01-24-2009, 04:29 AM
<!--quoteo(post=294242:date=Jan 23 2009, 11:09 PM:name=puckface)<div class=\'quotetop\'>QUOTE(puckface @ Jan 23 2009, 11:09 PM) <a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=294242\"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class=\'quotemain\'><!--quotecIt's not always just about "thats our character, you cant use it". Often times, some companies feel threatened by artists who use their characters while they still offer replicas or other products of the sort.<!--QuoteEnd</div><!--QuoteEEndInteresting point, Puckface.... However, in my opinion, it's not so much an issue of "being threatened," as it might just be simple economics? I'm not sure.New Line certainly has the money to hire a seriously talented sculptor to produce dead-on masks (or even pulled directly from movie molds) of it's licensed characters if it wanted to, however it realizes that there isn't a big enough market to warrant such a production at that cost.Companies that have been in business for awhile know that the only way to make money off of a halloween mask is to put little money in the production process and cut down manufacturing costs. The real draw for the consumer to buy the mask is in the licensed name, not as much the image (...at least to the "I wear a Halloween mask once a year crowd" - who doesn't inhabit this board.). Because of this, Big Name Copyright Owners will never sell the copyrights to a smalltime mask manufacturer not because it feels threatened by it, as much as it knows that the smalltime mask maker would never fork over as high a royalty or percentage profit as the Copyright Owner would demand.Certainly, as the business world would dictate - if it were economically feasible and someone (meaning a big company) could be making serious money off of it.....it would already be happening. The bottomline of why it doesn't is because mask-loving communities like this one......is such an insignificant portion of the consumer world.The only potential exception is the growing-interest in the film prop/bust/helmet community which has been successful in manufacturing big dollar items like Sideshow 1:1 busts and full scale Darth Vader helmets. My only thought on why this could be different is because perhaps people are collectors are more willing to fork over more money for collectibles that are more durable than latex, a naturally decaying substance? Not sure.Sorry for the long post, but the question got my mind going.....What do you guys think?