The Soapbox XII: The Convenient Truth [Archive] - Ozformers Transformers Club of Australia (otca.com.au)

STL

28th July 2009, 10:52 AM

It's been a bit of a gap between Soapboxes. Longer than I'd like but given the current amount of work on my plate these days, any future Soapboxes will be continue to be quite sporadic too.
__________________________________________________ _______________
The Soapbox XII: The Convenient Truth.

This edition of the Soapbox aims to explore one of the biggest issues in collecting: Knock-Offs (KOs). The announcement of a KO sweeps in with it a tide of fervent cries and wails. The common positions are adopted, the line in the sand is quickly drawn again. But in light of events in the past year, it seems only appropriate to cast the entire issue in a different light.

The common arguments against KOs are:
- Quality
- Illegality
- Deprivation of an opportunity to release
- Price

But are KOs still really a problem? In light of the mass-customisation sprees, I contend that they simply cannot. To claim otherwise is to be guilty of double standards.

Before I continue, it is necessary to underline that this is not an assault on mass-customisation. Nor is it an justification of KOs. This is an attempt to re-examine the veracity of arguments against KOs, about the moral high ground we try to occupy on the matter. It is a moral high ground that is no longer tenable and it is something we as a fandom need to grapple with if we intend to have any credibility on the issue.

KOs or mass-custom projects, it doesn't matter. It is wrong to adopt a moral high ground on KOs if you are buying mass customs products. It is wrong because you are depriving Hasbro/Takara, the rightful creators of the toys, an opportunity to make the product, It is wrong because you are infringing on Hasbro/Takara's intellectual property. The only line in the sand, if you wish to stay behind it that is and have a right to be angry about KOs, is to not buy mass-custom products.

From the perspective of legality, mass-custom products are completely and utterly culpable of impinging on the intellectual property rights of Hasbro/Takara. They are no different to KOs. They take an asset belonging Hasbro/Takara and exploit it for their own interests. They deprive Hasbro/Takara of the opportunity to profit on that idea, that character that they possess the exclusive right to. For instance, had Defender been produced prior to Classics 2.0/Universe Springer, the demand for the latter would've been greatly reduced. Why would fans purchase an inferior product? There's absolutely no reason too. Even the ROTF guns being produced by iGear. They effectively compete with ROTF Buster Prime. If you can buy the guns, there is less of a need to acquire Buster Prime. Have a look at at Hasbro's recent foray into armour and add-on parts such as Hydrodive BB, Wingblade Prime and Samurai Prowl. Fundamentally, the mass-customisers are stepping into Hasbro/Takara's market space and potentially competing with their products.

What's this? Hasbro/Takara never had the intention of producing an Ultra Magnus armour? That City Commander was complementary only, not competing with Hasbro? That doesn't hold up. Fact is, whether or not the choice to produce is made does not reside with the mass-customisers. It resides with Hasbro/Takara. You are in effect depriving Hasbro/Takara of future opportunities. Let me take this further. If City Commander had been something that did not even remotely resemble Ultra Magnus how much demand would there have been for it? Even if it was innovative and brilliant? Nowhere near as much. So fact is: the mass-customiser relies, much like the KO producer, on the intellectual property of someone else to create something of value. There is no difference.

One other complaint that often is thrown at KOs is that they are of a cheap and poor quality. That's false. We're not talking about the ones at the $2 shops, we're talking about the G1-like ones that have everything almost down to the nearest mm. I've played with one or two of these. The Swoop specifically and I assure you that the quality is leaps and bounds above my 2 G1 Swoops. These KOs are expensive, clocking in at $50-$70 USDs. They imitate the real thing, yes. But hell, you'd be hard press to find as good quality as them. On top of that, aren't the KO producers doing what mass-customisers are? Supplying a product that Hasbro/Takara has shown a lack of willingness to provide? All these claims that they can do it cheaper are unwarranted. Fact is, if Takara released a lot of the 1st-2nd year Autobot cars like Mirage/Sunstreaker etc, they'd be close the price of current Encores. $30-$40 USD. These KO producers are not undercutting Takara/Hasbro by doing a cheap job.

It costs them more obviously as that's why their prices are higher. It costs more to develop the mold. It costs more to produce. They don't have the economies of scale. Fact is, they are providing something that Hasbro/Takara hasn't evidenced any intention of doing. Isn't this exactly what mass-customisers are doing? And it's not like custom products are cheaper either. All the mass-custom products produced are quite pricey for what they are. Some cost more than the original toy itself. So those assertions that pricing is predatory and that it prices Takara and their reissues out of the market are wrong. Add to the kettle the fact that Encore hasn't exactly been doing spankingly well either. In that case, does it make the KO producers right as they are providing something that doesn't seem likely to be offered by Hasbro/Takara given prevailing market conditions?

Of course not.

The producers of KOs are fundamentally stepping all over something owned by Hasbro/Takara. Mass-customisers do the same. We should not then decry one group while glowingly praise another. It;'s grossly hypocritical. Until we cease purchasing and supporting mass-customisers, we are no longer in a tenable position to occupy a moral high ground on the matter.

At the very best, we can argue we are morally ambigious. We can argue that we as fans are deceived by KOers and hence that's why we have every right to be angry. But that argument falls apart too easily. We are simply fans. We do not possess the right to the molds We do not possess the right to say what is an appropriate use of the intellectual property of Hasbro/Takara and what is not. We do not possess the right to claim injustice as if our rights have been infringed. Our rights are to purchase official Hasbro/Takara products. Angry or frustrated as we may be, the reality is that we cannot adopt a double standard. We cannot conclude when it fits our interests to have a mass-custom project produced and then say that a KO cannot be produced. Fundamentally, the same infringement is taking place. It's just one that is more closer to home to us as it directly disadvantages us.

Quite frankly, I don't think any of us, myself included, will stop purchasing such products. The mass-custom projects are too good. If we as a fandom come to acknowledge and accept the production of these mass-custom projects that infringe upon the property rights of Hasbro/Takara, we have to realise that we have no longer have a moral high ground on KOs. Such a position is not tenable. But for the moment, we remain content to chastise the production of KOs while we happily accept the offerings of mass-custom producers. We do so because of the quality and strength of their offerings, offerings that can be quite pricey, offerings that we may never else have had a chance to acquire and appreciate. We obscure the truth of it though. The truth that what we clamour in fact is wrong, is an infringement of the property right's of others. That is why we ignore the truth of the matter. It's okay when it works for us one way but it's not okay when it works the other way. It's just too convenient.

And that's what it boils down to. A convenient truth.

The Soapbox Archive
The Soapbox I: TFM or TFTM? (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=1414)
The Soapbox II: The Problem with Jets (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=1484)
The Soapbox III: Price-Matching (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=1581)
The Soapbox IV: The Top 10 Characters of All-Time (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=1685)
The Soapbox V: What makes a good Transformers? (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=2707)
The Soapbox VI: Don't like gimmicks? Start dealing with it. (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=2804)
The Soapbox VII: The Top 10 Transformers toys of 2008 (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=3115)
The Soapbox VIII: 2008: A Year in Review (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=3122)
The Soapbox IX: Budgeting Basics (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=3461)
The Soapbox X: A Prime Problem (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=3550)
The Soapbox XI: Battle of the City-Formers (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=4007)

TheDirtyDigger

28th July 2009, 11:05 AM

I disagree.

blackie

28th July 2009, 11:17 AM

good to see our conversation has been bought to the masses :P

Sky Shadow

28th July 2009, 11:25 AM

I don't believe in G1 'authentic' knockoffs (and I'm not a fan of customs either.) When I buy a G1 toy, I want it to be the real 20something year-old vintage thing, not something people whipped up last year. It's the same as paying good money to buy a pedigree cat only to discover that it's just the offspring of a knocked-up stray from down the street, or buying a bottle of Grange Hermitage only to find that someone's stuck a fake label on cheap plonk. It's wrong.

dirge

28th July 2009, 12:35 PM

I don't buy customs or custom accessories as a matter of course - I have on one occasion - but I also don't buy KOs. I'm not worried if it's a reissue or original, but personally, buying non-HasTak stuff just doesn't have the same allure - the "magic" is missing, if you like, when it's not the real thing.

As for the moral high ground, I think it's fair to say that those involved in the production/distribution of the "high quality" KOs are specifically targetting Transformer collectors, and I suspect they'd have relatively high profit margins without QC, legal requirements and retail stores. If that's the case, the HasTak reissues are going to be better value for money because of that higher and lower profit margin. For me it's a moot point anyway.

kup

28th July 2009, 12:38 PM

I disagree.

+1

GoktimusPrime

28th July 2009, 12:50 PM

Sky Shadow brings up a good point about deception/fraud. The problem with knock offs over garage kits is that they are counterfeit items which attempt to deceive consumers into thinking that they are legitimate. And certainly many collectors have been burned spending their money on KOs believing them to be legitimate.

Garage kits like City Commander are NOT a counterfeit imitation of an existing product. The people who make them are making NO pretense that their products are manufactured under licence. It is legally dubious in terms of its visual similarity with Ultra Magnus --- but even then, only the trailer/armour, not the entire robot. I thought that you could copy a certain percentage of someone's intellectual property; like they do with parodies. And of course, the producers of these kits go to lengths to try and avoid/dodge direct affiliation with HasTak's intellectual property; such as not:
+ using the trademarked names like "Transformers," "Ultra Magnus" etc. anywhere
+ the illustration of "Classics Prime" in the comic book instruction is highly obscured and also distinctively modified from the actual toy... so it's an ambiguous looking transforming robot that bears striking similarity to Classics Optimus Prime, but it's NOT an imitation of that toy! (again, they could claim to have modified 10% of the toy's image)

Garage kits are kinda like software and hardware that people make that just happen to be compatible with products made by companies like IBM, but not actually made by those companies. How many of us have "IBM compatible" PCs?

What most of us consider to be "knock offs" on the other hand would be toys that attempt to deceive consumers into thinking that their counterfeits are legit. So morally speaking I think that garage kits and knock offs are two different things because one is not attempting to deceive consumers whereas the other is.

Quite frankly, I don't think any of us, myself included, will stop purchasing such products.
Not me. I don't buy any toy that's not manufactured under licence from Hasbro or Takara. So yeah, it's kinda moot for me too. :p

Hereticpoo

28th July 2009, 12:50 PM

The model Kits, the weapon sets, the armour sets, Teletran 1, the trailers all results of Hasbro not making a finished product me thinks. Someone pllleeeaaassssseeeeeee make Classics Bruticus hands and feet!!!! The poor guy looks like the alligator from HOOK got to him. :D

So i guess KOer's/customisers think....i'll just do it myself because HasTak cant / wont.

If the customisers will give me what Hasbro wont then i really dont care who's profitting. Its a Sh!t thing to say but dems the cards we're dealt! :)

d*r*j*

28th July 2009, 01:33 PM

This is big business Vs. small business.

Unless you study business who gives a spit?

I will buy whatever toys I see that I like and can afford. I probably prefer the ones made by the big toy companies because they have to jump through more hoops regarding safety.

But bootleg combiners are only $13 new... and they are all pretty shady in the quality department anyway.

Hasbro hasn't cared about Transformers ever... it's just a business venture for them. They aren't the inventors, just the marketers.

GoktimusPrime

28th July 2009, 01:59 PM

Unless you study business who gives a spit?
I morally object when it comes to making fraudulent counterfeits because I feel sorry for some people when they spend their money buying something that they actually believe to be a legitimate product, but have actually been deceived into buying an imitation. Like the KO Defensor with red Hot Spot (and other whacky colours), KO white Predaking and of course KO Devastator's shade of green is quite obviously different from the original (not to mention lack of chrome) etc. - people can see that these toys are pale imitations from kilometres away.

What I find more objectionable are say KO Mini bots, cassettes, G1 Optimus Prime, Autobot cars, Dinobots etc., forgeries which are made with the intention to deceive collectors. The toy and even its packaging are impressive imitations of the original product, making it more difficult for consumers to tell if they're real or not.

In terms of the moral argument, it all comes down to whether or not the counterfeiters are allowing consumers to make an informed choice. By lying and trying to deceive consumers you're obviously not trying to give consumers that choice.

Hasbro hasn't cared about Transformers ever... it's just a business venture for them. They aren't the inventors, just the marketers.
Hasbro may not care, but as a collector _I_ do care -- I care very much if the toys that I'm collecting are legitimate or forged counterfeits.

It's the same with being any other kind of collector (e.g.: art, currencies, stamps, antiques etc.); I think most collectors with any sense of integrity would be very discerning against imitations. Collectors are also discerning against reproductions - you only need to watch any episode of the Antiques Road Show to see appraisers spotting very authentic looking reproductions which their owners didn't even know were reproductions (because these things are just so old). I personally don't mind officially made reproductions (reissues), but I won't have a bar of any illegitimate imitation.

d*r*j*

28th July 2009, 02:20 PM

...collectors with any sense of integrity would be very discerning against imitations...

I guess that depends on what you collect and/or why you collect.
I find that in most cases there is a way to identify bootleg toys. You just have to do a little bit of research. If you don't know anything about the origin of a toy... why would you want to buy it? As an investment?

kup

28th July 2009, 02:28 PM

The Garage kits have actually encouraged people to buy HasTak products that they would have otherwise ignored.

Before City Commander, Classics Ultra Magnus was a 'meh' white Prime - Now his demand is considerable.

Arguably the same thing is happening to the Universe/Movie packaged Superion Maximus repaint.

A KO tries to deceive the buyer into thinking it is a complete legitimate product so that you would buy it instead of the real thing.

Comparing Garage/custom kits with KOs makes no sense to me. Also like mentioned, the garage kits often exist because Hasbro did not satisfyingly 'complete' the product to satisfaction of some costumers but at the same time it does note impede on their sales, on the contrary.

TheDirtyDigger

28th July 2009, 02:46 PM

jaydisc

28th July 2009, 03:32 PM

Not to pick on you specifically Kup, but you have concisely said two points that others have agreed with that I want to comment on:

The Garage kits have actually encouraged people to buy HasTak products that they would have otherwise ignored.

Before City Commander, Classics Ultra Magnus was a 'meh' white Prime - Now his demand is considerable.

The argument I believe STL is putting forth is that if Hasbro was to later consider making a non-repaint Ultra Magnus, the business viability of such a product has been negatively affected because they are competing against someone that has not legally licensed their IP. Hasbro would have to assess the same viability if while considering whether or not to reissue a figure that has been KO'd. This is even clearer for free standing figures such as Drift or Defender.

A KO tries to deceive the buyer into thinking it is a complete legitimate product so that you would buy it instead of the real thing.

The KO itself? The KO reseller? or the KO Manufacturer? These are all different entities with different motivations.

The KO itself does nothing :p

KO resellers have indeed been known to use deceptive tactics. You can even use the word "most", but that fact is far from universal. www.kotoys.com is very clear about what you are buying, as are many other KO resellers.

The KO manufacturer, on the other hand, is simply someone trying to make money by making a product based on someone else's IP, in order for to save R & D costs and garner demand. These are the same motives of a large-scale customizer. I don't believe that KO manufacturers practice deception. Like any other manufacturer, they sell to distributors or resellers. I have only ever heard of one public situation where resellers unknowingly received KOs when ordering otherwise. For the most part, the resellers that sell KOs, know full well that they are buying KOs.

I believe it is toward the KO manufacturers that STL is drawing his comparison and not to the resellers, which many of you have inferred.

kup

28th July 2009, 04:09 PM

Sorry, I disagree - deception is at the heart of KO manufacturers or there would be a big stamp on the box saying 'Non official product'.

In regards to Hasbro being denied the possibility to do Ultra Magnus with armor in the future due to City Commander - I doubt it very much it was even on their radar. I actually believe that its now more possible for Hasbro to do such things due to the success of City Commander but not before. Now they are more likely to pay attention instead of doing something half a$$ed because they know that a third party will then come out and benefit from their shortcomings - Yeah a garage kit upgrade means that an otherwise mediocre hasbro product will have more demand but I doubt Hasbro likes other companies benefiting from their short comings either.

HasTak had years to produce a G1 Ultra Magnus with armor but instead went forth with white Primes which got old quickly and naturally costumers became skeptical that it would ever happen and so did Fan Projects to their benefit.

STL

28th July 2009, 05:08 PM

Sorry, I disagree - deception is at the heart of KO manufacturers or there would be a big stamp on the box saying 'Non official product'.

I agree with the issue of deception. it's discussed above and while I completely take on board its dillutive effect on the collector market and frustration that comes with, it's ultimately not our place to kick up a stink (I'm not happy about G1 KOers either, mind you). Who owns the IP? Who should have ultimate authority to use their IP and their characters? Hasbro. It's not for anybody else to determine what to supply the market when ultimately the IP belongs to Hasbro. Yes, deception is an issue. But the bigger issue is the 1st infringement that allowed the deception to take place: the taking of IP belonging to Hasbro/Takara. That infringement is the one and the same to all those infringement that mass-customisers make.

In regards to Hasbro being denied the possibility to do Ultra Magnus with armor in the future due to City Commander - I doubt it very much it was even on their radar. I actually believe that its now more possible for Hasbro to do such things due to the success of City Commander but not before. Now they are more likely to pay attention instead of doing something half a$$ed because they know that a third party will then come out and benefit from their shortcomings - Yeah a garage kit upgrade means that an otherwise mediocre hasbro product will have more demand but I doubt Hasbro likes other companies benefiting from their short comings either.

HasTak had years to produce a G1 Ultra Magnus with armor but instead went forth with white Primes which got old quickly and naturally costumers became skeptical that it would ever happen and so did Fan Projects to their benefit.

City Commander gave rise to demand for Classics 1.0 Ultra Magnus? That's the after market, a market that Hasbro does not get a cut of. Hasbro gains no benefit whatsoever. It's an extrenely weak argument. And further, once again, it returns itself to one simple fact: Hasbro/Takara own the rights to TFs. Nobody else. It is not the place of anybody else, fans included, to determine what should be produced, what are the opportunities within the market. These are not decisions anyone else is able to make and exploit except Hasbro/Takara. It is their right. Not the mass customiser. Nor the KOer. Nor the fan. You cannot go out there and produce something based on someone else's IP and profit on it just b/c there's a new opportunity there. You don't have that right in the 1st place. It is not your right. You can't go out there and make a new version of the Matrix DVD boxset w/ better packaging and extras b/c you feel that the manufacturer made a substandard offering. It's not your place. By the same token then, the mass-customiser and the KOer can't do that either. They have no right to. They therefore are culpable of committing the same infringement.

I'm by no means judging anybody for buying mass-customised product. I myself do and openly acknowledge it. But what I'm trying to do is shed light on the moral hypocrisy we are embarking on. We have not a foot to stand on on KOers if we can accept the mass-customiser as ultimately that's a double standard,

MV75

28th July 2009, 05:12 PM

TheDirtyDigger

28th July 2009, 05:30 PM

You cannot go out there and produce something based on someone else's IP and profit on it just b/c there's a new opportunity there.

Yes you can, as proven by FansProject, natobot, igear, Impossible Toys and others.

jaydisc

28th July 2009, 05:34 PM

Sorry, I disagree - deception is at the heart of KO manufacturers or there would be a big stamp on the box saying 'Non official product'.

Not true. There is market demand for a substitution to more expensive, less fresh vintage goods. And it only takes a quick trip to any KO related news article to see so:

From Seibertron (http://www.seibertron.com/transformers/news/buyer-beware-ko-sunstreaker-to-be-released/16522/):

Wonder how much they'd let it go for? I still need a sunstreaker. I dont care if i have a KO or a real one as long as the price is right.

