Quote:
Originally Posted by SidJ
Gustav you are right about folk pinching posted images of rare kris or other swords and seeking to make copies. I have seen this done with kukris where firms steal / take images posted online at the behest of clients who want something similar and then make multiple copies and offer these for sale. These are always very inferior to the original given the limitations of copying from a 2D image often distorted by camera angle etc. It has resulted in collectors not sharing or posting images of rare pieces online on closed forums like this. The consent of the owner of the image has not been sought nor the source acknowledged at all. Its plagiarism for profit plain and simple in my ethical framework. Some would say imitation is the highest form of flattery though. Nonetheless the point on intellectual copyright and ownership of the images copied remains and although legally the issue is moot, broader ethical considerations on this copying remain a concern for me at least. In the present case this keris form is very rare I think and it was the image posted that was the direct cause of it being copied. Perhaps the differences between the old and the new are sufficiently great to distinguish between the two but that might only be due to the new keris makers inability to reproduce the original well. Anyway thats my personal view. I dont mean to cause offence or insult.
|
My understanding is that smith have been copying older keris for a very long time. Keris dhapur, especially when dealing with Javanese keris, and perhaps to some extent Balinese and Madurese keris, is a matter of pakem, isn't it? I am unaware of the idea of intellectual copyright or ownership of any particular dhapur in the world of keris. As for the present owner of this original keris, how would they be connected to the "intellectual copyright" of this old keris? They are not the maker or even the original owner. Theoretically, if i were the owner of, let's say, the Mona Lisa, what right would i have to copyright that image and prevent young artists from creating copies based upon my original? I am merely it's current caretaker, not someone involved in the creation of that piece of art.
In all other art forms, students of various disciplines have spent time copying the work of the masters for centuries. It is a common way of learning your medium. This should not, of course, be confused with forging (not in the metal working sense) an art work in order to deceive. But students emulating the masters has always been a path for learning any art.
But as Gustav stated, if you are worried about someone copying your rare dhapur, the best idea is not to publish photos of it in books or on social media.That said, this new version differs in a way that makes it instantly distinguishable from the original it was modeled after beyond it being inferior in form. The pamor. So while a copy it is still unique.