Transformers and More @ The Seibertron Store







Details subject to change. See listing for latest price and availability.
So I read that this was being made into a toy? wow, and I thought only 3rd party companies take stuff without giving any notice, acknowledgement or compensation..
FYI: hasbro nor idw solicited me to do this design, I did it on my own. I originally came up with a different design seen here: http://donfig.deviantart.com/art/ATB-Megatron-157367399 it was a sample for a story idea I was going to pitch to then editor Andy Schmidt. he turned me down because he said they have years of story already set in stone. so no biggie.
a couple of months later he comes to me and says they wanted to use the design. I said cool, lemme update it and the final image above was the result. I again asked if I can pitch a story, even if it's not TF related, he said yes and he'll come down to Long Beach Comic-con for a sit down. I went, but he never showed up. and that was that.
Jeep! wrote:Why do I imagine Dead Metal sounding exactly like Arnie?
Intah-wib-buls?
Blurrz wrote:10/10
Leave it to Dead Metal to have the word 'Pronz' in his signature.
Burn wrote:It's a dicey area when it comes to comics.
Take the recent Jack Kirby case for example, his family sued Marvel for the rights of characters Jack helped create. They lost because he was paid to do the job.
Was Don paid for this design? He says no. But there's always two sides to every story.
Seibertron wrote:Burn wrote:It's a dicey area when it comes to comics.
Take the recent Jack Kirby case for example, his family sued Marvel for the rights of characters Jack helped create. They lost because he was paid to do the job.
Was Don paid for this design? He says no. But there's always two sides to every story.
He said he wasn't paid by Hasbro for them doing a toy out of it. But doesn't mention anything about whether or not he was paid by IDW for coming up with a design. I still stand by my thought that if he does something with a Transformer whether or not it gets used at that time that it ultimately is the property of Hasbro.
Jeep! wrote:Why do I imagine Dead Metal sounding exactly like Arnie?
Intah-wib-buls?
Blurrz wrote:10/10
Leave it to Dead Metal to have the word 'Pronz' in his signature.
Seibertron wrote:I guess I'm confused why Don wasn't upset about IDW using this design back in Ongoing 2 or 3 years ago if he felt that he should've been given compensation for something. I've had the understanding for the past 25 or 30 years that whatever shows up in Transformers comics is property of Hasbro, which is why Marvel was so quick to have Death's Head and Circuit Breaker appear in other Marvel books prior to their debut in Transformers. I assumed that when an artist works for Hasbro or a licensed company such as IDW that any of the work done for the brand with those licensed characters during that time would be owned or could be used by Hasbro.
Dead Metal wrote:He did state, that he did it for a story pitch idw declined to use. Then they contacted him about using it, and he agreed as long as they let him pitch a story, they took the new design and didn't let him do his pitch. So no compensation at all. It looks like idw totally dropped the ball on this.
a couple of months later he comes to me and says they wanted to use the design. I said cool, lemme update it and the final image above was the result. I again asked if I can pitch a story, even if it's not TF related, he said yes and he'll come down to Long Beach Comic-con for a sit down. I went, but he never showed up. and that was that.
Convotron wrote:I wonder if Nick Roche will chime in on this basic situation of creator's rights...did Nick get the kind of treatment Don thinks is owed to creators of TF designs that get made into toys? (Generations Voyager Springer)
Bullycon wrote:He drew issues 14 and 15 of the ongoing, which included the new Megatron design. His cover for issue 15 was solely his new Megatron design.
I'm confused as to how he could be ignorant of the possibility of a toy based off that design, when he himself drew it into a Transformers comic.
Bullycon wrote:This tweet in particular, and its predecessors, really show his attitude toward the thing:
https://twitter.com/NickRoche/status/351049940555939840
So, yeah.
Convotron wrote:It's common for the employer to stipulate in the employment contract that anything created for the company is basically company property. I've seen this in every IT job I've had where if I were to code something for work, that code belongs to my employer, not me.
