the question is DSA, and you’re implying that it has something to do with DMCA, sure, it might in some aspect but a more common problem would be users abusing the form to get hats taken down that are remotely similar, and if my hat may be too similar in a way.
Such hat would likely not go on-sale for, obvious reasons, which I feel could negate this issue barely but I still felt it was more of a problem of abuse.
It’s not really abuse at that point. Assuming that the moderation team is actually reviewing the proof of ownership, then the items taken down were taken down rightfully. Don’t assume that just because something exists that it means that it’s allowed. It may more accurately be that it hasn’t been reported or claimed as of yet. Roblox limiteds are especially high on Roblox’s list of protected assets.
As @cloakedyoshi has said, you should make something more original. You could model all sorts of different crowns that wouldn’t cause issues. It doesn’t matter if your crown isn’t 1:1, it’s visually identical and that’s more than enough in most cases. I’d recommend looking at things with empathy to see if you’d like it if somebody did the same to your own work. Obviously that doesn’t overrule reality, but that should help you decide if something is morally acceptable, and also likely if it’s legally acceptable (this does not replace proper research).
Though if this is just for your experience, I don’t think it would matter if you used your own or the original as either are allowed to be used there. These restrictions are only for the marketplace and outside of Roblox.
I feel like it should be based on how the model is genuinely made rather how it looks on the outside, which would preferably be better in telling if something is the same or isn’t, but sure, it is pretty 1:1 basically, I guess I’ll make a few touch-ups.
When trying to logically figure out the morality of things, you should look at the principles and apply it to other things to see how it fairs. If it worked the way you want it to, you could model any IP and get away with it as long as it doesn’t have the exact same polygons and vertices. You’d be able to model a Mario character and profit off of it without fear of Nintendo striking you down. Well that’s a bad example, Nintendo is notorious for their “overreaching” against fan games, but the logic still applies. This would obviously be terrible as nobody would be able to protect their IPs. Simply modifying it may not always be enough either, as that’s sort of like putting a different outfit on Mario, it’s still Mario. This is why I’d recommend either getting permission, which is unlikely in this case, or just make your own crown that isn’t obviously a Roblox limited or a direct copy of anything else that would be protected.
I would likely not copy anything outside of Roblox, I’m aware it’s foolish to even attempt such a thing like most people on the website believe otherwise.
This is more like a full-scale re-creation, though the most I did was add spikes around it, it would be a likely difference in the texture, and the model. People who upload such assets like Mario are the equivalent of changing the color of the texture and publishing it to the steam workshop as they likely ported it from SM64 instead of creating it on their own.
It wouldn’t matter if they had created it on their own or not. That’s not the point. You can’t just sell something that somebody else owns. You can make something “inspired” by it, but it really does need to be different enough to avoid a claim, or worse, getting sued.
As other people said, you can recreate items like this, but question yourself if it’s morally acceptable to publish it as a near 1:1 copy even knowing what the Domino crown was used for: Domino Crown | Roblox Wiki | Fandom
The additional texture was likely going to be centered around “Black Iron” instead of the golden one, I was likely not going to ripoff something make-a-wish as I was planning to purchase a Black Iron accessory so it would go with what I was wearing, I understand it shouldn’t be extremely 1:1 so I decided to tweak it.
I’ve seen a multitude of items regarding these and not once has one of them gotten sued for it, though I do believe such items get “taken down” because usually users have no moral standing to even create it themselves, rather flash a Discord Server for “limited drops”, though I’ll be sure to edit it but it’s not really clear how far something must be edited for it to be viable on it’s own.
Nobody wants to sue because it costs money. This is why platforms such as Roblox and YouTube have DMCA systems in place. It protects you from getting sued while also making it easy for copyright holders to remove assets that they don’t approve of. My main point is that it doesn’t matter if it was directly copied or made from scratch. It’s only the likeness that matters. You can argue that if you want, but that’s how copyright law is. If you want to defend your inspired work, you’ll have to dispute any claims, but note that doing so may result in harsher measurements. YouTube specifically warns you of this if you attempt to file a counter claim. It’s an expensive endeavor that I wouldn’t recommend unless you’re certain you can both afford it and win. Though in this case, as long as you don’t dispute it, the worst that can happen is your content getting removed and you potentially getting a warning on your account.
I’m only saying this to both warn you and to dispel any misconceptions. But if you think your asset is different enough and you wish to take the risk, by all means, go for it. I would simply recommend that you work on more original assets instead.
This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
