Luna Moon, Helius Sun & Esther Star Playing Cards live on KS

[guru]

The tuckbox was also an infringement but those guys (Durero) were not interested in pursuing it.

http://unitedcardists.com/viewtopic.php ... a3#p127301" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[akicer]

Found an interesting thing, the Chinese collectors/cardists are now calling them Bocopy instead of Bocopo lol

[Adonael]

I can't see how the tuck box was an infringement, sure it's similar enough to challenge, but it's a 50/50 chance who comes out of it the winner. Unless it functions in exactly the same way on a technical level (which could only be known by dissecting or having the schematics for both) you can't copyright a general idea, only how you make it happen.

But damn, that really is a blatant rip off of the artwork. How bloody easy would it have been to just knock up something similar? Very! How damn lazy do you have to be? WTF?

[guru]

I can't see how the tuck box was an infringement, sure it's similar enough to challenge, but it's a 50/50 chance who comes out of it the winner. Unless it functions in exactly the same way on a technical level (which could only be known by dissecting or having the schematics for both) you can't copyright a general idea, only how you make it happen.

But damn, that really is a blatant rip off of the artwork. How bloody easy would it have been to just knock up something similar? Very! How damn lazy do you have to be? WTF?

Durero came out with this packaging in 2010 and recieved many design awards for it. It is known in the packaging world as one of the most creative packaging designs already. The original & this tuckbox had exactly similar opening mechanism.

That said, I challenge the verbiage on the kickstarter camapign saying they got the idea while peeling an orange

[portcullis]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_moron_in_a_hurry" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[akicer]

okay, so let's just briefly run through all the now known ripped off decks bocopo has produced or attempted to produce through KS funding (although, many were still produced anyways because they're shady AF)... shall we:

• The Luna Moon Series, obviously
• Thread Cardistry Deck: funding suspended but decks had already been produced and were dumped as add-ons in another campaign
• Lost Deer Series: funding suspended but decks had already been produced anyways and are currently being sold
• Oriental Memory: tuck and faces ripped off
• The Mountain Calligraphy Deck: funding suspended but I'm sure we'll see 'em out there for sale eventually if they're not already out there

any others I'm missing that y'all can recall??

#BoycottBocopo

Amy I added some evidence to the Meow star thread lol

[guru]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_moron_in_a_hurry"

Just reiterating once again that I'd have liked if the campaign page had mentioned that the box was inspired by the original design by Durero but it was said to be Bocopo's or Kevin's own original design. Given most of Bocopo's decks are mired into controversy lately, it is a likely possibility that the playing card box design was taken from Durero. It doesn't matter to me whether it is termed as a copyright infringement and even Durero didn't pursue it. It is a matter of what principles someone follow when supporting or backing something.

[daddobrendt]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_moron_in_a_hurry"

It is a matter of what principles someone follow when supporting or backing something.

We’ll put. To that end, anyone else think there are a couple of 2018 UC DOTY awards that should be stripped?

[PipChick]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_moron_in_a_hurry"

It is a matter of what principles someone follow when supporting or backing something.

We’ll put. To that end, anyone else think there are a couple of 2018 UC DOTY awards that should be stripped?

funny, I was just mulling this over last night lol... any thoughts??

The Luna moon series won placement in the 'Best Tuck' and 'Best Innovation' categories... we can very easily strip those honors of recognitions if y'all feel they aren't deserved as they weren't actually original ideas and rather just blatantly ripped off from elsewhere... I personally don't want to stand in support of such bs. At the very least, an asterisk'd annotation I think should most certainly added in light of all this.

[theCapraAegagrus]

Found an interesting thing, the Chinese collectors/cardists are now calling them Bocopy instead of Bocopo lol

Accurate.

It makes me even more glad that I dropped my pledge at the 11th hour.

[Decknowledgy]

We’ll put. To that end, anyone else think there are a couple of 2018 UC DOTY awards that should be stripped?

Drop it and make an announcement out of it, because clearly on Bocopo's official account on WeChat, they're using the UC awards to promote themselves BIGTIME:

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/zgwLkGf4ygjzcpX6R_qkyQ

Btw, the link was shared to me by a well-known printer in Taiwan, and they say Bocopo's unethical business model has been well-known for a long time in that Chinese-speaking region.

[Eric Lee]

Really? Their that notorious in the region? Wow. Yes, please drop them and announce it across the different social media. They don't deserve it since the art is clearly ripped off. Teddy or any other WeChat users can help with spreading this on WeChat?