To TFW2005 (http://www.tfw2005.com/boards/transformers-news-rumors/151231-ko-sunstreaker-boxed-images.html)

I feel all warm and fuzzy when I see these. Because I can pick up something that looks like the real thing for a lot cheaper than a sealed original. I thought Slag was also being worked on because prototypes showed up a while back with Sludge and Slag. I hope they finish the Dinobots.

I hope if Takara/Tomy doesn't do Shockwave we can get one in a G1 box from these guys.

Do you think he wants a big stamp on his box?

Now, as always, this raises the hairs on the back of necks and even induces MV75 to threaten with chilling effects (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effect_(term)), so watch out! :D

I don't think anyone is trying to condone KOs, but if you really think you're morally superior when you buy a large-scale, manufactured TF likeness as opposed to a KO, you're just rationalizing and deceiving yourself.

blackie

28th July 2009, 05:35 PM

Yes you can, as proven by FansProject, natobot, igear, Impossible Toys and others.

and KOers, which is what his point is in total

STL

28th July 2009, 05:35 PM

Not me. I don't buy any toy that's not manufactured under licence from Hasbro or Takara. So yeah, it's kinda moot for me too. :p

And I very much respect. that. I can't say the same for myself though so I can't deride KO producers or mass-customisers and that's really my contention. Unless we do what you do and not participate at all, we really have no leg to stand on.

Sky Shadow brings up a good point about deception/fraud. The problem with knock offs over garage kits is that they are counterfeit items which attempt to deceive consumers into thinking that they are legitimate. And certainly many collectors have been burned spending their money on KOs believing them to be legitimate.

Garage kits like City Commander are NOT a counterfeit imitation of an existing product. The people who make them are making NO pretense that their products are manufactured under licence. It is legally dubious in terms of its visual similarity with Ultra Magnus --- but even then, only the trailer/armour, not the entire robot. I thought that you could copy a certain percentage of someone's intellectual property; like they do with parodies. And of course, the producers of these kits go to lengths to try and avoid/dodge direct affiliation with HasTak's intellectual property; such as not:
+ using the trademarked names like "Transformers," "Ultra Magnus" etc. anywhere
+ the illustration of "Classics Prime" in the comic book instruction is highly obscured and also distinctively modified from the actual toy... so it's an ambiguous looking transforming robot that bears striking similarity to Classics Optimus Prime, but it's NOT an imitation of that toy! (again, they could claim to have modified 10% of the toy's image)

Garage kits are kinda like software and hardware that people make that just happen to be compatible with products made by companies like IBM, but not actually made by those companies. How many of us have "IBM compatible" PCs?

What most of us consider to be "knock offs" on the other hand would be toys that attempt to deceive consumers into thinking that their counterfeits are legit. So morally speaking I think that garage kits and knock offs are two different things because one is not attempting to deceive consumers whereas the other is.

I think that's neither here nor there as the deception argument isn't what comes first. The infringement is. We are trying to rationalise the infringement and quality it b/c of its deception. Does it make it okay if there is an infringement of Hasbro/Takara's IP as long as its offering something that's original? Or something that is an add on? I think not. The deception isn't the primary issue. In fact, you'd argue that FansProjects comic trying to be ambiguous about the transforming figure in its comic is aimed at blurring the legal line. That's there intention and that in some shape or form is deception. Henceforth, there is ultimately no leg to stand on as at its core both offerings, KO or mass-custom project, are predicated on the infringement of IP of Hasbro/Takara.

If the customisers will give me what Hasbro wont then i really dont care who's profitting. Its a Sh!t thing to say but dems the cards we're dealt! :)

And tbh that's really the very heart of it. We should buy what makes us content but the only thing is we need to be wary of making moral judgements on what is right and wrong as we're not the best ones, with the exception of those who refuse to buy non-office product, in the position to say so anymore.

Kyle

28th July 2009, 05:42 PM

I really feel like replying to this thread. But my opinion will be very biased so I better not... :o:p:D

TheDirtyDigger

28th July 2009, 05:44 PM

I really feel like replying to this thread. But my opinion will be very biased so I better not... :o:p:D

Do it!

STL

28th July 2009, 05:47 PM

Do it!

+1!

The point of the Soapbox is to get discussion on some issues of interest. So i think its only fair all views get presented and hopefully over time I amasss a bunch of Soapbox that explore a lot of interesting ideas from all vantage points.

blackie

28th July 2009, 05:47 PM

I really feel like replying to this thread. But my opinion will be very biased so I better not... :o:p:D

your opinion is no more biased than others

TheDirtyDigger

28th July 2009, 05:56 PM

and KOers, which is what his point is in total

No it's not.

SilverDragon

28th July 2009, 06:00 PM

I can understand the bad feelings towards KOs, but I'm not so sure about the high-quality KOs of certain toys, such as the Dinobots. From what I've heard, their molds have been lost/damaged too much for repair, so an Encore release is not possible. So the options for people after them are originals, who may be missing bits and be in poor condition, and the aforementioned high-quality KOs.

So while it's annoying for collectors that these KOs are released, they can represent the only means of getting the toy in good condition for others.

Hasbro hasn't cared about Transformers ever... it's just a business venture for them. They aren't the inventors, just the marketers.

If they don't care about Transformers, then why do they keep making them? Why are they trying to get Animated toys released despite the fact that the franchise is essentially over? That fact alone proves that they care about Transformers.

kup

28th July 2009, 06:10 PM

Oppinion by nature is biased.

Lint

28th July 2009, 06:54 PM

The producers of KOs are fundamentally stepping all over something owned by Hasbro/Takara. Mass-customisers do the same. We should not then decry one group while glowingly praise another. It;'s grossly hypocritical. Until we cease purchasing and supporting mass-customisers, we are no longer in a tenable position to occupy a moral high ground on the matter.

While both infringe/violate on HasTak intellectual property. We decry one group because they commit fraud and glowingly praise the other because they manufacture products/accessories we fans have demand for. I may not speak for everyone but I do not think we deride KO's because they violate intellectual property, we deride them because as collectors we are being sold a replica product that is packaged and marketed as genuine. There is no double standard here regarding the violation of intellectual property, just the no-standard :p

bruticus

28th July 2009, 06:54 PM

Without secondary businesses as competition, HasTakTom have a monopoly in the market and can charge whatever they want, no matter how good or bad the toy design or quality is. Having the mass customs and the KO companies around, helps keep HasTakTom in check.

Frankly, HasTakTom have been dropping the ball on TFs for quite some time. So what if fans dont buy all their products? People are voting with their wallets and Mass customs / KO companies are just listening better to peoples demands and filling the void that HasTakTom are not evening attempting to fill.

If something legit doesnt sell well then tough luck. That is the nature of retail industry. To survive, a company needs to evolve and listen to the market trends rather than be complacent and rely on brands and the ignorance of some consumers.

I really hate it when TF fans say "hey, if we dont show our support and buy it, then they may not release the next one"
umm... no... if we continue to support them on things that are crap, we are distorting the sales figures and giving the go ahead for HTT to continue producing crap.

STL's point seems pretty black and white. Mass Customs, small Customs and KO makers should all be considered together. Under the non official TF banner. It'll be hypocritical to say its ok for one and not for the other. But they all have every right to be there cos there is still a demand for it.

Even the crappy poor quality KO's have a purpose, cos not every fan around the entire world can afford the retail prices of official TFs. We just happen to be fortunate enough to even have a choice in what we buy.

kup

28th July 2009, 07:06 PM

bruticus

28th July 2009, 07:43 PM

The G1 KOs locally costs more than what you would get a complete vintage figure on ebay. The guy at the Parra Fair sales KOs and absurd prices and he is fully aware of what they are.

On Ebay, the G1 KOs are not that much ahead their loose vintage and complete counterparts.

I'm sure that observation doesnt apply to just KO's mate.

but yeah, it is a shame when people unsuspectingly get ripped off from buying KO's (especially expensive KO's) thinking they are legit, but life is a learning process. We have all been ripped of at some stage or another and we need to learn from it.

But on the opposite spectrum, there are some that knowingly buy KO's, thinking desperately that they can never own a legit MISB G1 Swoop (for e.g.), so they opt to pay the higher (but still cheaper) price and get MISB KO Swoop right then and there.

MV75

28th July 2009, 07:59 PM

So STL, what are your thoughts on this sort of thing:

http://www.tfw2005.com/transformers-news/other-news-20/knock-off-dia-commander-is-coming-168227/

?

The ko'ers don't care whos IP they walk all over.

Robzy

28th July 2009, 08:43 PM

Without secondary businesses as competition, HasTakTom have a monopoly in the market and can charge whatever they want, no matter how good or bad the toy design or quality is...Frankly, HasTakTom have been dropping the ball on TFs for quite some time...I really hate it when TF fans say "hey, if we dont show our support and buy it, then they may not release the next one" umm... no... if we continue to support them on things that are crap, we are distorting the sales figures and giving the go ahead for HTT to continue producing crap.+1000!!

Totally agree!

One solution: Bring back GoBots!

:D

GoktimusPrime

28th July 2009, 09:24 PM

STL: Yeah, I see what you mean by infringement over deception. Having said that, IMHO I find garage kits to be a more "benign" form of infringement whereas KOs are more malignant (especially if they are counterfeits that attempt to pass off as legit products). Garage kits are somewhat similar to say doujinshi or fan subbs; technically illegal but openly tolerated by companies where both parties realise that they can benefit from each other and there's a sort of unspoken code of honour that exists. I used to be involved in fansubbing and I can tell you that anim� companies _definitely_ knew we existed, and in fact often would observe the popularity of fan subs to gauge interest in a title before officially obtaining a licence for it. They even wrote friendly letters to us and gave us sample products!

And I think that companies can stand to benefit a lot if they play their cards right with "benign infringers" -- and on the other hand, things can turn very nasty against companies if they slap down too hard on benign infringers too. Look at the BotCon Japan 2000 Ichikawa Hirofumi controversy (I'm sure I've told you this story before). Although Takara were legally fully within their rights to do what they did to Ichikawa, the majority of Japanese fans felt that it was still an act of douchebaggery and as a result really lashed out against them. BotCon Japan has since become _extinct_ and Takara worked very hard in cooperation with Ichikawa to repair company-fan relations. To their credit they've done well, but yeah - I think they learned a lesson that flexing their legal muscle in a way which fans see as nothing more than corporate greed and selfishness can blow up in their face if it compromises their reputation and relationship with consumers.

I somehow don't think the majority of fans would feel a similar sense of outrage if HasTak ever cracked down on a bootlegger. :p

Without secondary businesses as competition, HasTakTom have a monopoly in the market and can charge whatever they want, no matter how good or bad the toy design or quality is...
What monopoly? It's not as if Transformers is the _only_ toy brand out there. We have Lego, Ben 10, Barbie, Sesame Street, Bakugan etc. And Transformers isn't the only scif robot toy brand out there, we also have Roadbots and Machine Robot. And in Japan the competition in this field is even more massive with the plethora of mecha toys and merchandise there (Transformers are like an insect compared to Gundam).

Unless you're saying that HasTak have a monopoly in making 'Transformers' - which is not a really valid argument. Of _course_ they have a monopoly in making Transformers; it's their brand! That's like saying that Holden has a monopoly in making Commodores or Lamborghini has a monopoly in making Diablos. Or that Mattel (which is a bigger company than Hasbro) has a monopoly in making Barbie. Yes, Barbie is Mattel's IP - but that in itself isn't stopping any other toy maker from making their own girls' doll line. Likewise HasTak owning Transformers doesn't stop anyone else from developing their own transforming robot toy line like say Macross. Heck, Transformers itself was _born_ from different transforming robot lines owned by different companies (though most by Takara) e.g. Diaclone, Microman, Astro Magnum, Mechabot-1, Beetras, Dorvack etc.

Frankly, HasTakTom have been dropping the ball on TFs for quite some time...I really hate it when TF fans say "hey, if we dont show our support and buy it, then they may not release the next one" umm... no... if we continue to support them on things that are crap, we are distorting the sales figures and giving the go ahead for HTT to continue producing crap.
So go ahead and boycott products that you think are sub par. I don't see how that justifies supporting an illegal market though.

Kyle

28th July 2009, 10:04 PM

Some thoughts/observations:

- KO makers try hard to pretend their KO's are the real deals produced by the real company, while certain fan items (not all) try hard to pretend their works are not related to the real deals or the real company. I find this parallel funny. :p

- Some of us are treating the support for fan items as having an affair and we're not faithful to our wife (HasTak). We think it's wrong but it feels good to do it. Are we all treating our relationship with HasTak like a real "marriage"?

- I like this topic "the Convenient Truth":

Also interesting how Hasbro itself has been infringing on others' intellectual properties. I wonder if Hasbro ever approached Lamborgini for a license for their Universe/Henkei Sunstreaker and Sideswipe? Whether they did or not they ended up releasing the toys anyway. :o Maybe they were willing to ignore and forgive themselves with the occasional ones here and there. As a fan I'm more than happy that they released the toys for us though. :p:D

HasTak released MANY vehicles/jets/whatever related toys in the past. Did they pay licencing fee for all of them? I think the licencing they paid for the Binaltech/Alternators/Movie/Alternaties/ROTF was certainly a good new direction for them. But when they mentioned they've been taken advantage of in the recent BotCon, it was very convenient for them to forget their own past. I'm not saying that just because HasTak took advantage of others then it becomes fair game for others to take advanage of HasTak too. But I just can't help but feel funny about HasTak's comments.

One can argue that HasTak's vehicle toys often came with differences and were not exact scale replicas of the real deals. But hey many of the fan items are creative and not exact copies of HasTak's existing products too. And do not kid yourself if you reckon HasTak's toys weren't inspired by others' intellectual properties.

- WST Dinobots were mentioned in discussions from time to time. How about Roadbots?

GoktimusPrime

29th July 2009, 11:21 AM

Also interesting how Hasbro itself has been infringing on others' intellectual properties. I wonder if Hasbro ever approached Lamborgini for a license for their Universe/Henkei Sunstreaker and Sideswipe?
I thought Universe/Henkei Sunstreaker and Sideswipe's alt modes weren't actual Lamborghinis, but 'generic' looking sports cars that happen to look quite similar to Lamborghinis (but dissimilar enough to avoid a lawsuit). Likewise I heard that Hasbro had to modify the headlights on RiD X-Brawn because they couldn't obtain the rights from Mercedes for the ML320 (whereas Takara did, hence why Wild Ride has fully accurate headlights). Likewise with Alternator Prowl they had to change the Honda logo to an "A" because of some licensing issue.

One can argue that HasTak's vehicle toys often came with differences and were not exact scale replicas of the real deals. But hey many of the fan items are creative and not exact copies of HasTak's existing products too.
Yeah, that's what I meant before when I said that these fan items intentionally design their products so that while they bear striking similarity to Transformers, they're also clearly dissimilar and not the same thing either. I was under the impression that once you modify at least 10% of a source material then it's no longer considered plagiarism. And indeed it is often done with parodies - look at Hardware Wars (with characters like Fluke Starbucker, Ham Salad, Princess Anne-Droid, Darph Nader, Chinchilla the Wookiee Monster, RT-deco, 4Q2 etc.), Thumb Wars (Loke Groundrunner), Spaceballs, MAD Magazine and who doesn't love Weird Al Yankovic's musical spoofs? ;)

I see fan items as being a lot of those things that people can get for computers, game consoles etc - stuff that's compatible, but not manufactured by the computer or console's company. e.g.: a Playstation-compatible controller not manufactured by Sony. They even have these in Japan; they're a cheaper alternative to buying Sony controllers, but of course, they're not endorsed by Sony. Heck, I drive a Mitsubishi but I can get PLENTY of generic-brand parts for my car that aren't manufactured by Mitsubishi. They're not illegal immitations/counterfeits or anything - they're just parts made by other companies but are intentionally made to be compatible with certain makes of cars.

And do not kid yourself if you reckon HasTak's toys weren't inspired by others' intellectual properties.
G2 Gobots/Spychangers were inspired by Mattel's Hot Wheels and are indeed designed to be compatible with their playsets!! Combiners were inspired by Galoob's Connect-a-bles (before Galoob was acquired by Hasbro) -- hell, the entire reason why Hasbro did Transformers was to compete with Tonka's Go-Bots/Machine Men!!

- WST Dinobots were mentioned in discussions from time to time. How about Roadbots?
The Smallest Dinobots are a form of intellectual theft though - but Roadbots aren't. They're perfectly legit and are indeed a form of competition for Transformers in toy aisles. I'm not at all interested in Roadbots, but it's always good to see competition in the market. :)

jaydisc

29th July 2009, 11:34 AM

I was under the impression that once you modify at least 10% of a source material then it's no longer considered plagiarism. And indeed it is often done with parodies - look at Hardware Wars (with characters like Fluke Starbucker, Ham Salad, Princess Anne-Droid, Darph Nader, Chinchilla the Wookiee Monster, RT-deco, 4Q2 etc.), Thumb Wars (Loke Groundrunner), Spaceballs, MAD Magazine and who doesn't love Weird Al Yankovic's musical spoofs? ;)

I don't think there's any hard set percentage or definition. I think the idea is you can't create market confusion so that one company can't profit of the work and IP of another.

I believe spoofs and parodies fall under a different set of rules to that as well. While this is an American example, I think most of the concepts will be similar. The EFF has put together a white paper on suggestions for running a gripe or parody site here (http://www.eff.org/wp/gripe-or-parody-sites). The goal is still to avoid market confusion. I don't think many have bought Weird Al's Fat thinking it was Michael Jackson's Bad. However, I do believe he was taken to court to find out on a few occasions.

Also, unbeknownst to, and unfortunately for, I don't believe Australia has the "Fair Use" provisions which I think you've insinuated, and we've probably all wished for. Most mentions of "Fair Use" that you'll find on the internet typically relate to the American DMCA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act).

kup

29th July 2009, 12:02 PM

Classics Sunstreaker:

http://www.channel4.com/4car/media/100-greatest/03-large/55-lamborghini-gallardo.jpg

Not a perfect replica but close enough.

Hereticpoo

29th July 2009, 12:05 PM

What monopoly? It's not as if Transformers is the _only_ toy brand out there. We have Lego, Ben 10, Barbie, Sesame Street, Bakugan etc. And Transformers isn't the only scif robot toy brand out there, we also have Roadbots and Machine Robot. And in Japan the competition in this field is even more massive with the plethora of mecha toys and merchandise there (Transformers are like an insect compared to Gundam).

I think Bruticus may have been trying to say that because HasTak fully own "Transformers" they are the only manufacturer for official Transformers, therefore no alternative manufacturer can compete. Eg, I've seen Macross Toys made by Yamato, Bandai, & Toynami. and Macross Model Kits made by Hasegawa and Bandai.
Starwars fans can choose from Hasbro, Kotobukiya, Medicom, Diamond Select, Sideshow, LEGO, EFX Collectables etc, etc.
I've seen Gundam items with Banpresto, Bandai or Kotobukiya on the box. (Dunno if Banpresto and Bandai are the same or not)

Like you said, Holden have a monopoly on Commodores (as awesome as they are) but they don't have a monopoly on Large rear drive Sedans.
Anyways.....fans dont have a choice, if you want an official Transformer that covert vehicle to robot it must be a HasTak. Alot of times HasTak take advantage of that by giving us Bruticus/Superion giftsets with no Fragging hands or Feet, they give us ROTF figures made entirely of coloured plastic, thats like KinderSurprise Quality and they're only $1 and you get chocolate!! They give us a red car and a yellow car and its Bumblebee and cliffjumper or Sideswipe and Sunstreaker, how many characters have been released using that classics Sunstreaker mold? 4 or 5? They manipulate box photos coz the TF inside aka Ult Bumblebee is Crap worthy but i must admit HasTak do produce some really nice stuff.

