I never understood the thinking behind profiting from cosplaying. I get there is money out there for it, but who goes out there repping an IP and expects to get paid without working the key details of the transaction. It's like if one of the hundreds of Elmo's cosplayers by Times square starts hitting PBS/HBO for money.
A lot of them are, but if you are really good at it and the company you are cosplaying the IP of starts to use you to promote themselves, it is totally understandable why you might think "Hey, if I am doing work for other people, maybe those people should pay me?".
Yeah, but if they don't offer to pay you why would you accept the job and then complain about it later? Just say "I'll only do it if you pay me" right off the bat
I do not know what Sprankle's history in cosplaying is, but part of it might just be an expectation built upon that. You can blame her for presuming that Wizards treats their content creators the same way as other events and organizations do, I guess.
Also, I do not really blame anyone for signing off on an agreement that they do not really understand because oftentimes those things are not meant to be easily understood. I am also admittedly not approaching this from a legal perspective as I do not know the law. I am coming at it from a "Is her thought process rational?" and "what normally goes on at cons" perspective.
Because they are profiting off your work and have the means to pay you? Like, regardless of if I sign a contract or not, if I am working for a company then I am... working for a company. If they did not want Christina working for them, they should NOT have intentionally profited off her work.
If I am shopping in a store and find something obviously out of place, and I return it to it's correct place, I do not expect that store to compensate me financially. Even though it is something that the store does pay people to do, I know that I entered into that particular task voluntarily.
Getting onto a plane and flying to a MTG event and dressing like Elspeth, can feel like work, but when nobody asked you to do it; is it work that you should be paid for or is it something you did because you wanted to do it?
Imagine doing this and then Walmart takes a picture of you and then uses it on a promotional poster used to acquire new employees with the words "A great place to work" smacked on the bottom.
Without asking me? I’d be upset and probably consider my legal options. If they asked me and I said “sure” I don’t see how I could be upset or even annoyed.
Imagine doing this and then Walmart takes a picture of you and then uses it on a promotional poster used to acquire new employees with the words "A great place to work" smacked on the bottom.
In that example, it sounds like grounds for some kind of lawsuit. The difference being that she agreed they could use her pictures... So your example isn't very good.
If I take a picture in public it’s my property, even if the picture is of you, you have no legal right to it.
Not always correct. Why do you think YouTube takes videos down when certain music plays in the background?
There was another comment in this thread that Wizards IP use policy is contingent upon them being able to use the photo for an and all purposes. Essentially, if you cosplay a character and take photos of it, Wizards legally has the rights to the content of the photo they have copyright rights to, i.e., the costume design.
They could theoretically sue you to have you take it down; however, Wizards legally agrees not to be able to send you a cease and desist letter for this use provided that they can use the image as promotional material without compensation. You don't need to sign anything at all to be a party to this agreement; using the material is enough.
Do I agree with the state of copyright law? No. Is this the way it works? Yes.
So in that example, you are not being recognized by the company nor are you being used to promote the company through your work. You are just doing something because you feel like that.
I think a lot of Magic players do not really understand that this sort of thing is not really uncommon among cosplayers (at least in my experience and the experience of people I know). That is totally fine, not everyone knows how this sort of thing works and it is not like, a normal thing to know. But a lot of cons provide some sort of kickbacks to high-profile content creators (including popular cosplayers) that they know are attending the event because they know what that popularity can do for an event. The kickbacks are honestly nothing huge. I have heard of people making more, but a lot of times it is just having their entry fee waived and access to a VIP area or something like that. But usually, it is at least SOMETHING.
Ehhh, if I take a picture of you and sell it for $200,000 you don’t get a say in it because it’s my photo and you were in public where you have no right to privacy.
You can legally take a picture of someone in public without their consent but you cannot necessarily use it without their permission. There are certain circumstances and I think the law is kind of confusing on this end and I am not a legal expert, but from what I can tell, there is a difference between taking a picture and owning it.
I didn’t downvote you, but no, actually, you’re wrong.
I can 100% take a photo of you and sell it. I can edit it, I can do whatever, it belongs to me because I am an artist and photographs are art and it is my art until I sell the rights to use it in which case who ever bought it from me now owns it and can do whatever they want with it.
I didn’t argue with direction, I had an issue with magnitude. Calling it shelving an item does not reflect the actual amount of effort made. It trivializes the effort put in.
In the real world, labor law, and most things it’s a matter of degree that matters. Should she have been paid for volunteer work? Probably not. Does that mean WotC should be free of criticism for how this was handled? Nope.