We should put a caveat in the UC DOTY 2019 about copyright issues and that the awards will be removed if these issues arise.

[Decknowledgy]

I don't use WeChat, (un)fortunately
The printer, actually TWO printers, have told me at the same time yesterday that Bocopo is notorious in the Chinese market for a long time. That's why things got international recently: Chinese customers were fed up with their practice and came together to spread the news on their social media, and then got picked up by some international folks living in China who shared the news.

That disclaimer would be extremely necessary for our next DOTY award.

[PipChick]

That disclaimer would be extremely necessary for our next DOTY award.

I'm already looking at drafting this up now for next year and how to rectify this past year's outcomes... consider it noted and it will be made abundantly clear that this is not at all acceptable and UC does not endorse or support anything thing of this nature.

I'm disgusted to learn that they are using UC and exploiting the honor they did not earn in the last year's DOTY event like this to capitalize and stake claim on the legitimacy of their work... Consider them the new poster child against such blatant copyright infringement practices from here on out until they can get their shit together.

#BocottBocopo

[macstrat]

I don't use WeChat, (un)fortunately
The printer, actually TWO printers, have told me at the same time yesterday that Bocopo is notorious in the Chinese market for a long time. That's why things got international recently: Chinese customers were fed up with their practice and came together to spread the news on their social media, and then got picked up by some international folks living in China who shared the news.

That disclaimer would be extremely necessary for our next DOTY award.

I'm already looking at drafting this up now for next year and how to rectify this past year's outcomes... consider it noted and it will be made abundantly clear that this is not at all acceptable and UC does not endorse or support anything thing of this nature.

I'm disgusted to learn that they are using UC and exploiting the honor they did not earn in the last year's DOTY event like this to capitalize and stake claim on the legitimacy of their work... Consider them the new poster child against such blatant copyright infringement practices from here on out until they can get their shit together.

#BocottBocopo

I do use WeChat. If you can send me copy, I can translate and post it.

[PipChick]

I do use WeChat. If you can send me copy, I can translate and post it.

I'mma spend some time drafting and putting something together later and I'll be sure to post about as soon as it's ready - thanks mac!

.

But the question I now would like to hear from everyone is thoughts on whether or not:

a.) the DOTY award recognition received in the 2 categories this deck placed in should be stripped and rescinded from Kevin Yu & Bocopo completely rather than just annotating it's infringement of copyright and violation of DOTY guidelines of UC's standard of ethics

and b.) if so, should those placements remain vacant or reallocated/awarded to the next runner ups in each of the categories?

Any thoughts and opinions on the matter in how we as a community should handle this would be greatly appreciated - thanks!

[MagikFingerz]

a) Personally, I'd be fine with either course of action. I have a feeling Bocopo is going to keep using the awards as promotional material whatever we do. Rescinding the awards completely might set a better precedent for similar occurrences in the future, though.

b) Giving them to the runners up could be seen as unjust, making the votes of everyone who voted for the Bocopo decks basically wasted. I say if we do rescind the awards, it's more fair to leave them vacant.

[theCapraAegagrus]

1. Publicly slam Bocopy, rescind the award, and provide them with a new award specially created for them. Something like "Biggest F&*king Loser That Can't Even Draw a Perfect Circle with a Protractor".

2. Leave the award vacant.

[STLBluesNut]

I feel on a deck that the art was blatantly copied, remove the award and give it to the runner up if you still have the tallys. In the case of a physical tuck packaging design, that's a little more grey for me. Everything that came in a box would be a design RIP off at that point.

Should we come out against anyone using a cut out? A tuck seal? A glued flap instead of a tuck flap? Embossing? Foil? I mean, someone had to do those first.

Sent from my Galaxy 8 using Tapatalk

[theCapraAegagrus]

I feel on a deck that the art was blatantly copied, remove the award and give it to the runner up if you still have the tallys. In the case of a physical tuck packaging design, that's a little more grey for me. Everything that came in a box would be a design RIP off at that point.

Should we come out against anyone using a cut out? A tuck seal? A glued flap instead of a tuck flap? Embossing? Foil? I mean, someone had to do those first.

Sent from my Galaxy 8 using Tapatalk

The tuck design is fairly complex and unique, my friend.

You're painting a vague picture against something distinctly particular (that has its own patent in its distribution industry).

The tuck is a ripoff that they claim is their own design. It isn't. While it doesn't violate any regulations - it is false advertising.

The falsely advertised "original tuck design" houses an IP illegality. It deserves any and all awards stripped regardless of other law-abiding products.