Its difficult to feel bad for Hasbro when there are so many examples of refined lumps of petrochemical inserted into a box with a Transformers logo on it. Go Customisers Go. (Please insert Go Speedracer pic)
Ko'ers have no good intention. Customisers have to make a good product or it won't sell, and you know it aint official before you press buy now. Yes there are property infringements. But comparing Ko'ers with Mass Customs is like Apples vs Oranges.

TheDirtyDigger

29th July 2009, 12:16 PM

Classics Sunstreaker:

http://www.channel4.com/4car/media/100-greatest/03-large/55-lamborghini-gallardo.jpg

Not a perfect replica but close enough.

Melbourne Lamborghini is one of my customers and the cars in their showroom look very like Classics Sunstreaker. I keep meaning to ask them if I can pose my Tf with their cars.

GoktimusPrime

29th July 2009, 02:49 PM

jaydisc: I think there are laws which dictate how similar a toy can be to something like a real life vehicle before the toy company has to pay a licensing fee. AFAIK HasTak have lawyers which review and approve their products - including things like visual likeness and how much they can get away with in terms of making similar to a certain product before needing to pay licensing. We know they definitely do it with names so I think they also do it with things like vehicles. So things like Universe/Henkei Sunstreaker is probably just within the legal limits of how much Hasbro can imitate a Lamborghini without having to pay for licensing. If you look at the movie toys they actually have vehicle makers' names and logos displayed (e.g. GM, Lockheed & Martin, Corvette etc.) which indicates to me that Hasbro must've sought permission from those companies.

I think Bruticus may have been trying to say that because HasTak fully own "Transformers" they are the only manufacturer for official Transformers, therefore no alternative manufacturer can compete. Eg, I've seen Macross Toys made by Yamato, Bandai, & Toynami. and Macross Model Kits made by Hasegawa and Bandai.
Starwars fans can choose from Hasbro, Kotobukiya, Medicom, Diamond Select, Sideshow, LEGO, EFX Collectables etc, etc.
I've seen Gundam items with Banpresto, Bandai or Kotobukiya on the box. (Dunno if Banpresto and Bandai are the same or not)
Those are more examples of other companies manufacturing toys under licence from the original company. For example, Kabuya manufactures a lot of Transformers candy/gum PVCs and model kits - and it would have been done so under licence from Takara. Likewise Jayjays is a separate company from Hasbro, but they are able to manufacture Transformers clothes under licence from Hasbro. So I'd say that a Macross toy or model manufactured by say Yamato, would've been done so under licence from Big West.

Anyways.....fans dont have a choice, if you want an official Transformer that covert vehicle to robot it must be a HasTak. Alot of times HasTak take advantage of that by giving us Bruticus/Superion giftsets with no Fragging hands or Feet, they give us ROTF figures made entirely of coloured plastic, thats like KinderSurprise Quality and they're only $1 and you get chocolate!! They give us a red car and a yellow car and its Bumblebee and cliffjumper or Sideswipe and Sunstreaker, how many characters have been released using that classics Sunstreaker mold? 4 or 5? They manipulate box photos coz the TF inside aka Ult Bumblebee is Crap worthy but i must admit HasTak do produce some really nice stuff.

Its difficult to feel bad for Hasbro when there are so many examples of refined lumps of petrochemical inserted into a box with a Transformers logo on it. Go Customisers Go. (Please insert Go Speedracer pic)
If you're unhappy with an official TF product, then just don't buy it. I'm not collecting Mighty Muggs because I think they're complete crap. I think most of us here entirely skipped Transformers Animorphs for similar reasons! Just because you're a TF collector doesn't mean you have to buy _everything_ that's an official licensed TF product, unless you're a completist - but again, that's a choice you make. But I don't see my dislike for Mighty Muggs as a justification for buying a KO. Just because HasTak won't officially reissue a certain toy doesn't mean I'll go buy a KO of it. For instance, I need the Trainbots - and I've seen plenty of KO Raidens around (first time I saw one was in 2001). But just because Takara won't reissue Raiden doesn't mean that I'll go get a KO. I'll either save up and buy a legit one, or just not get one!! (yes, I can live without that toy!) - as a collector I would rather not have the toy at all over having a counterfeit.

Ko'ers have no good intention. Customisers have to make a good product or it won't sell, and you know it aint official before you press buy now. Yes there are property infringements. But comparing Ko'ers with Mass Customs is like Apples vs Oranges.
+1

jaydisc

29th July 2009, 03:09 PM

d*r*j*

29th July 2009, 03:15 PM

...If they don't care about Transformers, then why do they keep making them? Why are they trying to get Animated toys released despite the fact that the franchise is essentially over? That fact alone proves that they care about Transformers.

What? Do hasbro make transformers? NO.

They pay people in Japan to design them.

Then pay people in China to produce them.

Then they market them in the US. That's it, they invest and sell. They only invest in things that they believe will sell. If they believe that animated toys will sell well... and they already have a partial investment in unique moulds, then they will most likely release further animated toys.

Hereticpoo

29th July 2009, 04:27 PM

...as a collector I would rather not have the toy at all over having a counterfeit.

True dat. Gok my man a challenge for you, or anyone who would know. ;)

Has there ever been a non Hasbro or Takara;

Toy (transforming toy, not statue, pvc figure, model kit, chewing gum, tshirt, coffee cup, car sticker, pogostick, role playing mask/gun/cape, keychain, spirograph, or table matt, Toy. )

.....that transforms from alt mode to robot and back.
.....that is an official transformers character from any licenced medium (Film, comic, anime).
with faction symbols, that is a 100% Official TRANSFORMERS registered product, thats been engineered, designed, developed, sold by a licenced third party manufacturer?

roller

29th July 2009, 04:34 PM

Hereticpoo, Antex produced Minibots for Argentina and Saltmen X + Z

canofwhoopass_87

29th July 2009, 04:43 PM

What about the employment opportunities for the poor factory workers making the KO's! Don't forget about the little people.

STL

29th July 2009, 06:13 PM

Its difficult to feel bad for Hasbro when there are so many examples of refined lumps of petrochemical inserted into a box with a Transformers logo on it. Go Customisers Go. (Please insert Go Speedracer pic)
Ko'ers have no good intention. Customisers have to make a good product or it won't sell, and you know it aint official before you press buy now. Yes there are property infringements. But comparing Ko'ers with Mass Customs is like Apples vs Oranges.

I agree completely that they are different. My point though is they come into existence b/c of the very same act. What's done after cannot right the first wrong. And in an ideal world, we should not be condoning either. Intention to make a good custom could easily be equated intention to make a good KO. That doesn't change the fact that there is IP being infringed, there is a deprivation of an opportunity for Hasbro/Takara (whether or not they choose to take it). We can't determine that b/c it is good for us, that that somehow makes it right. We can like it but that doesnt' change the fact that we are supporting something unsanctioned and depends exclusively on the Hasbro/Takara characters and toys and hence IP.

Some thoughts/observations:

- KO makers try hard to pretend their KO's are the real deals produced by the real company, while certain fan items (not all) try hard to pretend their works are not related to the real deals or the real company. I find this parallel funny. :p

- Some of us are treating the support for fan items as having an affair and we're not faithful to our wife (HasTak). We think it's wrong but it feels good to do it. Are we all treating our relationship with HasTak like a real "marriage"?

Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts. :)

I don't think its wrong at all. I'm perfectly comfortable with cheating in my r/ships :p But in all seriousness, I do agree with you. I have no problem at all at buying mass-customs. I love them and I think they have changed the way Hasbro thinks about repackaging toys. Just look at Wingblade Prime, Samurai Prime and Hydrodive BB. It costs them less to work with an old mold and just add armour basically but creates a whole new demand for that figure. What I do think is wrong is that we think we're somehow morally right to chastise KOs but fail to see that mass-customisers are guilty of the same infringement. You can't condone one and not the other b/c it makes you hypocritical. As such, I don't see myself as any longer able to be angered by KOs. I can't accept an infringement when it works for me but get angry when it doesn't.

I also agree with your parallel. It's very ironic how the lines are drawn!

- I like this topic "the Convenient Truth":

Thanks! I liked it too and was hoping to get more kudos for such a lovely title :o Much appreciated.

HasTak released MANY vehicles/jets/whatever related toys in the past. Did they pay licencing fee for all of them? I think the licencing they paid for the Binaltech/Alternators/Movie/Alternaties/ROTF was certainly a good new direction for them. But when they mentioned they've been taken advantage of in the recent BotCon, it was very convenient for them to forget their own past. I'm not saying that just because HasTak took advantage of others then it becomes fair game for others to take advanage of HasTak too. But I just can't help but feel funny about HasTak's comments.

One can argue that HasTak's vehicle toys often came with differences and were not exact scale replicas of the real deals. But hey many of the fan items are creative and not exact copies of HasTak's existing products too. And do not kid yourself if you reckon HasTak's toys weren't inspired by others' intellectual properties.

- WST Dinobots were mentioned in discussions from time to time. How about Roadbots?

I don't disagree with your point but again I don't think it makes it okay to commit the core infringement. In the case of both mass-customs and KOs, they take something (character or toy) that is not their's and use it for their own ends to produce something whose entire success rests on Hasbro/Takara IP. A Sunstreaker toy does not on the other hand rely solely on its appeal as a Lamborghini to succeed. People don;'t buy it b/c it's a Lambo. They buy it b/c its a transformer and it looks nice. So yes, I think you make a valid point but I don't think it changes the landscape at all here as ultimately the core infringement relies on something that is entirely Hasbro/Takara's to succeed.

What about the employment opportunities for the poor factory workers making the KO's! Don't forget about the little people.

I don't honestly think they'd be too different from the ones that normal TFs are made in either. You've gotta remember, all stuff is made in China these days. And a large reason for that is the low cost of labour.

So STL, what are your thoughts on this sort of thing:

http://www.tfw2005.com/transformers-news/other-news-20/knock-off-dia-commander-is-coming-168227/

?

The ko'ers don't care whos IP they walk all over.

You mistake me again. As stated clearly in the Soapbox, I'm not by any means saying KOers aren't guilty or deceptive. I contended all along that both mass-customisers and KOers step all over IP. Neither is less culpable. The only reduced culpability that mass-customisers have is derived from the fact that we like their products and that in itself isn't a very rigid position from which to hold some air of moral superiority when we're accepting something just b/c it's convenient to our interests. It's the same infringement and what we need to do is acknowledge that and admit that it's not right.

That's not to say we can't like mass-custom offerings b/c I sure as hell do. But to be credible we need to remember where the line in the sand is. Fact is, both have crossed it and we can't hold to our arguments about the morality of it all when we are condoning the very same act that permits a KO or mass-custom to be produced.

Sky Shadow

29th July 2009, 06:47 PM

What? Do hasbro make transformers? NO.

They pay people in Japan to design them.

Really? Doesn't that mean Eric Siebenaler, Don Figueroa, Derrick J. Wyatt and Aaron Archer get paid for just sitting around on their arses all day?

GoktimusPrime

29th July 2009, 06:51 PM

What? Do hasbro make transformers? NO.

They pay people in Japan to design them.

Then pay people in China to produce them.

Then they market them in the US. That's it, they invest and sell. They only invest in things that they believe will sell. If they believe that animated toys will sell well... and they already have a partial investment in unique moulds, then they will most likely release further animated toys.
That's not entirely true. In many cases Hasbro contributes too. Through reading the Takara Staff Interview with Ono Koujin in TF Generations and meeting up and talking with Hasbro designer Eric Siebernaler, my understanding of how it works is this:
+ Hasbro tells Takara what they want and sends them conceptual design sketches
+ Takara then engineers these designs into toys
+ After Hasbro approves the final designs they are then manufactured in China

Hereticpoo, Antex produced Minibots for Argentina and Saltmen X + Z
They didn't _make_ them though. They just got existing TF moulds like the MiniBots and Jumpstarters and repainted them and sold them to Latin American markets.

So afaik there hasn't been any other company that's produced mainline Transformers action figures. But then again, why would there be?? The only time HasTak would ever licence out to another company would be to produce things that they themselves don't, like clothes, comic books, cartoons, movies etc. Otherwise if they can do it themselves, why wouldn't they?

With franchises like Gundam and Macross it's different, they're not predominantly (or initially) toy franchises - they're anim� franchises. Anim� companies like Big West then go and licence various companies to manufacture merchandise for them. Transformers on the other hand is primarily HasTak's action figure franchise. So I think comparing Transformers with franchises like Gundam and Macross is like apples and oranges.

Compare it with other primarily toy franchises like LEGO, Barbie and Hot Wheels. When have LEGO ever allowed another company to manufacture LEGO toys for them? There are other brands of building block toys for sure, but none of them are actually LEGO (afaik).

What about the employment opportunities for the poor factory workers making the KO's! Don't forget about the little people.
And if we shut down drug makers we'll also be leaving many people without a form of employment. They might just have to go and make an honest living! :p

Watch this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6lzEhoXads) :)

Hereticpoo

29th July 2009, 06:58 PM

So I think comparing Transformers with franchises like Gundam and Macross is like apples and oranges.

Touche! :D

Kyle

29th July 2009, 07:14 PM

I don't disagree with your point but again I don't think it makes it okay to commit the core infringement. In the case of both mass-customs and KOs, they take something (character or toy) that is not their's and use it for their own ends to produce something whose entire success rests on Hasbro/Takara IP. A Sunstreaker toy does not on the other hand rely solely on its appeal as a Lamborghini to succeed. People don;'t buy it b/c it's a Lambo. They buy it b/c its a transformer and it looks nice. So yes, I think you make a valid point but I don't think it changes the landscape at all here as ultimately the core infringement relies on something that is entirely Hasbro/Takara's to succeed.

Just because HasTak does not rely on the infringements it makes to succeed in selling toys (this is still debatable), then the infringements it makes are no longer infringements?

If I don't need to steal but I go ahead and steal from a shop anyway, is it a lesser offence than someone who steals from myself?

Lord_Zed

30th July 2009, 01:01 AM

And if we shut down drug makers we'll also be leaving many people without a form of employment. They might just have to go and make an honest living! :p

Watch this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6lzEhoXads) :)

Sadly in certain disadvantaged countries that is pretty much the only way to make a living.

Oh but were talking about TF's. Like most posters I think there's an ethical world of difference between an object that is vaugely similar to something you've produced and one that is trying to look exactly like your product and pass itself of as the same thing.

Although it can't be denied they both infringe on Hasbro's intelectual property.

GoktimusPrime

30th July 2009, 09:51 AM

dirge

30th July 2009, 10:37 AM

I think there are two arguments here - legal and ethical/moral.

Legal point: yes, both counterfeits and fan items infringe on HasTak's IP.

There's still a distinction here. The fan item producers are ensuring that they don't directly complete with Hasbro/TT, and are generally treading around flagrant _copyright_ infringement. Sure, they're clearly producing items related to Transformers, but they're not producing items to compete with Hasbro/TT's product.

I think it's fair to assume that Hasbro/TT had no plans to make anything like (for example) City Commander. Classics Ultra Magnus is one of _many_ white Ultra Magnus repaints produced to milk the mould (keeping R&D costs down), and we've never had power armour for any of those.

On the other hand, they may have had Mirage in their sights as a reissue before the KO producers flooded the market with imitations. The KO producers are clearly not worried about stepping on IP toes, and are in effect competing (in fact, illegally outcompeting) with Hasbro/TT's potential TCS/Encore Mirage.

jaydisc

30th July 2009, 10:54 AM

There's still a distinction here. The fan item producers are ensuring that they don't directly complete with Hasbro/TT, and are generally treading around flagrant _copyright_ infringement. Sure, they're clearly producing items related to Transformers, but they're not producing items to compete with Hasbro/TT's product.

With Drift already out, and Defender and others announced, is this true anymore?

dirge

30th July 2009, 05:07 PM

With Drift already out, and Defender and others announced, is this true anymore?

Sorry, I was referring to accessories, rather than "customs" as such. The actual characters are on the other side of that fence.

jaydisc

30th July 2009, 07:09 PM

Do you guys think originally-packaged KO makers are being deceptive as well, e.g.

http://itfdb.com/temporary/tf/1248939966_Mickey.JPG.jpeg

GoktimusPrime

30th July 2009, 08:42 PM

Yes, but to a lesser degree than those who use counterfeit packaging.

jaydisc

4th August 2009, 10:50 AM

kup

4th August 2009, 10:55 AM

Well, here is a perfect example:

Impossible Toys (makers of the Quints), have just announced plans (http://www.seibertron.com/transformers/news/impossible-toys-teases-their-fall-project-trns01g1-arcee/16670/) to make a G1-styled Arcee. Personally, there is no doubt in my mind that this will have a negative effect on Hasbro's ability to sell Animated Arcee, as many G1 purists have publicly stated that they're only buying it due to a lack of a G1-styled alternative.

One could argue that this is even more damaging to Hasbro than say, a KO Sunstreaker, as the KO interferes more with the second hand market than with Hasbro directly.

I wonder how many of you here who deride KOs will also consider purchasing this? :rolleyes:

When it comes to those things, Hasbro should also share some culpability as they had ample time to make a proper G1 Arcee toy for almost 25 years but repeatedly neglected to do so despite more than a few other 'fembot' released toys.

Hasbro's neglect of a section their market is what gives rise to such third party toys.

TheDirtyDigger

4th August 2009, 10:57 AM

I wonder how many of you here who deride KOs will also consider purchasing this? :rolleyes:

Well put me down for two! :)

dirge

4th August 2009, 10:59 AM

As much as the idea is nice, I personally would only purchase a HasTak G1 Arcee. For me, this is still just a custom.

kup

4th August 2009, 11:09 AM

I am also pretty sure that people who are inclined to buy this custom would also buy a legit G1 Arcee if she was ever released so it wouldn't be very damaging to sales.

gamblor916

4th August 2009, 11:15 AM

I also deride KOs and will purchase several of these. Call me hypocrite.

dirge

4th August 2009, 12:06 PM

When it comes to those things, Hasbro should also share some culpability as they had ample time to make a proper G1 Arcee toy.

True. But as sole owner of the property, it is at their sole discretion. I don't know that "culpability" is the best way to put it. I think a better way to put it is that Hasbro haven't defended this part of their property from copyright infringement as well as they could have. They're not to blame, but their actions have indirectly led to a loss of revenue.

GoktimusPrime

4th August 2009, 01:28 PM

HasTak should make a G1-style Arcee as part of Universe/Henkei.

griffin

4th August 2009, 01:36 PM

But for the moment, we remain content to chastise the production of KOs while we happily accept the offerings of mass-custom producers.

I certainly don't. I don't collect anything that is fan-made (my collection is after all, a (licensed/official) Transformers(r) collection). That's because I personally feel that they contaminate the purity of my collection.

As for this forum, I also don't condone promoting of unnofficial items, and make sure that any news items clearly state they are not official items. If it is an item that copies or aims to imitate an existing or upcoming figure (like Drift), I would probably even omit mentioning it in the news section, unless it is to warn people off of it (like we do with KOs/counterfiet figures).