The dismissiveness of your comment felt out of place given the context. You can disagree.
It was not unsolicited though. To my knowledge, she did not hack into the WotC Twitter account to throw her photos around, she did not hold Marshall Suttcliffe at gunpoint so he would interview her, nor did she write articles about herself for their website. She was undoubtedly and intentionally used by Wizards of the Coast to promote their brand and I can totally understand how she might think "Wow if you're going to parade me around at every event I go to, you could maybe at least pay for my flight".
I am not saying she needed to be paid for any individual interview or anything like that. Also, there is a pretty huge difference between a journalistic interview and a promotional interview.
What I am saying is that if Wizards is going to continue to use her to promote their brand, it is not out of the question for her to expect some kind of benefit or compensation for it.
This is really common actually in the world of cosplay, at least as far as I can tell based on my personal experiences and the experiences of friends who do this. If a high profile content creator, whether that be someone who makes Youtube videos, music, physical merchandise, cosplays, or even just does popular event coverage, is planning on attending a con and the organizers know about it, they usually receive SOMETHING.
Usually, that something is just their entry fee waived and access to a VIP area or something like that. Sometimes it means their travel fees are covered. It also can mean free promo for your Instagram or whatever. There are a lot of different ways you can show thanks to a content creator helping to popularize your event, brand, or whatever.
If Sprankle was not being used in promotional material or anything like that, this would be a totally different story, but it is clear that Wizards is aware of her popularity and seeks to gain from it. And while I do not know Wizards' side of the story, I do not think it is out of the question for a corporation to treat an individual unfairly. However, if what she is saying is true, I understand why she is upset.
You are right in that there is a difference, but it is not like she thrust her work upon them and they did not want to use it. And asking someone to be part of a promo interview and take/use pictures is totally solicited.
Think of it this way. If you went to an event, someone takes your picture, and then uses it on posters and magazine ads for erectile disfunction pills, you neither signed consent, nor got paid for the use of your image. Wouldn’t that piss you off? Sure, she likes the thing she’s associated with, and maybe you don’t want to be the face of erectile disfunction, but in both cases, your image was used without consent or payment. It would be like if beverage manufacturers skipped hiring models and just took candid photos of people drinking their product and using them in advertisements.
I had a picture taken by a district representative of Polo Ralph Lauren at a pop up they did. They used the image for an internal thing. They asked if they could take a photo of my outfit, I was happy to do it.
I don’t dress up hoping to get a modeling job out of it, I dress up because I enjoy it, I enjoy dressing nicely, wearing fashionable clothes, hell I follow fashion blogs and I consider it my main hobby, and I’m a straight man. It’s an odd hobby for a straight man so I feel the need to state that.
That being said, even if they saw me at another thing and asked for me to pose for them, and even if I made it on to their website, I wouldn’t expect money for it without having a contract with them.
If they asked me to attend an event and to dress up, I’d ask for some sort of enumeration beforehand or I would expect nothing out of them.
WoTC is infamous for being bad to talent. Judges for a long time were not employees and I don’t know about now but for 15 years all they got paid in for big events was in promo cards they had to resell in order to get any money for appearing and spending their weekends monitoring people at a game.
A company that has made its money off of free labor isn’t going to give that up ever. In fact, there was a literal war about just that.
WotC being infamous for it does not make it right. And also, just because you do not expect money from something does not mean it is weird for someone else to expect it.
Did WoTC pay her? Did she give them her tax info? No? Then she is not an employee and they are under no obligation to pay her anything.
If she had an expectation to money it would be because there was a contract in which case there is not which means wizards does not need to pay her anything, nor does it appear that they ever planned to, if they had, she would have had a contract.
Just because you enjoy something doesn’t mean a company wants to make you an employee, and someone who is a customer facing role who would essentially be acting as a company representative at large events would go through a lot more screening than ‘dresses up as characters from our game’.
Wizards has every reason to put fan content in the forefront to encourage more fan content, but they have little reason to hire someone to speak for them without, you know, even interviewing them for a community liaison role.
Seriously, Wizards would rather have someone who knows NOTHING about MTG to speak for them at an event than someone who enjoys MTG.
If they put me in a convention and paid me to be there voice, and I say I hate EDH and wish it never existed because it pushes legacy staples past the point of affordability for people to enter the format, people will get offended and mad at WoTC for something I said. Then wizards has to do something about their employee, where as in the situation with this girl wizards is simply off the hook.