[STLBluesNut]

I understand that view. Amy asked for opinions on the matter and that was mine. I think in some areas thinks become a bit grey when one starts talking copying, plagiarism, inspired by, in the style of, etc.

Sent from my Galaxy 8 using Tapatalk

[BaconWise]

But the question I now would like to hear from everyone is thoughts on whether or not:

a.) the DOTY award recognition received in the 2 categories this deck placed in should be stripped and rescinded from Kevin Yu & Bocopo completely rather than just annotating it's infringement of copyright and violation of DOTY guidelines of UC's standard of ethics

and b.) if so, should those placements remain vacant or reallocated/awarded to the next runner ups in each of the categories?

I would say if there is legitimate infringement, the accolades should be stripped. If the deck won any particular category, we should update the award to the runner-up. If it just placed, we should leave the spot vacant and, in either case, have some placeholder text like "removed due to copyright infringement" or something.

In light of what Teddy said about them publicly referencing their awards (why wouldn't they?!), there should be a public announcement made across various channels. I'm torn between if the announcement should be short and sweet/matter-of-fact or a lengthy overview of Bocopo including international sentiment and past examples. I guess we will let Amy do what she does best This is a shame, though.

[Decknowledgy]

I'd say make the Tuck of the Year vacant and strip them of their title. Why?
Because although the project is taken down on KS, you could still see its short description if you go to p.1 of this thread. It literally reads:

An illuminating experience that transcends status quo. The pioneer redesigned case that takes your imagination to the Moon and beyond.

Hope this helps folks decide what to do with their award.

[hsbc]

Pretty sure I voted for the tuck case Retract the award!

[macstrat]

I understand that view. Amy asked for opinions on the matter and that was mine. I think in some areas thinks become a bit grey when one starts talking copying, plagiarism, inspired by, in the style of, etc.

Sent from my Galaxy 8 using Tapatalk

I dont know if the award should be stripped, per se. If anything, I think it should be marked as falsely advertised and any future decks by Bocopo should be prohibited for DOTY consideration. It is a MASSIVE grey area that lives in a broken system. Just because a complaint was filed, doesnt mean it holds water. Kickstarter covers their ass, and thats to be commended, but it doesnt make the charges legally upstanding. Should this change, I will happily stand behind having their award stripped.

It does beg the question however: How do we prevent this from happening in the future?

[theCapraAegagrus]

I dont know if the award should be stripped, per se. If anything, I think it should be marked as falsely advertised and any future decks by Bocopo should be prohibited for DOTY consideration. It is a MASSIVE grey area that lives in a broken system. Just because a complaint was filed, doesnt mean it holds water. Kickstarter covers their ass, and thats to be commended, but it doesnt make the charges legally upstanding. Should this change, I will happily stand behind having their award stripped...

The infringement claim is about as transparently legitimate as can be. There is literally no defense for Bocopy stealing intellectual property. This is regarding the back design of the cards and not the legal (but not by original design) tuck case.

A product that has ANY IP theft should be COMPLETELY removed from any contention of award/reward.

This is a good example of why the randomizing of rewards for participating is a good thing. If it was "who got the most popular votes right" then this would affect their "score".

And, yes, Bocopy should be completely banned from any future nominations in UC DotY contests.

[rousselle]

The possibility that the tuck design had been copied from a pre-existing idea was already known before voting commenced for the DOTY awards. A decision had not been made prior or during voting saying that the tuck would be an invalid choice. Since there is no new information about the legitimacy of the tuck's mechanical design, I see no reason to nullify those DOTY votes.

In general, I am not in favor of rescinding the award unless new information calls it into question.

The only new information here is that the graphic design elements were plagiarized. Those elements did not contribute to why these two specific categories were awarded to this deck.

THAT SAID, if we decide to rescind the awards that this deck received, I believe the category should be awarded to the next highest vote getter(s). If we are disqualifying these tucks because they were *not* the most innovative of the year, we should still acknowledge those innovations that *were* stand-outs for 2018. The best way to proceed, it seems to me, is to simply nullify the votes that had been cast for Luna/Helius/et al and re-award based upon the remaining votes.

I realize that at the moment, I may sound like a minority voice here, but given that we allowed these votes to stand when the votes were counted and we knew then what we know now about the mechanical design, I think it's disingenuous to pull the award back at this point.