As it was mentioned in an early posting in this topic, a fan-made, original accessory that actually encourages the purchase of a legitimate product, is much more desirable (probably even by Hasbro), than a copied product or accessory that prevents the purchase of a legitimate product.

Like,
- Superion parts being available while Superion is still in stores, helps sell a combiner many weren't planning to buy.
- Universe/Henkei Inferno ladder while Inferno is still available in stores, generates the same added interest in a currently released item.
- As does Autoscout while Soundwave is in release.
- City Commander being available while stores (mostly online stores) still had Ultra Magnus in stock, means more turnover of TFs inventory for that store, prompting them to continue ordering more of the brand. Same happened with the Cliffjumper add-on package.

None of those falsely claim to be a real Transformers product, or aim to replace an existing item. As such, each item is having a positive impact on Hasbro/Takara sales.

But,
- A fan-made Drift toy is being produced despite it being announced by Hasbro that there will be an official toy soon, and people are less likely to buy both.
- A Gen1-styled Arcee toy is along the same lines, if it is released before or during the retail sale of an official Gen1-styled Arcee toy in Animated packaging.
- Masterpiece Convoy trailer is an example of what happens when there is an official release of a fan-made item. Even if it is already in circulation, additional first-hand and second-hand sales of the unnofficial product negatively impacts on the sale of the legitimate one. (it was because of this one that I don't risk buying fan-made stuff in case a real one is released and I need to replace it to keep the collection 'pure')

People purchasing a fan-made/KO figure (especially if it is cheaper or is an almost exact replica of the real thing) are less likely to purchase the real thing, and thus negatively impacts Hasbro/Takara sales.

Not to mention that Replica out-of-release figures (that don't directly impact on sales), irritates fans/collectors of real TFs products, who can no longer purchase an item with the piece of mind that it isn't a fake. It can also indirectly impacts on legitimate sales (albeit a negligible amount), by the occasional newbie/kid/parent who gets stung by a counterfeit, and gets turned off the whole franchise/fandom.

This isn't a criticism towards anyone here who buys fake TFs or items that compete with legitimate items, because there is too much demand overseas for cheap immitations for us (the fans) to ever stop it. If it really is a problem to Hasbro's bottom line, they need to step up, pull their finger out, stop all the talk, and do something affirmative about it for once.

As it stands, Hasbro and TakaraTomy will only spend more money on significant existing investments - the unreleased Animated toys and Titaniums Prowl & Grimlock already got to mould stage, so most of the expense has been made and they needed to be produced to offset the prior significant investment, as opposed to the other Titaniums (Arcee, Shockwave, Cosmos) which didn't get to mould stage, so not enough expense warranted taking them further to be produced.
Replicas of past items are probably not of great concern to Hasbro/Takara, as it would be deemed a waste of money stopping them if they didn't feel that it would tarnish their brand's image enough with their continued existence.

Defcon

4th August 2009, 04:48 PM

With customizing of toys it should be for personal use only and through private commissions only. I like to see customizers work and admire it, but when someone builds up a reputation and starts selling them on ebay that to me is infringing on the intellectual property. Online stores selling custom kits, along with official transformer products, is misleading even though these products are unofficial and are stated to be. This stuff should be only privately produced.

And to be now hypocritical!
I think the Quint customs are great! its a pity these customs are not produced by hasbro/takara.

Defcon

4th August 2009, 05:09 PM

And also I hate KO's I have one bad KO experience through ebay, and I will never recommend them to anyone, not even for customs. Get rid of them/ destroy them and take them out of circulation. I thought I had bought a legit product, even the picture looked legit, but the actual item I recieved was not.

I really don't think KO's hurt or have a huge impact on sales for Hasbro/Takara products, once you realize its fake and of poor quality you really have wasted your money and if you try to resale, personally I would feel guilty. But since you have already wasted your money it might be a while before you buy again. And I suppose this is a loss of a potential purchase of a legit product.

GoktimusPrime

4th August 2009, 07:39 PM

Time for my moment of hypocrisy:

I don't buy unlicensed toys or accessories, but I do buy unlicensed merchandise. e.g.: backpack, clothes, car badges etc., because finding officially licensed fashion items is damn hard to find, especially before Jayjays started doing TF clothes (which is only a fairly recent thing). And there are still lots of things that I still cannot find licensed items for like neckties, pants, socks, pyjamas etc., so anything I can't find I'll make myself using iron-on transfers. Some item are also - to me - prohibitively rare and expensive, like Transformer shoes. I'm not a sneaker collector and I'd really like some cheap generic-style TF shoes; even like the kind you'd buy at Kmart. I'd make my own pair with iron-ons, but shoes are also made from rubber which melt under the iron. :(

My goal is to build an entire wardrobe full of TF-image covered clothes and clothing accessories so that each and every day I am covered head to toe in Transformers imagery. At the moment my daily dress consists of:
+ Transformers underwear (licensed)
+ Transformers shirts (mostly licensed, some unlicensed)
+ Transformers pants (unlicensed - self made)
+ Transformers backpacks (unlicensed - one purchased, another self made)
+ Transformers umbrella (unlicensed)
+ Transformers hat (licensed)
+ Transformers jackets (licensed)
+ Transformers wristwatch (licensed)
+ Transformers scarf (unlicensed - self made)
+ Transformers glove (unlicensed - self made)
+ Transformers neckties (unlicensed - self made)
+ Transformers belts (licensed and unlicensed)
+ Transformers car badge (unlicensed, although I have licensed magnets on my car too)

I would _love_ to buy more officially licensed fashion and fashion accessories if only they would make them (for adults - I see some awesome TF clothes for kids, including a beanie which I'd buy in a heartbeat if they were made in adult sizes). :(

STL

5th August 2009, 11:53 AM

I think there are two arguments here - legal and ethical/moral.

Legal point: yes, both counterfeits and fan items infringe on HasTak's IP.

Ethical/moral point: counterfeits are direct violations and attempt to deceive consumers whereas fan items do not. Counterfeiters are primarily motivated by personal gain/profit whereas fan item producers are primarily motivated by their love for the franchise and dedication to the fandom. As I understand it the money they charge for these items is to cover the cost of manufacture, and not for profit. If they are substantially profiting from this, then it would change the ethical argument - but I'm working on the assumption that they're not-for-profit.

Legally, agreed.

Morally, I'm not sure about that the tenacity of that assumption that it is not for profit. If it isn't, then it goes further to my point.

Even more so, I think the moral dimension of it needs to be separated from the fact .that Hasbro is a corporation. What if it was just a single individual who invested all this time into it and then this corporation ran away with the idea and made extortionate profits? I'm certain there'd be more sympathy. There are countless instants of this in commercial history, mind you. But the point is, Hasbro/Takara being a corporation does not change the nature of the transgression.

That;'s not to say that if Hasbro/Takara hasn't ever taken ideas from someone else. As Kyle has pointed out they have. But two wrongs do not make a right either. So the KOers or mass-customisers are in the same boat. It doesn't justify their position to infringe morally just b/c Hasbro/Takara have. Just b/c someone steals, it doesn't all of a sudden make sense that you steal from someone, right?

I certainly don't. I don't collect anything that is fan-made (my collection is after all, a (licensed/official) Transformers(r) collection). That's because I personally feel that they contaminate the purity of my collection.

And as I noted to Gok, that makes you one of the few people have any right to decry KOs. You're consistent on your position. The rest of us, not so much.

People purchasing a fan-made/KO figure (especially if it is cheaper or is an almost exact replica of the real thing) are less likely to purchase the real thing, and thus negatively impacts Hasbro/Takara sales.

Not to mention that Replica out-of-release figures (that don't directly impact on sales), irritates fans/collectors of real TFs products, who can no longer purchase an item with the piece of mind that it isn't a fake. It can also indirectly impacts on legitimate sales (albeit a negligible amount), by the occasional newbie/kid/parent who gets stung by a counterfeit, and gets turned off the whole franchise/fandom.

I don't think that being a replica changes the landscape on this issue. Fact is you are still also potentially depriving of Hasbro/Takara an opportunity down the line. Would they be now keen to release a armoured Ultra Magnus? Or a new Buster Prime with the guns if a cheaper custom set is available rather than buying the same figure all over? Or the custom Grimlock crown set which is now in direct competition with the Takara exclusive? You are depriving the rightful owner of their property rights whether or not they've done it yet. Once you produce it, it removes the opportunity for them or puts them in competition with something based completely on their IP. This impacts their sales. Heck though it doesn't even come down to whether it competes. Simple fact is that the infringement exists. That cannot be justified irrespective of the position. It's like saying to someone, youve got to much spare land you're doing nothing with. I'm going to build my pool onto your land onto the part you've never used

You couldn't tolerate that. You can't tolerate this just b/c it works for you.

The logic just isn't sound.

I also deride KOs and will purchase several of these. Call me hypocrite.

[QUOTE=Defcon;120613And to be now hypocritical!
[/QUOTE]

But that's the point of this Soapbox. We don't have to be hypocritical. we just need to appreciate our positon on the matter. The simple fact is that there is one and the one and the same infringement that occurs in the first place. That it is that same infringement that allows the existence of both. Just b/c we as fabs have a personally vested interested doesn't change the fundamental nature of the infringement. We cannot have it work for us one way, but then staunchly take the opposition position when it doesn't go our way. There has to be consistency.

That's when it's hypocritical.

griffin

5th August 2009, 01:32 PM

How does this:

I don't think that being a replica changes the landscape on this issue. Fact is you are still also potentially depriving of Hasbro/Takara an opportunity down the line. Would they be now keen to release a armoured Ultra Magnus? Or a new Buster Prime with the guns if a cheaper custom set is available rather than buying the same figure all over? Or the custom Grimlock crown set which is now in direct competition with the Takara exclusive? You are depriving the rightful owner of their property rights whether or not they've done it yet. Once you produce it, it removes the opportunity for them or puts them in competition with something based completely on their IP. This impacts their sales. Heck though it doesn't even come down to whether it competes. Simple fact is that the infringement exists. That cannot be justified irrespective of the position. It's like saying to someone, youve got to much spare land you're doing nothing with. I'm going to build my pool onto your land onto the part you've never used

You couldn't tolerate that. You can't tolerate this just b/c it works for you.

The logic just isn't sound.

...disagree with what you were responding to:

Originally Posted by griffin http://www.otca.com.au/boards/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?p=120553#post120553)
People purchasing a fan-made/KO figure (especially if it is cheaper or is an almost exact replica of the real thing) are less likely to purchase the real thing, and thus negatively impacts Hasbro/Takara sales.

Not to mention that Replica out-of-release figures (that don't directly impact on sales), irritates fans/collectors of real TFs products, who can no longer purchase an item with the piece of mind that it isn't a fake. It can also indirectly impacts on legitimate sales (albeit a negligible amount), by the occasional newbie/kid/parent who gets stung by a counterfeit, and gets turned off the whole franchise/fandom.

I was pointing out that Replicas, even of past figures, impacts the bottom line of the Brand owners. Even if it is of a lesser amount with the Replica past figures. We know about the controversy of the Gen1 Constructicons - I think the new movie has improved the chances of a reissue, but we would have had one ages ago (for Takara to profit from and generate more reissues, and maybe even more combiner reissues), if it weren't for Replica Constructicons. The additional point I was making here is the (rare) occasion that has a potential long-term customer turned away from the Brand after being disappointed or upset over getting Replica figure (of any era) that they didn't know was a Replica when buying it.

GoktimusPrime

5th August 2009, 03:03 PM

Just b/c someone steals, it doesn't all of a sudden make sense that you steal from someone, right?
But what about consideration of motive?

STL

5th August 2009, 04:01 PM

How does this:

...disagree with what you were responding to:

I was pointing out that Replicas, even of past figures, impacts the bottom line of the Brand owners. Even if it is of a lesser amount with the Replica past figures. We know about the controversy of the Gen1 Constructicons - I think the new movie has improved the chances of a reissue, but we would have had one ages ago (for Takara to profit from and generate more reissues, and maybe even more combiner reissues), if it weren't for Replica Constructicons. The additional point I was making here is the (rare) occasion that has a potential long-term customer turned away from the Brand after being disappointed or upset over getting Replica figure (of any era) that they didn't know was a Replica when buying it.

Oops my bad. I read it as you were meaning that replicas are worse than mass-customised product b/c they hurt Hasbro/Takara's bottom line more and for that reason replicas/KOs are a worser animal. I didn't realise it was expanding on the same point for both. :o

But what about consideration of motive?

Motives we have agreed are subjective. I can't say with conviction who does it for profit, who does it "for the fandom". And I don't think it helps either whatever the motive. If a homeless person robbed your house so he could continue putting food on the table for their kids, would that make it okay? I think again, we as a fandom don't have much credibility on the issue once we starting buying these custom products. We can't have our cake and eat it.

GoktimusPrime

5th August 2009, 04:19 PM

a homeless person robbed your house so he could continue putting food on the table for their kids, would that make it okay?
Good point. I've been robbed before and it's an awful experience - and the person's motives is inconsequential, the fact is that you've been robbed. (the cops told me it was by junkies though :()

griffin

6th August 2009, 01:22 AM

Oops my bad. I read it as you were meaning that replicas are worse than mass-customised product b/c they hurt Hasbro/Takara's bottom line more and for that reason replicas/KOs are a worser animal. I didn't realise it was expanding on the same point for both.

Overall, yes, my entire post was scaling the different issues instead of just painting all as equally good or equally bad. It's just that the small portion of my post you quoted in your reply post, didn't appear to relate to what you were saying in your reply (to my entire post, assumedly), which confused me.

I see this issue as a scale/spectrum, not a simple black-and-white sorting of the elements being raised.
Replicas (of current/future product) IS worse for the bottom line, but that doesn't mean I'm saying the others are okay because they 'aren't as bad'. I don't support any, but they aren't all equally evil.

On a scale of Worst to Not-Really-That-Bad:
Replica current/future product - hurts bottom line of Hasbro/Takara most, if it is a cheaper alternative.
Replica past product - hurts the bottom line a lot less, mostly from upset customers of the fake product. As for preventing reissues - it would only limit the potential pool of reissue candidates, and we've seen 8 years of reissues with no signs of it running out of sellable candidates (Besides, Reissues aren't a significant product line/money-maker out of all the millions of TFs produced each year by Hasbro and TakaraTomy anyway, so they wouldn't care too much which figures get done if there is enough demand for it - they still took a chance with Metroplex despite the Replica).
Custom figures - would only hurt Hasbro/Takara on the rare occasion an official version of that character in that same form is produced (if Fan-made versions of Drift and Arcee go ahead, I think they would be the first - but knowing an official, well-sculpted/engineered convertable figure is on the way, these probably won't even be produced, or sell much at all).
Custom accessories - doesn't compete with Hasbro/Takara or prevent a purchase of an official product, but instead creates a need to purchase an official item for that Custom accessory, generating sales for the Brand owner.

They might all be illegal, and to some fans are all just as avoidable, but when it comes to affecting Sales, or the Bottom Line, of the Brand Owners, it's obvious that they would prioritise combatting Replicas first, because they have the greater negative impact.
It makes it difficult to claim that Customised accessories have just the same impact to Hasbro/Takara as Replica figures when we see one encourages sales of official product, while the other discourages it. Custom figures wouldn't even be close to the affect Replicas have, because even if an official figure was done later, fan-made stuff is still so different in design/engineering/sculpting, fans would still want to buy the official figure if it is good enough to buy. After all, that's what it would come down to - the existance of a fan-made alternative won't be preventing the purchase of the official figure if that official figure is just a terrible toy. If the official figure is a good toy, people who bought a fan-made figure will still buy it because the fan-made convertable figures just can't compete with the real thing.

STL

6th August 2009, 11:07 AM

On a scale of Worst to Not-Really-That-Bad:
Replica current/future product - hurts bottom line of Hasbro/Takara most, if it is a cheaper alternative.
Replica past product - hurts the bottom line a lot less, mostly from upset customers of the fake product. As for preventing reissues - it would only limit the potential pool of reissue candidates, and we've seen 8 years of reissues with no signs of it running out of sellable candidates (Besides, Reissues aren't a significant product line/money-maker out of all the millions of TFs produced each year by Hasbro and TakaraTomy anyway, so they wouldn't care too much which figures get done if there is enough demand for it - they still took a chance with Metroplex despite the Replica).
Custom figures - would only hurt Hasbro/Takara on the rare occasion an official version of that character in that same form is produced (if Fan-made versions of Drift and Arcee go ahead, I think they would be the first - but knowing an official, well-sculpted/engineered convertable figure is on the way, these probably won't even be produced, or sell much at all).
Custom accessories - doesn't compete with Hasbro/Takara or prevent a purchase of an official product, but instead creates a need to purchase an official item for that Custom accessory, generating sales for the Brand owner.

I think that's a great spectrum you've got going there which shows degrees of relativity That said, what do you think about custom accessories that compromise Hasbro's future ability to profit. for example, the guns being made for movie Prime are in direct competition with the Buster Prime release. If you can get those relatively cheaper, why would you want to buy a US Hasbro Buster Prime which lacks all the silver of Takara (assuming they Hasbro release their own version down the track). Or if it clashes with exclusives like the Crown Grimlock? Again that directly affects sales of the official product b/c the reason they offer a second release with a slight variation down the line is to profit from the base mold. What if someone had made TFM Ironhide's guns prior to the release of the ROTF version? Again that's cannabilising future releases. This is even more the case given Hasbro has said in recent times it wants to focus on brand recognition through repainting main characters and giving them a new prefix as opposed to all new name. The way they do this is by a different accessory etc so it really bites into them and is as bad as say the first category of a custom of a current/future product.

So while I do think the spectrum's a great starting point I don't think it's explanatory power is completely sound. That's probably why the focus still needs to be on recognition of the nature of the transgression here. It is one and the same across the entire spectrum. It's ultimately the same transgression that permits each of those categories to exist and in that sense none is relatively less reprehensible than the other.

griffin

6th August 2009, 11:36 AM

Indeed, there is no such thing as 'half illegal', so each would be just as bad in the eyes of the law. I just think it is worth breaking down the scale, like the difference between murder and manslaughter (both are bad, but one is worse).

As for custom accessories that replicate future/existing accessories, it is part of the 'Replica Current/Future Product' category (I didn't use the word 'toy' because it isn't just whole toys in that category) because people will buy it, 'if it is a cheaper alternative' to the official (whole) product.

kup

6th August 2009, 11:41 AM

STL

6th August 2009, 02:12 PM

When it comes to MP Grimlock and his crown - You would not get a full $300 figure just for the hat, I certainly wouldn't. If I wanted just the hat I would go for the accessory kit instead or not get one at all.

Buster Prime's gun: Assuming I already own the first release, I wouldn't buy and import a whole figure just for the gun. I would get Buster Prime only if I didn't own the original release which I don't. However If I already owned the original, I would probably look into getting the accessory kit instead as a gun or a crown is not worth the full cost of buying the same high end figure twice.

I am sure that I am not the only one who would see it like that.

I don't disagree with you for a moment. I sure as heck won't be forking out cash for it either and would prefer the accessory kit. Not that I intend to. Don't think a crown is all that cool tbh but that's neither here nor there.