Seibertron wrote:I had something similar happen at a company that I worked at a few years back. After working there for almost a year, they decided they wanted us to sign contracts stating that any work we did outside of work would be considered their property. They had lingo to exclude Seibertron.com in it, but I was extremely concerned about signing any paperwork because of the legalese and my concerns about protecting Seibertron.com. I refused to sign the paperwork and was fired one week later. Not sure if I was fired because of my refusal to sign the paperwork or because they had lost the big client that I had been working on a few weeks before that, but I really felt like my refusal to sign that paperwork is what put the nails in the coffin. Little did I realize at the time that taking that stand would get me one step closer to getting to work on Seibertron.com full time.
fenrir72 wrote:Hasbro/Tomy(?) pulled a similar stunt iirc on another artist at deviant art. He wasn't employed by them but they/whoever in Hasbro/Tomy incorporated 6 shot's silhouette in the box without paying the guy. I wonder what happened to that issue?
Convotron wrote:Seibertron wrote:I had something similar happen at a company that I worked at a few years back. After working there for almost a year, they decided they wanted us to sign contracts stating that any work we did outside of work would be considered their property. They had lingo to exclude Seibertron.com in it, but I was extremely concerned about signing any paperwork because of the legalese and my concerns about protecting Seibertron.com. I refused to sign the paperwork and was fired one week later. Not sure if I was fired because of my refusal to sign the paperwork or because they had lost the big client that I had been working on a few weeks before that, but I really felt like my refusal to sign that paperwork is what put the nails in the coffin. Little did I realize at the time that taking that stand would get me one step closer to getting to work on Seibertron.com full time.
Wow, that does seem suspect to me. It may not have been the only reason but I can't help but think it was factored into the decision to fire you.
The up side to that is you were able to focus more on Seibertron.com.fenrir72 wrote:Hasbro/Tomy(?) pulled a similar stunt iirc on another artist at deviant art. He wasn't employed by them but they/whoever in Hasbro/Tomy incorporated 6 shot's silhouette in the box without paying the guy. I wonder what happened to that issue?
This is a situation that I see differently. The reason is that Don was working for IDW and hence, Hasbro, as far as the transference of his work.
The artist who did his own Sixshot artwork would have no reason to believe his artwork would be used in an official capacity. I think that would be a case for a HasTak rep to contact the artist via his DA account to say "We saw your art, we think it's great, we're going to use it in an upcoming toy package design.".
In Don's case, it's a reality that his official TF artwork is outright owned by IDW/Hasbro and that it's a possibility that beyond the comics, his work would be used in some way. If he had some unpublished work that was used by HasTak for a toy design, as an example, I would say that he would have a right to be upset. The courtesy of contacting him in that scenario would be a reasonable expectation.
fenrir72 wrote:As I previously mentioned,that guy wasn't employed by either IDW and Hasbro.And yes, I agree, a simple "hey we're gonna use your work Don" would have been better than leaving a bad taste in the mouth.
fenrir72 wrote:As I previously mentioned,that guy wasn't employed by either IDW and Hasbro.And yes, I agree, a simple "hey we're gonna use your work Don" would have been better than leaving a bad taste in the mouth.
Jeep! wrote:Why do I imagine Dead Metal sounding exactly like Arnie?
Intah-wib-buls?
Blurrz wrote:10/10
Leave it to Dead Metal to have the word 'Pronz' in his signature.
We're forgetting one key thing here, the design is still ugly and still suck
Convotron wrote:I can understand the notion that it would have been nice and "classy" of Hasbro to do something along the lines of what Don wants but at the same time, Don's handling of this isn't exactly classy.
Instead of going to Hasbro, trying to touch base with them, perhaps through going to a publicly known rep such as Clint Chapman, and voicing his displeasure, he opens up a shooting gallery via his DA account and basically appeals to public sympathy.
Rather than giving Hasbro a chance to say "Wow, you know what? We're sorry. Let us try to make amends.", Don is playing the victim and singing the anthem of creator's rights and corporate/big business injustice towards the "little guy".
There is no doubt that there's validity in Don's grievances but the way in which he handled this situation and how he carries himself is less than classy or professional.
Return to Transformers Toys Discussion
Registered users: Bing [Bot], Bumblevivisector, Glyph, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Google Feedfetcher, MSN [Bot], Roadbuster, Sabrblade, Till-all-R1, Yahoo [Bot], Ziusundra