See also:

* OJ Simpson is still a Hall of Fame running back for the NFL, even though he was later accused of murder and convicted of felony theft.
* Harvey Weinstein's movies that earned Best Picture are still considered to be Best Pictures, even though he is currently being tried for rape and has been convicted (in the court of public opinion) of being a Huge Gaping Asshole. Alas, he had already been known to be a Huge Gaping Asshole at the time he was funding those movies.
* Mel Gibson is still Best Director for Braveheart, even though he, too, has since been outed as an asshole.

Etc, etc.

[Merlebird]

As I see it, rescinding the awards and advancing the runners-up in that category is actually not terribly difficult in this particular instance, just due to the ties in the categories they placed for:

'DOTY' AWARD WINNERS
BEST TUCK CASE

• 1st PLACE :
  • Luna Moon / Helius Sun / Ester Star: Deluxe Editions, designed by Kevin Yu & produced by BOCOPO (USPCC)
  
  
  2nd PLACE - TIE:
  • ARABESQUE: Collector's Editions, designed by Lotrek (OPC)
  • HANA: Signature Editions, designed by Steve Minty (EPCC)
  
  
  4th PLACE :
  • House of the Rising Spade: Gatekeeper, designed by Lorenzo Gaggiotti - Stockholm17 (Cartamundi / USPCC & tuck by OPC)
  
  Honorable Mentions :
  • 2018 NPCCD Series, designed by Alexander Chin (USPCC)
  • Deck the Halls, designed by Jackson Robinson - Kings Wild Project (Shuffled Ink & tuck by EPCC)

[...]

BEST INNOVATION

• 1st PLACE :
  • 2018 NPCCD Series, designed by Alexander Chin (USPCC)
  
  
  2nd PLACE - TIE :
  • Luna Moon / Helius Sun / Ester Star: Deluxe Editions, designed by Kevin Yu & produced by BOCOPO (USPCC)
  • DAMASK, designed by Lotrek (OPC)
  
  
  4th PLACE :
  • COPAG 310, produced by Cartamundi (Cartamundi)
  
  Honorable Mentions :
  • NEO: WAVE Ultra Edition, designed by Montenzi (USPCC & Cartamundi)
  • Deck the Halls, designed by Jackson Robinson -Kings Wild Project (Shuffled Ink & tuck by EPCC)

Best Innovation is simplest: make Damask the sole 2nd place winner, advancing Copag 310 to 3rd. No new placements would need to be made.

Best Tuck could be a bit thornier, depending on your point of view, since the tie is not in Luna Moon's placement. Bumping Arabesque and Hana up to a tied 1st would leave only two placements. I'm not sure how Amy handled honorable mentions - that is, if multiple listings indicate a tie for runner-up, or if the first listed deck received more votes than the honorable mention below it - so depending on how that worked 2018 NPCCD could be advanced to 4th, or 2018 NPCCD and Deck the Halls could tie for 5th.

I think vacating Luna Moon's Best Tuck placement entirely - that is, leaving it blank and not advancing the runners-up - would be the wrong call. It would, in effect, allow Bocopo to continue to cheat their runners-up out of awards they would likely otherwise have won, even if Bocopo could no longer (legitimately) claim the awards themselves.

I think a lifetime disqualification for Bocopo from consideration for future DOTY awards is warranted. In the case of Luna Moon specifically I'm somewhat more ambivalent, since the issue of possible IP infringement vis-à-vis the tuck design was known to UC users even prior to the completion of the campaign but didn't seem to dissuade DOTY voters. It could be argued, as Tom did, that rescinding the awards would set an important precedent, but I think it's a hard sell otherwise.

In short: everything Allan already said while I was writing this. Whoops.

It does beg the question however: How do we prevent this from happening in the future?

There's really nothing we can reasonably do that we aren't already doing. Demanding to see sketches, draft work, or other potential "proof of originality" for every nominee just isn't feasible, to my mind, and even if it were it wouldn't be foolproof - as any high school student who's written a final paper and then invented a "rough draft" after the fact to satisfy a class requirement could tell you. There is always going to be the risk that plagiarized work could compromise the awards, and the recourse for that is always going to have to be decided on a case-by-case basis.

[rousselle]

I *do* favor a lifetime ban against Bocopo and their many aliases, going forward. And, I do not think it's a bad thing to put an asterisk after their name where they appear in the DOTY2018 awards.

[Bradius]

There are also a number of false infringement claims. We shouldn’t get in the middle of these disputes in general. However, we have voiced concerns about Bocopo before the UC deck of the year contest to be fair. Given the fairly strong evidence brought forward, I would find that if we did decide to remove them from the awards, we would be reasonably be justified in doing it.

I’ll leave the decision up to UC management.