That said, you can't do what you feel. You can't say b/c you prefer things to be a certain way that its a-okay to march out there and steal Hasbro/Takara's IP and directly compete with them using their own product. There's a reason why that Grimlock is an exclusive. Why he's packed in a certain way. You are hurting Takara's ability to sell this exclusive. It doesn't matter what you feel. It's wrong. You'd certainly hate it if someone did the same to something that you designed and invested money in just to watch the sales of your exclusive cannabalised. Just b/c its not the best option for us doesn't make it okay to infringe on Takara's IP. I hope you can see that.

dirge

6th August 2009, 02:20 PM

I don't disagree with you for a moment. I sure as heck won't be forking out cash for it either and would prefer the accessory kit. Not that I intend to. Don't think a crown is all that cool tbh but that's neither here nor there.

(snip)

There's a reason why that Grimlock is an exclusive. Why he's packed in a certain way. You are hurting Takara's ability to sell this exclusive. It doesn't matter what you feel. It's wrong.

One could argue that it's wrong for Takara to ask consumers to buy another very expensive Grimlock toy to get their hands on the crown itself. Not from a legal POV obviously, but an ethical one. Are they ripping off their consumers? Is this behaviour unethical and therefore wrong from a moralistic standpoint?

You're approaching this from a purely legal point of view, but others will take an ethical approach. Most would agree that straight up counterfeited products are wrong, because both points of view would feel that the consumer _and_ HasTak are being ripped off. Not all would agree with your stance on 3rd party accessories.

I have no stance myself on the rights and wrongs of third party accessories - but there are definitely different ways of approaching it. STL, your arguments so far are largely dismissing the ethical points of view expressed by others here.

GoktimusPrime

6th August 2009, 02:52 PM

jaydisc

6th August 2009, 02:55 PM

It's my impression that STL is not being critical of unlicensed toys and also not being critical of KOs. What he is trying to point out is that there is a hypocrisy if you are critical of one and accepting of the other.

TheDirtyDigger

6th August 2009, 03:09 PM

What he is trying to point out is that there is a hypocrisy if you are critical of one and accepting of the other.

There's no hypocrisy although I can almost see how that assumption could be mistakenly made.
Ko's are not fan made items. They never will be and they don't pretend to be.

STL

6th August 2009, 03:14 PM

One could argue that it's wrong for Takara to ask consumers to buy another very expensive Grimlock toy to get their hands on the crown itself. Not from a legal POV obviously, but an ethical one. Are they ripping off their consumers? Is this behaviour unethical and therefore wrong from a moralistic standpoint?

They're offering a variant. different colours, different packaging, more accessories. It's not much different to Crystal Convoy, Black Starscream or Gadep or any other exclusive. I can't see how that makes it a moralistic point. Is every repaint then a moralistic conundrum? Unethical?

You're approaching this from a purely legal point of view, but others will take an ethical approach. Most would agree that straight up counterfeited products are wrong, because both points of view would feel that the consumer _and_ HasTak are being ripped off. Not all would agree with your stance on 3rd party accessories.

I have no stance myself on the rights and wrongs of third party accessories - but there are definitely different ways of approaching it. STL, your arguments so far are largely dismissing the ethical points of view expressed by others here.

I don't think I've dismissed the ethical points. I've tried to address them myself if you have a close look, Dirge. I've pointed out various ethical arguments to counter ethical arguments put forward too. Showing that those points are ethically very questionable themselves. I've pointed to instances of where it's not right to steal from someone just b/c they've stolen from someone else. Ive discussed Is it any more right to steal from someone if it is for a good end? How would you feel if you were the victim? Is it okay that if you like something then that qualifies it as being ethical right to take someone else's ideas/IP? Is it okay that b/c something is too pricey that a third party who relies on someone else's IP make a cheaper alternative? is it okay that if Hasbro/Takara infringe on other's IP, that we do it too? They are questions that I've addressed with countervailing moral points too..

At the end of this complex web, I certainly do feel that the most cogent position is to at least acknowledge that we ourselves are condoning infringements. There is something unethical in that itself but at the very least we need to recognise that that makes it less tenable to sit there and decry KOs and the like .And I should point out I'm not accusing anyone of doing anything wrong. I myself have acknowledged my own excitement for many custom projects.

Oh, and if you feel there are an other ethical view points I haven't considered, please do feel free to raise them. The purpose of this Soapbox was to try and get us to start seeing the change in the landscape. Issues that were once so seemingly black and white aren't anymore and that's really the purpose of this Soapbox. To put an idea out there and see the other ideas that bounce off it and how it bounces off other ideas. For instance, Griffin's made some great points in terms of that specturm he put up. Kyle pointed out that Hasbro/Takara aren't exactly angels themselves. I think those are all worthwhile ideas. In many ways, this is an ethical discussion we're having here as well. Especially at a time when the collecting landscape is changing very quickly and dramatically, I think its a discussion worth having and welcome all view points put forth here.

dirge

6th August 2009, 03:17 PM

What STL is trying to point out is that there is a hypocrisy if you are critical of one and accepting of the other.

If someone was to say "KO producers are infringing copyright", yet happily buying them, I'd agree. And they'd look pretty silly.

If someone was to say "KO producers are infringing copyright", yet happily buying fan items, I would agree.

If someone was to say "KO producers are depriving Hasbro of future income", yet happily buying fan accessories (items such as Drift are a little different), I would disagree. Unless someone from Hasbro comes out and states that they were developing an upgrade kit for Ultra Magnus (as an example), then it's not an unreasonable assumption for them to make that Hasbro hasn't actually lost any future income.

Which isn't to say that Hasbro may not consider it at some point - but for something unlikely like a standalone Transformers accessory kit*, there's too much doubt to state that Hasbro are being deprived of income. It's shades of grey, of course.

* which we've rarely ever seen from HasTak

Gutsman Heavy

6th August 2009, 03:21 PM

That said, you can't do what you feel. You can't say b/c you prefer things to be a certain way that its a-okay to march out there and steal Hasbro/Takara's IP and directly compete with them using their own product. There's a reason why that Grimlock is an exclusive. Why he's packed in a certain way. You are hurting Takara's ability to sell this exclusive. It doesn't matter what you feel. It's wrong. You'd certainly hate it if someone did the same to something that you designed and invested money in just to watch the sales of your exclusive cannabalised. Just b/c its not the best option for us doesn't make it okay to infringe on Takara's IP. I hope you can see that.

I think by only selling to people with a Japanese address takara are doing a fine job of hurting their chances to sell that exclusive.

STL

6th August 2009, 03:23 PM

STL: I'm curious*, if you hold such a strong moral objection over unlicensed toys... why buy them? Why not just avoid them? I abstain from collecting unlicensed toys, yet it seems that your objection is stronger than mine. No offence, but it seems odd to me that you would purchase toys and accessories that you appear to have such a powerful objection against.

<vague.shrug> :/

*Not in that way d:

It pretty much comes down to what Jaydisc has said. I have no problem with either anymore. Given I accept one, I can't all of a sudden rationalise in my own mind it's right to purchase mass-customs when fundamentally they stem from the same infringement. That'd be incredibly hypocritical of me. So yeah, I'm no longer a KO hater (I once was!) but given the change in the landscape, I've had to reassess my own ethics on the matter and I think the conclusion is pretty poignant. Both stem from infringements, both are equally wrong. I can't support one, decry the other. Only guys like yourself or Griffin have that right any more.

To me it all boils down to this great post I didn't credit enough early in the piece:

The model Kits, the weapon sets, the armour sets, Teletran 1, the trailers all results of Hasbro not making a finished product me thinks. Someone pllleeeaaassssseeeeeee make Classics Bruticus hands and feet!!!! The poor guy looks like the alligator from HOOK got to him. :D

So i guess KOer's/customisers think....i'll just do it myself because HasTak cant / wont.

If the customisers will give me what Hasbro wont then i really dont care who's profitting. Its a Sh!t thing to say but dems the cards we're dealt! :)

And I'm perfectly comfortable with that position. :)

kup

6th August 2009, 03:32 PM

I also don't think that getting the accessory kit to compliment my existing figure means that the custom kit is competing with HasTakTom.

If I already have, say ROTF Prime (original release) and lament that it didn't come with a gun - I still wouldn't get buster Prime just for the gun even if there was no other choice so there is no competition as for most people, the whole new figure is not worth buying just for the gun.

Whoever gets both original and Buster Primes were going to get them anyway and for reasons beyond the sole accessory as very few people would buy the whole figure again 'just' for the gun alone.

There is no competition and it doesn't undermine Takara sales in any noticeable form unless they too are planning to release individual accessory kits which they will not.

Yeah, accessory kits do dance around the intellectual property factor and sometimes steps over the line but at no point have they endangered HasTakTom's bottom line or the possibility of future original mold figures. Only the straight replica KOers do that.

As Dirge says, there is the legal point of view and the ethical/moral view and one has to be conscious of both or you fail at taking into account the larger picture.

It's like that incident that Gok was telling us regarding that Japanese fan convention that was shut down by Takara some years ago:

Takara only saw the legal point of view - not the moral, ethical or beneficiary (to them) point of view and decided to shut down the event because it was technically unauthorized. This caused a massive and probably very costly backlash from fans and costumers hurting their company name as well as sales and bottom line despite them technically being legally correct.

Why?

Because Takara could only see the legal side of it and failed to see that A) The event was also heavily promoting their products at no cost to the company B) It was going to pee off several of their fans who were attending the event out of interest and enthusiasm for their products.

You cannot only see and insist on one side of the argument, particularly in something like this which is multi-angled or you loose perspective on the greater picture at the risk of your own detriment.

dirge

6th August 2009, 03:54 PM

I don't think I've dismissed the ethical points. I've tried to address them myself if you have a close look, Dirge. I've pointed out various ethical arguments to counter ethical arguments put forward too. Showing that those points are ethically very questionable themselves.

Okay, let me clarify a little. By saying "It doesn't matter what you feel. It's wrong." is very dismissive of the different points of view and the ethical shades of grey here.

As griffin (and others) have alluded to, there are degrees. And depending on one's own ethics, it is possible to condone some items and not others:

+ Some of the fan-items aren't infringing on copyright (avoiding brand labelling etc) - they're equatable to reverse engineered generic printer cartridges, in essence.

+ Some are infringing - but aren't actually producing an item that HasTak are ever likely to produce themselves, resulting in no loss of income.

+ Some items are produced to suppliment a toy seen as "incomplete", such as the guns for movie Prime. That HasTak later produce another variant with the said gun included makes this one very much a grey area - HasTak could well lose income from this one, but the producer of the add-on accessory may not have intended that.

+ Some items, such as the KOs, are deliberate copyright infringements which are designed to specifically replace HasTak items, and therefore are designed to "steal" profit (so to speak).

It's not "wrong" to produce a fan item - even for profit - while skirting around copyright. I say that because "wrong" is a relative term and it depends on one's ethics. It is "wrong" to produce blatant KOs - the KOers know what they're doing is a flagrant abuse of copyright - they just don't care.

Hereticpoo

6th August 2009, 04:38 PM

I dont know about anyone else, But I really, really, really find it hard to believe that KO'ers hurt HasTak bottom lines in any significant way.

I'm pretty sure that anyone who knows the difference between a KO and a genuine toy would go genuine anyday. The G1 Devastator example annoys me because if it were re-issued encore style I'm sure people inclined to buy it would buy it KO or no KO. It's not like hasbro's market (kids) are putiing 25 year old transformers on their Xmas lists.

I don't like KO's. Its not because I want to shed tears for HasTaks pocket abuse, its because they look yukky and they get in the way when you're hunting demonbay for G1 stuff and sometimes you'll get one from demonbay unwittingly. So for me they're an inconveniance.

Fans Kits me Love because infrigements aside these guy have actually R and D'd to make something presentable and at times they give us things that HasTak would never have considered worth their time. Poor Ultra Magnus waited 25 years for some new trousers and finally FP did it. If the mass custom guys have made HasTak stand up and pay attention to what we as hardcore collectors want, that's awesome. And I dont think I'm a hypocryt, because I just dont care about anything as long as I'm happy. I'm a western 18-35 year old male born with consumerism in my blood, the way our western government wants me too be. :cool:

dirge

6th August 2009, 04:53 PM

I'm pretty sure that anyone who knows the difference between a KO and a genuine toy would go genuine anyday.

There are some fans who will happily buy a "good" copy counterfeit Transformer. They're a minority, I would expect, but there are some out there.

Sadly, the flood of KOs does affect the business decisions of HasTak when it comes to releasing reissues, precisely because the ease with which one can purchase (knowingly or not) a KO on eBay or in certain markets (Hong Kong?) threatens to take away much of the demand for the legit product.

GoktimusPrime

6th August 2009, 05:18 PM

I think by only selling to people with a Japanese address takara are doing a fine job of hurting their chances to sell that exclusive.
Not really. As exclusives they're produced in very limited numbers that their domestic market can easily absorb. And that's the whole point of exclusives anyway, it's not much different from say Hasbro selling toys exclusively to OTFCC club members or BotCon attendees.

It pretty much comes down to what Jaydisc has said. I have no problem with either anymore. Given I accept one, I can't all of a sudden rationalise in my own mind it's right to purchase mass-customs when fundamentally they stem from the same infringement. That'd be incredibly hypocritical of me. So yeah, I'm no longer a KO hater (I once was!) but given the change in the landscape, I've had to reassess my own ethics on the matter and I think the conclusion is pretty poignant. Both stem from infringements, both are equally wrong. I can't support one, decry the other.
Are you on one hand saying that you don't have a problem with unlicensed products anymore, but on the otherhand conceding that they're both "equally wrong"? I find it curious that you would personally classify them as "wrong" yet say that you have no problem with them.

To me it all boils down to this great post I didn't credit enough early in the piece:

The model Kits, the weapon sets, the armour sets, Teletran 1, the trailers all results of Hasbro not making a finished product me thinks. Someone pllleeeaaassssseeeeeee make Classics Bruticus hands and feet!!!! The poor guy looks like the alligator from HOOK got to him.

So i guess KOer's/customisers think....i'll just do it myself because HasTak cant / wont.

If the customisers will give me what Hasbro wont then i really dont care who's profitting. Its a Sh!t thing to say but dems the cards we're dealt!

And I'm perfectly comfortable with that position.
So are you saying that the ends justify the means (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consequentialism)?

I dont know about anyone else, But I really, really, really find it hard to believe that KO'ers hurt HasTak bottom lines in any significant way.
Remember that the majority of people who buy Transformer toys are parents for their children. If your child wanted a Transformer and you found the same toy that was a counterfeit, but sold at a much cheaper price, which would you go for? How many adults knowingly buy bootlegged DVDs and games for their children because it's cheaper than buying the real thing? Most console games I played with as a kid were KOs; especially those cartidges with like 1000 games in 1.

Gutsman Heavy

6th August 2009, 05:57 PM

Not really. As exclusives they're produced in very limited numbers that their domestic market can easily absorb. And that's the whole point of exclusives anyway, it's not much different from say Hasbro selling toys exclusively to OTFCC club members or BotCon attendees.

very true, my point (as badly as it was made now that I've re-read it) was that I doubt the 3rd party crown (made for a western audience) is really competing with the exclusive intended for the japanese market.

Sky Shadow

6th August 2009, 06:24 PM

very true, my point (as badly as it was made now that I've re-read it) was that I doubt the 3rd party crown (made for a western audience) is really competing with the exclusive intended for the japanese market.

I'm not certain that's the case, though. Consider a scenario in which I desperately want a Grimlock with the crown (which I do) but I already have a Masterpiece Grimlock.

I can buy a Masterpiece-08X Grimlock (despite it being difficult and expensive for me as someone who lives outside Japan) which nets TakaraTomy 13650JPY ($170AUDish). Or I can take the easier and cheaper route of buying a replica crown from some mass-customiser, which will mean TakaraTomy gets 0 yen and as a result may be dissuaded from creating any more Marvel comic-accurate items in the future.

I am buying MP-08X Grimlock whatever the cost, because I want there to at least be a possibility of more Marvel comic-accurate toys. But for every one of those KO Grimlock crowns that are sold, the likelihood of my dream becoming reality is potentially diminished.

jaydisc

6th August 2009, 06:55 PM

Unless someone from Hasbro comes out and states that they were developing an upgrade kit for Ultra Magnus (as an example), then it's not an unreasonable assumption for them to make that Hasbro hasn't actually lost any future income.

Sadly, the flood of KOs does affect the business decisions of HasTak when it comes to releasing reissues, precisely because the ease with which one can purchase (knowingly or not) a KO on eBay or in certain markets (Hong Kong?) threatens to take away much of the demand for the legit product.

I can't find the difference between the two statements above. How could a KO threaten to take away potential revenue but an accessory not threaten to do exactly the same?

GoktimusPrime

6th August 2009, 07:29 PM

As far as anyone knew, HasTak had no intention of making an upgrade trailer for Ultra Magnus. History demonstrates that HasTak love to repaint Optimus Primes in white and sell them as Ultra Magnus but they never get trailer-armours. As a result fans made one for Classics Ultra Magnus. Because, as far as is known, HasTak had no intention of making one themselves, they haven't lost any potential income from the fan item as a result.

A KO reissue on the other hand threatens to reduce demand for a legit version of that product, and thus in turn effects HasTak's business making decision. The Sunstreaker mould is only rumoured to have been lost and HasTak has neither confirmed nor denied this, so for argument's sake let's assume that they still have the mould. Now because there's a KO Sunstreaker coming out, Takara would now ask themselves why they would bother making a legit reissue as the demand for a G1 Sunstreaker may be effected by the KO. Many collectors may be satisfied to purchase a KO and not bother buying the legit version, which Takara may in turn see as meaning that it would be too risky for them to reissue Sunstreaker. The decision for them is compounded further if the G1 Sunstreaker mould has (as rumoured) indeed been damaged or lost/destroyed as it means that TakaraTOMY would have to spend a lot more money with R&D in terms of restoring the mould. We know that in 2000 when Takara reissued Convoy for the first time that they took what was left of the G2 Optimus Prime mould (which was the whole toy but they'd the arms were destroyed or lost) and spent a lot of money restoring the arms for that mould. Takara have stated that this was a _very_ expensive venture for them, but they calculated that with a character like Optimus Prime, the demand could justify the expense. And we've seen HasTak milk this reissue mould for all it's worth; I cannot think of any other Transformer toy that has been reissued more times than the 1984 Optimus Prime mould! AFAIK Takara(TOMY) have not gone to that much trouble and expense for any other lost or damaged mould for a reissue.

STL

6th August 2009, 07:33 PM

Okay, let me clarify a little. By saying "It doesn't matter what you feel. It's wrong." is very dismissive of the different points of view and the ethical shades of grey here.

As griffin (and others) have alluded to, there are degrees. And depending on one's own ethics, it is possible to condone some items and not others:

+ Some of the fan-items aren't infringing on copyright (avoiding brand labelling etc) - they're equatable to reverse engineered generic printer cartridges, in essence.

+ Some are infringing - but aren't actually producing an item that HasTak are ever likely to produce themselves, resulting in no loss of income.

+ Some items are produced to suppliment a toy seen as "incomplete", such as the guns for movie Prime. That HasTak later produce another variant with the said gun included makes this one very much a grey area - HasTak could well lose income from this one, but the producer of the add-on accessory may not have intended that.

+ Some items, such as the KOs, are deliberate copyright infringements which are designed to specifically replace HasTak items, and therefore are designed to "steal" profit (so to speak).

It's not "wrong" to produce a fan item - even for profit - while skirting around copyright. I say that because "wrong" is a relative term and it depends on one's ethics. It is "wrong" to produce blatant KOs - the KOers know what they're doing is a flagrant abuse of copyright - they just don't care.