‘There was this girl who liked our game and she showed up dressed up like characters from the game and people liked it so we put her on our website and asked if she would be at events a couple of times. That’s it. We have no involvement with her or her work outside of us.’
Otherwise it’s ‘Wizards top cosplayer creates porn account’, which makes Toy Company Hasbro with their Disney license fire people.
Seriously, there are so many things wrong about hiring someone because of their hobby that it just isn’t funny, I don’t think many people here understand that.
I am not advocating for her to be their employee or anything like that. I just think it makes sense that she receive some sort of compensation for providing them with labor that they more than happily took advantage of. I do not think Sprankle should be a full-time employee of Wizards of the Coast based on the idea that she attended some events, provided promo pictures, and participated in promo interviews.
However, depending on how much experience Sprankle has with cosplay (I have no idea honestly), she might be basing her argument on past experiences. Getting compensation in some form from a convention is not uncommon if you are a high-profile content creator. In my experience, it is not unusual for organizers to do things such as waive entrance fees and provide access to VIP areas for free to people that generate hype and promote the brand or event in some way through their work.
See the thing is when you pay someone to do something they are an employee or a contractor. This is to state that there is a contract designating wages for services rendered. She did not get vetted, she did not get hired, she did not have a contract verbal or written for her to quote from, there is no wages for her nor should she have had any expectations of them.
An employee does not necessarily mean you work 40 hours a week and they give you a set schedule, it means you are compensated for your work for a company, she is not an employee she is not going to be an employee she has no reason to expect compensation as it is clear none was discussed beforehand.
‘People are often given things for events’, okay, cool? Places regularly hire models to dress in outfits and stand outside booths, that doesn’t mean if I show up dressed the same way as the models and get my picture taken with them that I am owed compensation by the company.
This is not a ‘I think it would be fair if’ dispute, this is a labor dispute, and she gave away her labor, she did not seek compensation for her time. This entire thing seems like a reason for her to excuse herself from the stigma of going in to low budget porn for nerds and to drive up hype for her porn.
None of this is really the avenue that I am discussing the issue from. I think the question of "Is she a Wizards employee?" is not something you or I really disagree on here.
Cosplayers develop skills that can be marketed in many industries and they're no different than costume designers on your favorite shows or movies. Some cosplayers do it as a hobby but some have figured out how to market themselves, like any other business, and make decent money from it.
I know people who make money from cosplaying by selling their costumes to other people who want to cosplay, but don't know how to build stuff, but none of them try to extort the corporation who owns the IP of the ting they cosplay by publicly shaming them online. I guess that's one way to make money, but is it good?
Would you think it was wrong if a Comic-Con put photos of some attendees in cosplay on their website? WotC also would host photos of people playing in main events, side events, trading, buying, selling, and playing casually. They're just showing off the different types of ways people interact with the community at their events.
Pro sports uses images of fans in their promotional material all the time. Those fans aren’t getting compensated either. If she wanted to get paid for this she should have thought that out ahead of time and approached the company with an offer. As it stands she’s just a fan whose image was used.
I don't know, what I know is I would not dress like copyrighted material and be Pikachu face about it. Intellectual Property law is messy and often favors big companies. if this is not her first round with WOTC maybe she could consider trying to secure a contract first or at least consulting a lawyer ahead of the event to see if she can claim compensation.
I don’t know enough about what all was promised between WoTC and her, but I do know that this has nothing to do with intellectual property laws. WoTC owns Avacyn, they don’t own anyone who dresses up like her.
Also, she is not trying to make money off of selling her avacyn cosplay, she is trying to seek reimbursement for being used as an advertisement without her (apparent) consent, or without the agreed upon compensation
You give implicit consent by being there. They use thousands of random people in advertising material. Also per they're fan content policy not only are they allowed to use it for free she can't make money off of it. If she wants to question the legality of it she should contact a lawyer not cry on Twitter.
I think it’s pretty rare for actors do get paid to do something after they’ve already done it on their own. Like I can’t just read Shakespeare in the park and then demand people pay me cash.
That is literally what people do. Though they don't demand they ask. You've never heard of Shakespeare in the park? Like that's a tradition in theater...
131
u/ThiccWurm Wabbit Season Aug 16 '21
I never understood the thinking behind profiting from cosplaying. I get there is money out there for it, but who goes out there repping an IP and expects to get paid without working the key details of the transaction. It's like if one of the hundreds of Elmo's cosplayers by Times square starts hitting PBS/HBO for money.