I think then its also possible to apply your shades of gray to KOs too. KOers are thinking that no Hasbro/Takara are never going to re-issue Mirage or Wheeljack or the Dinobots. Why not do it for ourselves. Hasbro/Takara aren't producing it at the moment and don't look like it either. That's an opportunity for us. In your worlds, since Hasbro/Takara don't like "likely to produce themselves, resulting[ly] there is no loss of income." And again, I think you've missed your own moral conundrum there. Just b/c fan-tems aren't "brand labelling" does it change that City Commander is supposed to Ultra Magnus? Why not paint it pink, blue and yellow? It wasn't b/c ultimately no one would've brought it in the same quantities it was demanded. They needed it to represent Ultra Magnus - something that rightfully belongs too Hasbro/Takara.

And constantly, no one the "KOs are wrong, fan customs are okay" has addressed the point I put forward is it right to steal someone's IP if it gives people what they want?

I think Gok alludes to it below. But that's the critical question here b/c I believe it underlies what I've termed "the convenient truth". We try and rationalise it b/c it's of benefit to us. We are up in arms though if its to our detriment. Can we have it both ways? I don't think we can.

So while I also agreed there are shades of gray, we still need to find a line in the sand. Yes there are shades but shades can be taken too far. Shades can be exploited and then it becomes a matter of, as you say, everyone's own ethics. What's wrong with a KO all of a sudden then if one can rationalise it? We need to at a minimum keep to some core facts. There is at the very least a legal infringement on someone's copyright. That act is the same one that allows a wide array of KOs/Mass-customs to be produced. That's a fact we cannot run away from. It constitutes a flagrant abuse of copyright either way and those involved don't really care. That's a fact we cannot use a convenient truth to obscure.

I've said it and said it again, I think it's a-okay. This is not about saying KOs are awesome or KOs are bad. This is not about saying mass-customs are the scourge of the universe or absolutely brilliant. It's just trying to explore that convenient truth we give ourselves. I think there's a dramatic shift in the landscape. Before it was quite black and white, but now we're entering a transition stage.

Not really. As exclusives they're produced in very limited numbers that their domestic market can easily absorb. And that's the whole point of exclusives anyway, it's not much different from say Hasbro selling toys exclusively to OTFCC club members or BotCon attendees.
.

Now, this is where the title of this thread was borne out of. It's very convenient to say that. Fact is, you have to remember, almost everything Takara produces is for its domestic market. Yes, people are able to export but primarily its dominant market is Japan. However, as we all know everyone has imported stuff from japan. Encore isn't meant for us. Henkei isn't meant for us. Alternity isn't meant for us. It's supposed to be primarily for its main market. Japan.

Now to twist that on its head and say oh this exclusive is only meant to be for Japan so some customiser in Hong Kong has no effect on it is ridiculous. Look at all the other "exclusives" like Henkei and Encore. Guess what, all the major US/HK online stores have all somehow had stock of those. They flood eBay too and sellers from Singapore and Malaysia have them in spades too. I'm really sorry, but to me this is the convenient truth. People are all too willing to rationalise and rationalise their reasons with arguments that they make their convenient truth. If you think about it, all exclusives have made it beyond Japanese shores. Bet you that BBTS will have it up for preorder, no doubt. Fans Project DIA for Asia, same thing. It's up for pre-order at BBTS. It's a very weak argument and you've got to remember, fans in Japan are also able to by the crown accessory kits too.

The reasoning just doesn't stand up against anecdotal evidence yet that argument is raised. Why? Because it's convenient.

Are you on one hand saying that you don't have a problem with unlicensed products anymore, but on the otherhand conceding that they're both "equally wrong"? I find it curious that you would personally classify them as "wrong" yet say that you have no problem with them.

So are you saying that the ends justify the means (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consequentialism)?
.

Personally, I don't think you need to link to a definition. I think it's rather condescending and rude. I think the expression "ends justify the means" is itself sufficient to evidence your meaning.

As for your point, I would say that I've readjusted my moral boundaries on the issue. I can see the double standard and I can't occupy that position anymore. So I've had to readjust where I stand on the issue as I can't deride KOers on the one hand and then applaud customisers on the other hand. I at the least have to be consistent. And that's as simple as no longer making it an issue in my mind to distinguish between the degrees. Yes, there are still cons of each but I cant with cogency assert KOs are bad when I'm allowing the same infringement somewhere else.

I also don't think that getting the accessory kit to compliment my existing figure means that the custom kit is competing with HasTakTom.

If I already have, say ROTF Prime (original release) and lament that it didn't come with a gun - I still wouldn't get buster Prime just for the gun even if there was no other choice so there is no competition as for most people, the whole new figure is not worth buying just for the gun.

Whoever gets both original and Buster Primes were going to get them anyway and for reasons beyond the sole accessory as very few people would buy the whole figure again 'just' for the gun alone.

There is no competition and it doesn't undermine Takara sales in any noticeable form unless they too are planning to release individual accessory kits which they will not.

Yeah, accessory kits do dance around the intellectual property factor and sometimes steps over the line but at no point have they endangered HasTakTom's bottom line or the possibility of future original mold figures. Only the straight replica KOers do that.

I find that logic to be very unsound and convenient. If you're only avenue to getting a better weapon/accessory is by buying the figure over with some slight retools then that's it. You've got to buy the figure. The very moment there's an alternative (accessory kit) why should I buy the whole thing again? For instance, Animated Wingblade Optimus Prime is based on the Voyager but with a new armoured trailer. Given the first choice of buying a separate accessory kit, I'd sure as heck do it rather than buying the whole toy/mold again. This means that basically the accessory kit would drive me away from buying the toy again. As why the heck would I fork out money for the whole Voyager when I can get the armour by itself? That means the accessory is competing with Hasbro/Takara, doesn't it?

As Dirge says, there is the legal point of view and the ethical/moral view and one has to be conscious of both or you fail at taking into account the larger picture.

It's like that incident that Gok was telling us regarding that Japanese fan convention that was shut down by Takara some years ago:

Takara only saw the legal point of view - not the moral, ethical or beneficiary (to them) point of view and decided to shut down the event because it was technically unauthorized. This caused a massive and probably very costly backlash from fans and costumers hurting their company name as well as sales and bottom line despite them technically being legally correct.

Why?

Because Takara could only see the legal side of it and failed to see that A) The event was also heavily promoting their products at no cost to the company B) It was going to pee off several of their fans who were attending the event out of interest and enthusiasm for their products.

You cannot only see and insist on one side of the argument, particularly in something like this which is multi-angled or you loose perspective on the greater picture at the risk of your own detriment.

I think you've missed my points, Kup. If you would go back and read over many of my posts, you'll notice that I have addressed and raised moral & ethical issues as well. To which there have been few responses. I completely agree with you, its not just about the letter of the law. That's why I have as above acknowledged quite openly that I've had to realign my position on this. I've seen its no longer tenable for me to hold any sort of moral high ground. It's incredibly hypocritical.

Your example is quite different as well. What I'm talking about now is an all-new emerging market for customs. What you're talking about is an event. What we're talking about now are products specifically been manufactured on a mass scale to broad global markets sold through so many online outlets

I think what this boils down to again is a convenient truth. We cannot deride KOs and accept mass-customs simultaneously. We can though accept the existence of both and realise that they arise out of the same infringement. Similar issues permeate their space and can we real pick and choose something just b/c one suits our purposes and another doesn't? To me too this has been an evolution in thinking as I've opened my eyes up. When I wrote my Soapbox VIII 2008 a Year in Review (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=3122), I was only starting to see the emergence of the custom market as a real force. I didn't see many ethical issues at all. It's not until more recently why discussing the toys, this really occurred to me. We are living in a very interesting transition here. With things like Defender, Protector etc coming along, the boundaries are going to be more tested, the landscape more changed.

Anyhow, I'd also like to take this opportunity to thank everyone whose responded and contributed to this edition of the Soapbox. Despite the divergence of views, which is inevitable in any Soapbox, I think it's been a very successful Soapbox in my eyes b/c it's got people to really discuss an issue in great depth and given that issue great texture. And that's the most important part of the Soapbox, getting people to talk about something topical and challenging and I'm very glad that this thread has done that.

Hopefully my next Soapbox isn't too far away

The_Damned

6th August 2009, 08:09 PM

dirge

6th August 2009, 09:06 PM

I can't find the difference between the two statements above. How could a KO threaten to take away potential revenue but an accessory not threaten to do exactly the same?

1) How many times have HasTak released accessory sets for Transformers? The probability of HasTak releasing an upgrade kit for Classics Ultra Magnus is essentially zero - with or without fan kits. The 3rd party kit just wont affect HasTak's bottom line. The probability of a Sunstreaker reissue drops significantly with the fake on the market. Before it might have been something they were looking at - but now it wouldn't be anywhere near as likely.

2) How many consumers buy a second version of a Transformer with a hat? Sure many fans do, but not all - because of the expense. And I'm betting fewer kids would but the same toy again - many parents won't buy the same toy twice if they can help it.

3) I doubt that the kids would buy the 3rd party upgrade kit in significant numbers, whereas more might buy the KO in the market stall. The KOs have a much wider reach.

Then there's this...

how can accessories made by a third party be illegal and an infringement on copyright?

for example it is not illegal to by accessories for my car, like roof racks, cd player, mags, lights, spoiler(i think you get the picture).

So how can a toy be any different to a car??

my whole problem with Knock Off transformers is that they are marketed as the real thing like the box and toy are trying to replicate and deceive people so they think they are buying the real thing,

The fact remains that 3rd party accessories are just that. They're not marketed as genuine, nor are they trying to dupe anyone into thinking that they are. The recent KOs are released in packaging that is trying to trick the unaware into thinking it's a HasTak product. Granted, many will be looking on the secondary market, but the flood of KO Sunstreakers on the market now means less chance of income for HasTak if they release an Encore Sunstreaker next year. Some will make the informed decision to buy the third party product, many wont. Many who make the decision not to buy fakes could well end up with them unwittingly.

GoktimusPrime

6th August 2009, 09:23 PM

Now, this is where the title of this thread was borne out of. It's very convenient to say that. Fact is, you have to remember, almost everything Takara produces is for its domestic market. Yes, people are able to export but primarily its dominant market is Japan. However, as we all know everyone has imported stuff from japan. Encore isn't meant for us. Henkei isn't meant for us. Alternity isn't meant for us. It's supposed to be primarily for its main market. Japan.
Absolutely.

Now to twist that on its head and say oh this exclusive is only meant to be for Japan so some customiser in Hong Kong has no effect on it is ridiculous. Look at all the other "exclusives" like Henkei and Encore. Guess what, all the major US/HK online stores have all somehow had stock of those. They flood eBay too and sellers from Singapore and Malaysia have them in spades too. I'm really sorry, but to me this is the convenient truth. People are all too willing to rationalise and rationalise their reasons with arguments that they make their convenient truth. If you think about it, all exclusives have made it beyond Japanese shores. Bet you that BBTS will have it up for preorder, no doubt. Fans Project DIA for Asia, same thing. It's up for pre-order at BBTS. It's a very weak argument and you've got to remember, fans in Japan are also able to by the crown accessory kits too.

The reasoning just doesn't stand up against anecdotal evidence yet that argument is raised. Why? Because it's convenient.
Don't forget that Hasbro and TakaraTOMY have a contractual agreement between each other that expressly forbids them from trying to cross-contaminate each other's market. This means that even though a lot of collectors outside Japan may be interested in TakaraTOMY's Transformers, they are not allowed to cater for that market. They _have_ to exclusively target their own market. Likewise Hasbro can only exclusively target their own markets too and cannot attempt to infiltrate TakaraTOMY's market. This can be exempted if one company gives the other company permission. For example, Hasbro Australia would have imported Masterpiece Ultra Magnus and MP Convoy w/ trailer with TakaraTOMY's permission. To do otherwise would be a violation of their agreement.

I know this because when I was organising the Sabretron convention I called Takara and asked them if they would be willing to make exclusive toys for an Australian convention, and they told me that because Australia is a Hasbro market they could only do it with consent from Hasbro Australia.

So likewise Hasbro cannot market their exclusives to the Japanese market.

STL

6th August 2009, 10:14 PM

how can accessories made by a third party be illegal and an infringement on copyright?

for example it is not illegal to by accessories for my car, like roof racks, cd player, mags, lights, spoiler(i think you get the picture).

So how can a toy be any different to a car??

my whole problem with Knock Off transformers is that they are marketed as the real thing like the box and toy are trying to replicate and deceive people so they think they are buying the real thing,

It's quite different here. This is an accessory wholly and completely dependent on the intellectual IP of Hasbro/Takara. It takes their IP in the form of a character and produces a product that predicates its success on that character. Look at the colour scheme, look at the successive weapons sets. They all go to confirm the very same thing. It's not like a general transforming toy or accessory. It has its success completely based on its likeliness to something that does not belong to them.

A car has many makes, many differences. Transformers are purely and completely the property of Hasbro/Takara. To produce an item whose appeal is completely dependent on the IP of Hasbro/Takara is where the transgression

As I've put forward before, if the armour hadn't even remotely resembled Ultra Magnus, would anyone have been interested? I think not and therein lies the transgression. For custom accessories, it becomes even more obvious in the case of something like the Grimlock's crown, that directly competes with something Takara intends to offer.

I'm sure each of us would appreciate it even more if we were the ones in the position of Hasbro/Takara and someone produced something that directly competes with what we created in the 1st place, something we put the money and time investing into or takes away an opportunity to produce something ourselves. We'd be pretty upset.

And again, don't get me wrong, I'm not in favour of KOs by any stretch of the imagination. But the ground we're treading on is one and the same - the ripping off of someone's IP, IP they've developed over time. Just b/c we like the product doesn't make it necessarily acceptable and how can we condemn one and not the other when fundamentally they both exist b/c of the same transgression? So we need to rethink our position on the matter as landscape of TF collecting changes and more and more custom products are made.

GoktimusPrime

6th August 2009, 10:35 PM

Sky Shadow

6th August 2009, 11:11 PM

The crown is easier to get away with. First of all, it was Marvel who initially put the crown on Grimlock, not HasTak - so they don't even technically own the rights to that crown. I suspect that because it's a fairly generic looking crown, and probably Marvel never copyrighted it, that TakaraTOMY were able to replicate it. I long for the day that Death's Head and Circuit Breaker may appear again in Transformers again. (pipe dream, I know)

Unlike Circuit Breaker, Death's Head would actually be owned by Hasbro and not Marvel (if Hasbro cared enough to do some research about it.)

It's alleged by Marvel that 'High Noon Tex' was a one-page strip that (like Circuit Breaker's appearance in Secret Wars II) appeared in other Marvel UK books before Death's Head's first appearance in Transformers UK #113. This is, however, untrue. 'High Noon Tex' was never published anywhere before Transformers #113 in May 1987 (in fact, '...Tex' didn't even exist back then.) The one-page 'High Noon Tex' strip didn't run until well over a year later - in September of 1988. It was damage control - well after Death's Head's popularity in his Transformers appearances - that 'High Noon Tex' was produced as an argument that he was a Marvel character rather than a Hasbro one (so the Marvel UK Death's Head series could run without Hasbro having a hand in it.) This is further evident by the fact that 'High Noon Tex' was drawn not by Geoff Senior, who - as we know - created Death's Head and drew his first appearances in Transformers comics, but by Bryan Hitch, who drew the Death's Head series as of December of 1988. The signature in the corner of 'Tex' even says "Hitch '88". If 'High Noon Tex' was in fact done in, say, April of 1987 then it would also be Hitch's first published comics work, predating his supposedly 'actual' first comics work by a couple of months, back when he was seventeen years old. In the Incomplete Death's Head #1 from 1993 it states Re: 'High Noon Tex' that "the main energies behind this historic page were Simon Furman, Bryan Hitch and former UK Editor Richard Starkings". Richard Starkings was not the editor of Transformers UK #113 - Ian Rimmer was; Bryan Hitch was not the artist of Transformers #113 - Geoff Senior was. However, both Richard Starkings and Bryan Hitch perform those roles over a year later on Death's Head the series.

The claims that 'High Noon Tex' came first are either accidentally misremembered or deliberately misleading because Marvel realised they needed to secure the ownership of Death's Head. Also unlike Circuit Breaker, whose Transformers appearances always contained the disclaimer "CIRCUIT BREAKER and the distinctive likenesses thereof is a trademark of the Marvel Entertainment Group Inc" none of Death's Head's Transformers issues had a similar disclaimer - he was always under the blanket of the Hasbro. Surely if Marvel had gone to all the 'High Noon Tex' trouble to secure Death's Head for their own then they would have stuck it in the legal blurb at the beginning of the comics. At worst, 'High Noon Tex' was a Marvel Comics smokescreen attempt to anachronistically secure copyright for a character that they wouldn't otherwise have in order to begin the Death's Head solo comic.

'High Noon Tex' was not published before Transformers #113 (May, 1987) - nobody has ever seen '...Tex' in anything published before September 1988; it's signed 'Hitch 1988' and Hitch was a seventeen year-old who wasn't working in comics at the time of Transformers #113. There is no physical evidence that a teenager with no comics work who wasn't Geoff Senior drew 'High Noon Tex' before May of 1987 and that that particular teenager coincidentally ended up drawing Death's Head as a series one-and-a-half years later. 'High Noon Tex' was not published before Transformers #113 - nobody has ever seen a copy printed in 1987 and it's even signed 1988. It's an 'urban' legend.

http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/9205/textrd.jpg

(The '88 signature from 'High Noon Tex'. And yes, if you just read my whole rant above, I am kind of obsessive about this issue - it's a personal pet peeve of mine, thanks. :p)

jaydisc

7th August 2009, 01:08 AM

1) How many times have HasTak released accessory sets for Transformers? The probability of HasTak releasing an upgrade kit for Classics Ultra Magnus is essentially zero - with or without fan kits. The 3rd party kit just wont affect HasTak's bottom line. The probability of a Sunstreaker reissue drops significantly with the fake on the market. Before it might have been something they were looking at - but now it wouldn't be anywhere near as likely.

Nice excuse, but still an excuse.

2) How many consumers buy a second version of a Transformer with a hat?

Enough. Obviously. That's why they make it ;)

Then there's this...

how can accessories made by a third party be illegal and an infringement on copyright?

for example it is not illegal to by accessories for my car, like roof racks, cd player, mags, lights, spoiler(i think you get the picture).

So how can a toy be any different to a car??

I completely understand this argument, but these ARE NOT original accessories. It's like someone besides Mercedes selling Mercedes logos for Mercedes bonnets. If you want to come up with an original likeness, that's fine. The fan made stuff being alluded to in this soapbox are NOT original accessories.

my whole problem with Knock Off transformers is that they are marketed as the real thing like the box and toy are trying to replicate and deceive people so they think they are buying the real thing,

To someone unaware that could be deceiving, but a very large part of the KO market is create by those that are aware, and have thus created much of the demand for this market.

The recent KOs are released in packaging that is trying to trick the unaware into thinking it's a HasTak product.

Or to grant cheapasses the cheaper minter replica product they want.

The crown is easier to get away with. First of all, it was Marvel who initially put the crown on Grimlock, not HasTak - so they don't even technically own the rights to that crown. I suspect that because it's a fairly generic looking crown, and probably Marvel never copyrighted it, that TakaraTOMY were able to replicate it. I long for the day that Death's Head and Circuit Breaker may appear again in Transformers again. (pipe dream, I know)

I assure you that Marvel does not maintain ownership of enhancements to the Hasbro IP they've licensed just because it doesn't exist in toy form. Regardless, another excuse.

dirge

7th August 2009, 02:56 AM

Nice excuse, but still an excuse.

I don't buy 3rd party stuff. There's no excuse here.

HasTak don't do accessory kits for Transformers. So the potential for loss of revenue is miniscule, if at all. The potential for loss of revenue is MUCH greater from KOs.

The majority of fan-produced items are not produced with any intention to compete with HasTak for market (leaving aside stuff like Drift). KOs clearly are. Sure, some of the fan-produced items will end up overlapping the retools, but they're certainly not designed with the intention of stealing HasTak's potential market.

I completely understand this argument, but these ARE NOT original accessories. It's like someone besides Mercedes selling Mercedes logos for Mercedes bonnets.

How is it like selling a Mercedes Logo? Where are the registered trademarks on fan produced items? If you want to bring branding into it, show us the branding on the fan produced items which are designed to take the place of HasTak products. Otherwise you're drawing a very long bow.

Most if not all fan accessories do NOT use copyrighted or trademarked images/names on their packaging. Copyright does not extend to items designed to work with a branded item, unless they mislead the consumer into believing the item is genuine or licensed. City Commander is specifically designed to fit a HasTak branded item, just as a Calidad cartridge is designed to work in a HP printer. It will _refer to_ HP on the packaging, and is directly competing with HP for business. If anything, the producer of the generic cartridge is closer to a copyright infringement, since they've reverse engineered the print head and such. And that's wholly dependent on HP's patented product and IP.

Either way, producing a product to fit another specific product is not, in itself, violating copyright. If it were, the generic printer cartridge manufacturers would have been out of business a LONG time ago.

To someone unaware that could be deceiving, but a very large part of the KO market is create by those that are aware, and have thus created much of the demand for this market.

Yeah and those who are actively buying KOs, while fully aware that they're buying KOs, aren't able to point the finger at KO producers. I don't think anyone's disputing that. What we're discussing is the KOers intention to deceive. Sure, most of us know that the KOs are just that, but the producer is setting out to produce something deceptive, and are flagrantly using HasTak's IP to do it..

You're pointing to the fact that many KO buyers are aware of the fact it's a KO. That doesn't get the producer off the hook, since the producer's intention still remains to produce something that's counterfeit.

There's a huge difference between the deliberate and blatant counterfeiting of a KO producer and a producer of a fan item who is producing something that is designed to work with a product, who takes care to avoid violating copyright. IP protection does cover using the names and trademarks of productions in fiction. It doesn't extend to reverse engineering a product to work with someone else's product. The proliferation of generic printer cartridges proves that. And yes, that HAS been tested - printer companies have gotten into trouble for denying warranty repairs for use of 3rd party cartridges.

Frankly, I'm not convinced that (most) fan produced items are anywhere near level of IP abuse as the KOs. The analogy on about Mercedes logos is a poor argument when most fan items aren't setting out to take the place of HasTak items, they specifically ensure they're not confused for HasTak merchandise, and avoid any sort of official branding while KO producers flagrantly use trademarks and patented items that doesn't belong to them. They're one ones using the logos.

As for the ethical arguments presented, there's a huge gulf in intention between a fan item produced to supplement a HasTak item and a KO designed to take the place of one. The fact remains most fan items - while produced for profit - aren't designed to take the place of HasTak products as KOs are. Sure there are fan items which do take the place of HasTak items/step on IP (the Drift toy is an example), but that's closer to a KO, the way it deals with HasTak's IP.

STL asked the question about is there a difference, and pretty much everyone who who has responded has said yes - including many such as myself who buy neither (and aren't looking to make any sort of excuse for themselves). I don't see why those who claim there is a difference are being shot down with such determination. Why encourage a discussion only to dig one's heels in when presented with alternate points of view? Those defending the original viewpoint are heading further and further into legal hypotheses to defend the original point of view, which was more about ethics than legality.

STL doesn't see the difference between KOs and fan items, and he's welcome to that stance. But this thread feels more like an attempt to convince the world of this opinion than to have a meaningful discussion about whether or not there is a difference.

I'm not trying to point the finger at STL (and it's nothing personal), by the way, but this thread feels more like a crusade to put across one viewpoint than an attempt to generate meaningful discussion. I'm generally a fan of the soapboxes, but in this case I can't help but feeling the original argument just doesn't stack up at all - no matter how it's reworded. So yeah, I'm done with it. Bring on XIII.

Kyle

7th August 2009, 06:24 AM

Bring on XIII.

+1. :)

STL

7th August 2009, 08:53 AM

STL asked the question about is there a difference, and pretty much everyone who who has responded has said yes - including many such as myself who buy neither (and aren't looking to make any sort of excuse for themselves). I don't see why those who claim there is a difference are being shot down with such determination. Why encourage a discussion only to dig one's heels in when presented with alternate points of view? Those defending the original viewpoint are heading further and further into legal hypotheses to defend the original point of view, which was more about ethics than legality.

STL doesn't see the difference between KOs and fan items, and he's welcome to that stance. But this thread feels more like an attempt to convince the world of this opinion than to have a meaningful discussion about whether or not there is a difference.

I'm not trying to point the finger at STL (and it's nothing personal), by the way, but this thread feels more like a crusade to put across one viewpoint than an attempt to generate meaningful discussion. I'm generally a fan of the soapboxes, but in this case I can't help but feeling the original argument just doesn't stack up at all - no matter how it's reworded. So yeah, I'm done with it. Bring on XIII.

I have to vehemently disagree there.

While the Soapbox exists for the purpose of generating discussion, its daft to say it can�t propogate a point of view. And it always does. It�s just that on this particular issue there�s a large schism and comes way too close to home than most would like. It attacks the convenient truths, it challenges the paradigms that we currently hold.

There�s nothing wrong in that, is there?

It�s like an opinion piece that tries to put a point of view out there. It does so by considering multiple facets. And in each and every response, I�ve raised many countering moral quandaries but few have been responded to. I should note, Dirge, that that includes yourself. You�re willing to make baseless accusations like that this is completely a legalistic approach that I�ve ignored others viewpoints when I�ve endeavoured to respond to each and every response with careful reasoning. I haven�t been facetious, I�ve tried to highlight some very large moral issues but convenient truths should not obscure.

No one�s still answered the fundamental moral questions.

Is it okay to steal as long as you steal from someone if their a multi-national corporation?

Is it okay to steal as long as you derive some benefit from it and it�s not to your detriment?

Is it okay to steal as long as what is stolen wasn�t going to be used anyway?

Is it okay to make that decision to steal based on your own subjective probabilities of whether that something isn�t going to be used in the future?

And really I don�t mind that no one has responded to those points. Because I think that itself underlines some critical points and goes to the heart of some core issues about the activity of collecting itself. How collectors can adopt convenient truths provided it gives them what they want. But that�s neither here nor there. It annoys me that it can even asserted that I�ve ignored others viewpoints when I have myself been ignored.

I certainly don�t for a moment have a single misgiving about people ignoring me but it I do have a misgiving about people telling me I�ve ignored others.

It only bothers me that someone can sit there and suggest that for a moment I�ve ignored all other viewpoints, Dirge. I�ve worked though them carefully, offering reasoned counterpoints in depth and at length. Do look over the entire thread again. To suggest that I�ve ignored the views of others illustrates misrepresents me and the nature of this thread when I�ve embraced all points though I don�t necessarily agree. That is crude. That is unfair. That is disappointing.

dirge

7th August 2009, 09:46 AM

There�s nothing wrong in that, is there?

Not, nope at all.

No one�s still answered the fundamental moral questions.

They have been addressed, but many questions whether or not you're even asking the right question.

You're right that items like the fan Drift are stepping all over Hasbro's IP toes. Items like City Commander make a deliberate effort to _not_ do that. They're selling an item designed to work with Hasbro's items, not intended to compete with Hasbro. In terms of right and wrong, they're making an effort to _not_ steal from Hasbro. The KOers are not making that same effort. Which is the answer many people have provided to your questions.

It annoys me that it can even asserted that I�ve ignored others viewpoints when I have myself been ignored.

On the contrary, your viewpoint has been considered, but I still don't believe that your assertion that Hasbro's rights are being violated in the same way by both fan projects and flagrant KOers. Fan items such as Drift are stealing Hasbro's IP and the IP of the company that created Drift in their publication (I don't know who that is, sorry), and your point is perfectly valid there.

Can you provide us with specific proof that items such as the Ratchet/Ironhide heads, City Commander and the Cliffjumper set _are_ too close to Hasbro's IP as to violate Hasbro's rights? Those disagreeing with you are mainly questioning your claim that this IP is being used in an unauthorised manner. You made that claim, we're calling you on it -as I did with my Calidad refence.

I certainly don�t for a moment have a single misgiving about people ignoring me but it I do have a misgiving about people telling me I�ve ignored others.

That was more directed at some of the comments such as "this is an excuse", above. Which wasn't yours. Sorry I should have been more specific.

It only bothers me that someone can sit there and suggest that for a moment I�ve ignored all other viewpoints, Dirge.

Again, this mainly relates to comments from jaydisc. My apologies - I'm trying to not make it personal, but I was too sweeping.

Having said that, noone has responded to my point about the fan items which specifically avoid IP, as well as my reference to the printer cartridge companies, whose reverse engineering has been proven to be legally valid (and which offers a strong parallel).

GoktimusPrime

7th August 2009, 11:01 AM

Most if not all fan accessories do NOT use copyrighted or trademarked images/names on their packaging. Copyright does not extend to items designed to work with a branded item, unless they mislead the consumer into believing the item is genuine or licensed. City Commander is specifically designed to fit a HasTak branded item, just as a Calidad cartridge is designed to work in a HP printer. It will _refer to_ HP on the packaging, and is directly competing with HP for business. If anything, the producer of the generic cartridge is closer to a copyright infringement, since they've reverse engineered the print head and such. And that's wholly dependent on HP's patented product and IP.

Either way, producing a product to fit another specific product is not, in itself, violating copyright. If it were, the generic printer cartridge manufacturers would have been out of business a LONG time ago.
This is what I was trying to say back in post #7:

Garage kits are kinda like software and hardware that people make that just happen to be compatible with products made by companies like IBM, but not actually made by those companies. How many of us have "IBM compatible" PCs?

Same with car parts. My mechanic always asks me if he wants me to replace parts with the same manufacturer as my car or a cheaper generic brand part that is compatible with my car's make/model. I personally don't feel the urge to pay extra money for an oil filter just because it has my car maker's logo on it; I'll happily buy a cheaper unknown brand. ;)

jaydisc

7th August 2009, 11:28 AM

HasTak don't do accessory kits for Transformers. So the potential for loss of revenue is miniscule, if at all. The potential for loss of revenue is MUCH greater from KOs.

This is arguable. Hasbro re-release toys with new accessories. And when you're talking about a $100 toy with a new movie accurate accessory, the potential of loss of revenue is more than miniscule. KOs rarely affect Hasbro revenue directly, rather the second hand market. So, depending on the KO and the custom you're discussing, that's simply not true.

How is it like selling a Mercedes Logo? Where are the registered trademarks on fan produced items? If you want to bring branding into it, show us the branding on the fan produced items which are designed to take the place of HasTak products. Otherwise you're drawing a very long bow.

Because they're selling a likeness that is owned by someone else. However, I concede that logo was a poor example in that it's now being confused by the branding/packaging, which was not the intention. Just because accessory industries are welcomed, that does not give the accessory manufacturers license to infringe. Interoperability? Fine. We're not talking about interoperability though.... yet...

Most if not all fan accessories do NOT use copyrighted or trademarked images/names on their packaging. Copyright does not extend to items designed to work with a branded item, unless they mislead the consumer into believing the item is genuine or licensed. City Commander is specifically designed to fit a HasTak branded item, just as a Calidad cartridge is designed to work in a HP printer. It will _refer to_ HP on the packaging, and is directly competing with HP for business. If anything, the producer of the generic cartridge is closer to a copyright infringement, since they've reverse engineered the print head and such. And that's wholly dependent on HP's patented product and IP.

Either way, producing a product to fit another specific product is not, in itself, violating copyright. If it were, the generic printer cartridge manufacturers would have been out of business a LONG time ago.

The cases you're referring to, as I remember it, was about interoperability (and I remember it being Lexmark, not HP ;)). As I recollect it, Lexmark was a printer manufacturer that started putting microchips in their cartridges. The printer would then authenticate the cartridges as genuine and allow their use. It was done to block out competing cartridge manufacturers. In America, there is something called the DMCA, which I have referred to a few other times in different discussions. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act forbids the reverse engineering of a system intended for security. This was the claim Lexmark used against the competitor who reverse engineered the protocols occurring between their chips and their printers. It was already a stretch because it was clearly designed as an anti-competitive measure, not for security, but regardless, in the end, the competitor won, and I believe that the DMCA was even later amended to include this exception, which is that reverse engineering is acceptable, granted it is for the goal of interoperability. So, it was not a case of Lexmark saying you stole our design or likeness, but rather that their security protocol was reverse-engineered.

There have been similar cases with Lego trying to block other brick makers from making their bricks fit with Lego. However, I'm not as aware of those results.

It is readily possible to make accessories that provide interoperability without stealing likeness (at least that I'm aware of), like the Fans Project Gas Can.

Yeah and those who are actively buying KOs, while fully aware that they're buying KOs, aren't able to point the finger at KO producers. I don't think anyone's disputing that. What we're discussing is the KOers intention to deceive. Sure, most of us know that the KOs are just that, but the producer is setting out to produce something deceptive, and are flagrantly using HasTak's IP to do it..

You're pointing to the fact that many KO buyers are aware of the fact it's a KO. That doesn't get the producer off the hook, since the producer's intention still remains to produce something that's counterfeit.

But I'm not trying to get anyone off the hook. I think this is the disconnection between us. On the surface, I would not disagree with any one of your statements focused at either industry (for want of a better word). Where the disagreement arises from me, is that I feel that any claim against or defense of either, can easily and readily applied to the other. So, again, it's not the actual position that any one is taking for one or the other that I disagree with. We're all welcome to those opinions. It's what I see as a lack of consistency.

I buy fan-made items. I love them. I look forward to Fans Project stuff more than I look forward to Hasbro stuff.

I don't buy KOs. I don't really buy vintage toys either. But I think that for me to publicly deride KOs is hypocritical because there are folks who buy KOs for the same reasons I buy fan-made customs.

As for the ethical arguments presented, there's a huge gulf in intention between a fan item produced to supplement a HasTak item and a KO designed to take the place of one. The fact remains most fan items - while produced for profit - aren't designed to take the place of HasTak products as KOs are. Sure there are fan items which do take the place of HasTak items/step on IP (the Drift toy is an example), but that's closer to a KO, the way it deals with HasTak's IP.

(bolding mine)

KO Sunstreaker, Springer and others are also not designed to take the place of any [currently or expected to be available] products from HasTak.

I don't see why those who claim there is a difference are being shot down with such determination. Why encourage a discussion only to dig one's heels in when presented with alternate points of view? Those defending the original viewpoint are heading further and further into legal hypotheses to defend the original point of view, which was more about ethics than legality.

I don't see any difference in the "heel digging" from either side. I just see continuous disconnected. My interpretation of the original point was not that it was about the ethics and legality of either, but the lack of consistency we apply. So, as you continue to try and show a differentiation between the two, I'm giving you conflicting examples of similarity.

I'm not trying to point the finger at STL (and it's nothing personal), by the way, but this thread feels more like a crusade to put across one viewpoint than an attempt to generate meaningful discussion. I'm generally a fan of the soapboxes, but in this case I can't help but feeling the original argument just doesn't stack up at all - no matter how it's reworded.

I think this opinion is just the result of you disagreeing.

This topic was always going to be problematic for a few reasons.

1. People are really emotional about KOs.
2. The topic suggests that people are rationalizing an inconsistency due to a deep seeded belief. That's always going to be difficult to discuss.

Having said that, noone has responded to my point about the fan items which specifically avoid IP, as well as my reference to the printer cartridge companies, whose reverse engineering has been proven to be legally valid (and which offers a strong parallel).

I don't believe that reverse engineering for interoperability is comparable to profiting from the likeness of someone else's character. No one is suggesting that because City Command FITS SNUGGLY around Hasbro's toy, it is an infringement. The claim is that its sales have benefited because it represents someone else's copyrighted character.

jaydisc

7th August 2009, 11:32 AM

Same with car parts. My mechanic always asks me if he wants me to replace parts with the same manufacturer as my car or a cheaper generic brand part that is compatible with my car's make/model. I personally don't feel the urge to pay extra money for an oil filter just because it has my car maker's logo on it; I'll happily buy a cheaper unknown brand. ;)

This is the same rationale used by those that buy KOs.

Hereticpoo

7th August 2009, 11:40 AM

So are you saying that the ends justify the means (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consequentialism)?

Sorry Gok I looked at that link but its so long....I didnt read it :o
In answer to your question......
Um....Yes? At least for me they do. Society trys to tell us otherwise! :D

Okey dokey STL.....
Is it okay to steal as long as you steal from someone if their a multi-national corporation?
Society would say no....

Is it okay to steal as long as you derive some benefit from it and it�s not to your detriment?
Stealing in general? Like anothers kids toys? No....not okay.

Is it okay to steal as long as what is stolen wasn�t going to be used anyway?
Like a garden gnome? Society says no, I say YES! :D

Is it okay to make that decision to steal based on your own subjective probabilities of whether that something isn�t going to be used in the future?

At the end of the day its not okay to steal in any situation. Whether you're starving or homeless or rich or poor. (Yes, I would steal to survive) Everyone will justify their own actions according to their own values. So STL I agree that mass customisers and KOers do infringe on HasTak. It is wrong. But if I like something I see and I can afford it....I'll buy it whether its official or not.
:cool:

blackie

7th August 2009, 11:59 AM

At the end of the day its not okay to steal in any situation. Whether you're starving or homeless or rich or poor. (Yes, I would steal to survive) Everyone will justify their own actions according to their own values. So STL I agree that mass customisers and KOers do infringe on HasTak. It is wrong. But if I like something I see and I can afford it....I'll buy it whether its official or not.
:cool:

well that summed up my whole stance, and i didnt have to do a thing :P

Paulbot

7th August 2009, 12:19 PM

When I see what I want, I'm going to take it. If it's against some law, you can bet I'll break it.

kup

7th August 2009, 12:21 PM

When I see what I want, I'm going to take it. If it's against some law, you can bet I'll break it.

That would be awesome as the slogan in a Decepticon techspec :p

STL

7th August 2009, 01:47 PM

Not, nope at all.
They have been addressed, but many questions whether or not you're even asking the right question.

You're right that items like the fan Drift are stepping all over Hasbro's IP toes. Items like City Commander make a deliberate effort to _not_ do that. They're selling an item designed to work with Hasbro's items, not intended to compete with Hasbro. In terms of right and wrong, they're making an effort to _not_ steal from Hasbro. The KOers are not making that same effort. Which is the answer many people have provided to your questions.

On the contrary, your viewpoint has been considered, but I still don't believe that your assertion that Hasbro's rights are being violated in the same way by both fan projects and flagrant KOers. Fan items such as Drift are stealing Hasbro's IP and the IP of the company that created Drift in their publication (I don't know who that is, sorry), and your point is perfectly valid there.

Can you provide us with specific proof that items such as the Ratchet/Ironhide heads, City Commander and the Cliffjumper set _are_ too close to Hasbro's IP as to violate Hasbro's rights? Those disagreeing with you are mainly questioning your claim that this IP is being used in an unauthorised manner. You made that claim, we're calling you on it -as I did with my Calidad refence.

Having said that, noone has responded to my point about the fan items which specifically avoid IP, as well as my reference to the printer cartridge companies, whose reverse engineering has been proven to be legally valid (and which offers a strong parallel).

While not entirely the same as your cartridge (which I must concede I'm not well versed in), this is the premise of it.

It's quite different here. This is an accessory wholly and completely dependent on the intellectual IP of Hasbro/Takara. It takes their IP in the form of a character and produces a product that predicates its success on that character. Look at the colour scheme, look at the successive weapons sets. They all go to confirm the very same thing. It's not like a general transforming toy or accessory. It has its success completely based on its likeliness to something that does not belong to them.

A car has many makes, many differences. Transformers are purely and completely the property of Hasbro/Takara. To produce an item whose appeal is completely dependent on the IP of Hasbro/Takara is where the transgression

As I've put forward before, if the armour hadn't even remotely resembled Ultra Magnus, would anyone have been interested? I think not and therein lies the transgression. For custom accessories, it becomes even more obvious in the case of something like the Grimlock's crown, that directly competes with something Takara intends to offer.

I'm sure each of us would appreciate it even more if we were the ones in the position of Hasbro/Takara and someone produced something that directly competes with what we created in the 1st place, something we put the money and time investing into or takes away an opportunity to produce something ourselves. We'd be pretty upset.

And again, don't get me wrong, I'm not in favour of KOs by any stretch of the imagination. But the ground we're treading on is one and the same - the ripping off of someone's IP, IP they've developed over time. Just b/c we like the product doesn't make it necessarily acceptable and how can we condemn one and not the other when fundamentally they both exist b/c of the same transgression? So we need to rethink our position on the matter as landscape of TF collecting changes and more and more custom products are made.

So I put it out there again. Are both not originating from the same transgression. The fundamental basis of the IP is maybe not the toy itself but the character upon which the custom attempts to capture. With all of your examples, it is absolutely and entirely clear that those customs are supposed to represent characters that are the IP of Hasbro/Takara. Characters they've invested time and money into building up, That is unauthorised use. That is stealing. KOs rely exactly on the same fundamental transgression.

Otherwise, they'd be out there KOing Gobots. They're not and that's b/c TFs are inherently more valuable. Why not create customs for GoBots then? Same reason. The IP of Hasbro/Takara is far more interesting and valuable. It's something people care about and it's only something people care about b/c Hasbro/Takara have invested heavily into it to make us care about them. That IP whether it be in the form of a toy, book, character, statue, merchandise is that of Hasbro/Takara's.

For that reason, is there really a valid distinction? And I think not. But as I alluded to above, I suspect as with all geekdoms, we rationalise in order to get what we want. That's why geeks have little credibility on many issues. There's a degree of hypocrisy out there and in my view, that's what I'm trying to illustrate.

When I see what I want, I'm going to take it. If it's against some law, you can bet I'll break it.

This is the view I take now. And whether its legal or ethical it doesn't matter.

GoktimusPrime

7th August 2009, 01:48 PM

That would be awesome as the slogan in a Decepticon techspec
Pretty much. This thread has got me thinking that the Decepticon cause is much Consequentialistic; believing that the ends justify the means. Whereas the Autobot cause is more deontological. The moral values of a society greatly vary depending on which society you live in! (e.g. Totalitarianism etc.)

Bartrim

11th August 2009, 09:11 AM

Sorry if this has been asked but I've been away for the best part of 2 weeks and can't be arsed reading 12 pages. But what about the argument that things like "City Commander" have increased Hasbro's sales? I mean how many people didn't want a classics Magnus because it was another white Prime repaint? (God knows I was very close to selling mine) Then when news of "City Commander" came out how many people said "Awesome... now only if I had a classics Magnus"?

It's something I've thought about for a while and I would like to hear Hasbros retort.

Lord_Zed

12th August 2009, 10:18 PM

MV75

19th August 2009, 04:54 PM

These aren't replicas of existing toys. This is no different to a mass produced fan made custom. That's already being discussed here (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=5212)

Jgon, I'm interested, happy to wait 1-3 months and don't care about packaging. Cheers.

Looks like a thomas the tank engine train to me in train mode.....

You might be thinking of these "bullet" trains:

http://www.netlaputa.ne.jp/~m-akao/GALLERY/gal1/GAL12/TOMAS2/TOMAS2.html

jaydisc

19th August 2009, 05:47 PM

The arguments I've heard here (note that these are not my arguments), is that a "KO" is intended to trick or deceive the purchaser, by not just stealing the likeness of a character, but attempting to clone an existing product's design in every way, even including packaging. I've also heard the argument that mass-produced-fan-made-customs fill a market gap that would otherwise not be filled (thus causing no loss of revenue to the IP owner), and while they might borrow a likeness, they still create their own physically unique product.

Based on those arguments, this seems to fall more in the fan-made-custom camp. Now, if you think this is a direct KO aka replica, please point me to the original, because I'd much prefer to buy that anyway.

Also, remember that this Soapbox is not really about the ethics of either position, but moreover the consistency of one's position. If I was running around reporting KOs to eBay, because I felt they infringed someone's IP, and then I went to buy this transforming train, this Soapbox argues that I would be hypocritical, and I agree.

However, in my case:

* I buy some fan made customs that infringe IP, and
* I don't report KOs for infringing IP

FWIW, I don't buy [what most here would call] KOs either, but I would never try to effect anyone else's ability to.

kup

19th August 2009, 07:08 PM

This is an example of a KO trying to pass as a Fan kit:

http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=5450

The toy is not adding anything to an existing toy nor creating a new unique toy in the likeness of Hasbro's intellectual property. It's blatanly replicating HasTak's invested R&D into a scaled down unofficial toy which they are happy to sell and profit from without paying any royalties to the company that went through the procedure of creating the design.

It's not trying to trick anybody that its official but it is benefiting from the design and development of another. It's almost 100% Plagiarizing the engineering and design of a toy made by another company.

To me this is more in the realm of theft than any third party accessory kit or custom parts. I would indeed call this toy a KO.

GoktimusPrime

19th August 2009, 10:12 PM

The term "knockoffs" is a term commonly used to refer to what is more properly known as counterfeit goods (reference (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterfeit#Counterfeiting_of_consumer_goods)).
Dictionary.com defines counterfeit as: "an imitation intended to be passed off fraudulently or deceptively as genuine" (source (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/counterfeit)).

Fan-made items are not imitations intended to be passed off fraudulently or deceptively as genuine. For example, City Commander is clearly not intended to pass off as a G1 Ultra Magnus trailer/armour.

TheDirtyDigger

21st August 2009, 12:37 PM

Just a sorta related question;

Do you think Matt Moylan of Lil' Formers fame would pay licensing or royalties to HasTak for his use of their characters?

Sky Shadow

21st August 2009, 12:44 PM

Just a sorta related question;

Do you think Matt Moylan of Lil' Formers fame would pay licensing or royalties to HasTak for his use of their characters?

Interesting question. I'm almost certain the answer is 'no', particularly since his strips these days cover all sorts of different franchises (thus, there's no way he pays all of them and I'm guessing he doesn't pay any of them.) From a legal standpoint, I'd say that since what he's doing is parody, it may well constitute 'fair use'.

kup

21st August 2009, 01:00 PM

Matt Moylan does have some level of officiality in lil'formers. I think that he is contracted to do strips in the Club magazine which is an official publication.

STL

24th August 2009, 11:29 PM

Just a sorta related question;

Do you think Matt Moylan of Lil' Formers fame would pay licensing or royalties to HasTak for his use of their characters?

I don't think he's ultimately profiting or making money from them. In many ways, it's a creative endeavour that he shares with fans. And it's not really just limited to TFs either. He's not selling those strips; just using them as part of parody as Sky Shadow points out.

This is an example of a KO trying to pass as a Fan kit:

http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=5450

The toy is not adding anything to an existing toy nor creating a new unique toy in the likeness of Hasbro's intellectual property. It's blatanly replicating HasTak's invested R&D into a scaled down unofficial toy which they are happy to sell and profit from without paying any royalties to the company that went through the procedure of creating the design.

It's not trying to trick anybody that its official but it is benefiting from the design and development of another. It's almost 100% Plagiarizing the engineering and design of a toy made by another company.

To me this is more in the realm of theft than any third party accessory kit or custom parts. I would indeed call this toy a KO.

So what? I thought you said KOs are fraudulent and deceptive and that's why individuals such as yourself see them as wrong. How is this product a KO when it quite clearly makes its point that it is a resized MP. It's not trying to decieve, nor lie.

Mind you, I don't disagree with you that they are infringing the IP of Hasbro/Takara. But there's a really large hole in argument that tries to says its okay to steal IP as long as there's no deceptiion on fans but then say its not okay b/c they steal the IP of an already designed toy?

What's the difference between IP of a toy that Hasbro/Takara have invested heavily in and the IP of a character/brand that Hasbro/Takara have invested heavily in?

Not very much, I'm afraid.

kup

24th August 2009, 11:45 PM

I don't think he's ultimately profiting or making money from them. In many ways, it's a creative endeavour that he shares with fans. And it's not really just limited to TFs either. He's not selling those strips; just using them as part of parody as Sky Shadow points out.

So what? I thought you said KOs are fraudulent and deceptive and that's why individuals such as yourself see them as wrong. How is this product a KO when it quite clearly makes its point that it is a resized MP. It's not trying to decieve, nor lie.

Mind you, I don't disagree with you that they are infringing the IP of Hasbro/Takara. But there's a really large hole in argument that tries to says its okay to steal IP as long as there's no deceptiion on fans but then say its not okay b/c they steal the IP of an already designed toy?

What's the difference between IP of a toy that Hasbro/Takara have invested heavily in and the IP of a character/brand that Hasbro/Takara have invested heavily in?

Not very much, I'm afraid.

So what you say?

Well one thing is creating an Ultra Magnus kit that is very loosely based on Hasbro's intellectual property but is considerably different in engineering, design and appearance to anything that Hasbro has ever produced in the past as well as being something that there is absolutely no chance that Hasbro will ever do. Another is copying almost the exact design part by part of an existing official toy - down scaling it and then selling it without any royalties given to the creator than invested 95% of the overall Research, design and engineering.

- A fan kit is like an unofficial Addon Map pack for an existing Video game.

- This smaller MP Prime is like grabbing an existing game, copying it on a blank DVD with your own custom cover and then selling it as your own product.

As much difference as Apples and Oranges

STL

25th August 2009, 12:50 AM

So what you say?

Well one thing is creating an Ultra Magnus kit that is very loosely based on Hasbro's intellectual property but is considerably different in engineering, design and appearance to anything that Hasbro has ever produced in the past as well as being something that there is absolutely no chance that Hasbro will ever do. Another is copying the almost the exact design part by part of an existing official toy - down scaling it and then selling it without any royalties given to the creator than invested 95% of the overall Research, design and engineering.

- A fan kit is like an unofficial Addon Map pack for an existing Video game.

- This smaller MP Prime is like grabbing an existing game, copying it on a blank DVD with your own custom cover and then selling it.

As much difference as Apples and Oranges

"loosely based on Hasbro's intellectual property"? ? ?

:D ;) :rolleyes:

You seem to place no weight whatsoever in the character that Hasbro/Takara has built up. Sure in the case of CC, Ultra Magnus is no Optimus Prime. But if you take an unbiased view of it the simple cold and hard fact is that there is extreme value in the IP of a character. It's what transcends. Not the toy mold of the 80s but the character, Thats why a character remains recognisable in all his incarnations whether he be G1 Prime, RiD Prime, Optimus Optimal etc.

Hasbro/Takara have invested heavily in the character to make it recognisable, to make it valuable. They research the market, the design the character in their studios, run focus groups, refine their designs etc. That's not effort? That is some serious effort to build a character that kids will care about, that kids who grow into adults still resonate with. For some third party to take that value in the IP is not right for a single moment. Tell me that you brought CC b/c you thought it was loosely based on Hasbro/Takara's IP then. Or did you buy it b/c its the modern representation of Ultra Magnus?

I think the answer's pretty obvious.

Just b/c its engineered does not make it for a moment less significant than the IP within a character. CC Ultra Magnus is clearly intended to be the modern (classics/universe) representation of Ultra Magnus. Pure and simple. it's folly to assert that you bought it b/c

1.) "it was loosely based on Hasbro's intellectual property'"
2.) not deceptive nor fraudulent

Again, i don't disagree with u about the iGears Prime infringing IP but I'm trying to show you that the IP of a character is just as valuable, if not more, than a toy mold.

And that's what inspired the title of this Soapbox: "the Convenient Truth" b/c the reasons (excuses) levelled show a constant changing of goal posts by fans. Perhaps, as I propose, a better position is to realise we no longer occupy a tenable position and just ignore the issue altogether as otherwise we risk being hypocritical and coming up with convenient truths to justify why something is all so bad when something else is not.

You can't keep changing your goalposts. One moment its all about deception. The next moment its about engineering. The next moment its about Hasbro/Takara not wanting to do it anyway. The next moment its why should I pay so much for a toy when I can get a cheaper accessory set? It's as simple as the fact that we don't need convenient truths. Just accept the fact that we buy toys that impinge on IP and move on instead of trying to adopt some moral high ground.

kup

25th August 2009, 10:00 AM

Your argument is way too black & white in a topic that is so ambiguously gray and I believe this does not allow you to take into account perspective or context.

City Commander is not recreating fiction about Magnus so Hasbro's investment in the character is none relevant and as mentioned, the character design is different to anything that Hasbro has produced. City Commander's existance is not by any means taking away Hasbro's right to the character - It is actually reenforcing its appeal and as previously mentioned it has helped to sell what was just another repaint that no one cared about. Hasbro has not lost anything due to City Commander, on the contrary it has gained and actually reenforce the popularity of the character that may even help Hasbro sell more toys of him in the future.

This new scaled down MP Prime is now competing with the new officially released black repaint - See the difference?

jaydisc

25th August 2009, 10:23 AM

City Commander is not recreating fiction about Magnus so Hasbro's investment in the character is none relevant and as mentioned, the character design is different to anything that Hasbro has produced. City Commander's existance is not by any means taking away Hasbro's right to the character - It is actually reenforcing its appeal and as previously mentioned it has helped to sell what was just another repaint that no one cared about. Hasbro has not lost anything due to City Commander, on the contrary it has gained and actually reenforce the popularity of the character that may even help Hasbro sell more toys of him in the future.

None of this mumbo jumbo has any legal relevance in excusing an IP violation outside of Kup World.

This new scaled down MP Prime is now competing with the new officially released black repaint - See the difference?

Ah, OK. I get it now. If you can violate IP in a way that doesn't directly compete, it's OK?

Here is a text book example of this Soapbox:

In one thread (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?p=123265#post123265), you deride a company for making what you call a KO, and in another thread (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?p=122543#post122543), you're organizing a group purchase of an item from the SAME company which is an equally (arguably more so) direct replica of an upcoming product accessory from Takara.

griffin

25th August 2009, 11:06 AM

And that's what inspired the title of this Soapbox: "the Convenient Truth" b/c the reasons (excuses) levelled show a constant changing of goal posts by fans. Perhaps, as I propose, a better position is to realise we no longer occupy a tenable position and just ignore the issue altogether as otherwise we risk being hypocritical and coming up with convenient truths to justify why something is all so bad when something else is not.

You can't keep changing your goalposts. One moment its all about deception. The next moment its about engineering. The next moment its about Hasbro/Takara not wanting to do it anyway. The next moment its why should I pay so much for a toy when I can get a cheaper accessory set? It's as simple as the fact that we don't need convenient truths. Just accept the fact that we buy toys that impinge on IP and move on instead of trying to adopt some moral high ground.

I don't see the reason for making people feel bad about something Hasbro themselves show no interest in prohibiting (and have even stated at BotCon that they are happy with *small scale* fan-stuff). No one here is claiming that any unauthorised products, either replicating or inspired by the Transformers brand/likeness, are legal (and are therefore unethical to acquire). The focus has been on the level of legality of each of these concepts. It isn't valid to say that all things illegal, are equally illegal. If it were, we would have the same penalties for stealing a loaf of bread, as we would for killing someone.
When you try to make out that all things here are equally illegal, it's only natural that others are going to come back with a reason why they aren't, so that they aren't being put into the same category as Counterfeit toys (which is actually something Hasbro do have a problem with).
If Hasbro themselves don't see Fan-produced stuff as being as bad as Counterfeit TFs, then don't try to label people of both categories as being just as bad as each other. Until Hasbro actually cracks down on the fan-produced, non-replica stuff, that sort of 'convenience' is just going to stir up tensions among fans who are still collecting within the scope of Hasbro policy.

Kyle

25th August 2009, 11:08 AM

Sorry guys, I'm closing this thread for now.

It is one thing to share opposing viewpoints in this thread (and I see all sides already had plenty of time to present and discuss their viewpoints.)

But it is another thing when we start to question fellow members' actions from other threads. It has long passed the point when the new discussions in this thread would benefit any of us in anyway.

We are all fellow fans with the same passion for TF and mates on this forum. I hope there'll be no hard feelings. :)

STL, I would love to read your next Soapbox. :)

Please PM me or other mods if any of you disagree with this.

Kyle

25th August 2009, 12:10 PM

Ok I'm re-opening the thread. But please keep in mind what I was trying to say in my previous post. The thread will be closed if it gets unfriendly to fellow members. Thanks guys.

kup

25th August 2009, 12:39 PM

As mentioned, I see the miniature MP Prime as a knock off and although the same company has indeed made the Grimlock crown - It is not the same thing.

The Grimlock crown is just an accessory made to compensate for the first release lacking it. We all saw the proototypes with the crown and we all thought until shortly before release that it was going to come with it. Instead it was released with the ridiculous Season 3 waiter kit. What this accessory kit is doing is giving us an accessory that 'completes' that release for everyone who bought it and is not willing to go and buy a whole new MP Grimlock just for the crown alone.

The crown kit would only be the same violation as the miniature MP Prime if it actually came with a Grimlock figure. Interestingly enough the crown was also announced before we even knew about King Grimlock.

STL

25th August 2009, 07:02 PM

I don't see the reason for making people feel bad about something Hasbro themselves show no interest in prohibiting (and have even stated at BotCon that they are happy with *small scale* fan-stuff). No one here is claiming that any unauthorised products, either replicating or inspired by the Transformers brand/likeness, are legal (and are therefore unethical to acquire). The focus has been on the level of legality of each of these concepts. It isn't valid to say that all things illegal, are equally illegal. If it were, we would have the same penalties for stealing a loaf of bread, as we would for killing someone.
When you try to make out that all things here are equally illegal, it's only natural that others are going to come back with a reason why they aren't, so that they aren't being put into the same category as Counterfeit toys (which is actually something Hasbro do have a problem with).
If Hasbro themselves don't see Fan-produced stuff as being as bad as Counterfeit TFs, then don't try to label people of both categories as being just as bad as each other. Until Hasbro actually cracks down on the fan-produced, non-replica stuff, that sort of 'convenience' is just going to stir up tensions among fans who are still collecting within the scope of Hasbro policy.

Well, so we aren't supposed to be angry unless Hasbro/Takara are unhappy about it? In that case, we better not get angry about poor quality control. we better not get upset about ridiculously high retial prices. we better not... I could start off on a long list of things we shouldn't be discussing unless Hasbro/Takara are unahppy about it but I'm not going to. The point being that that's not really a valid yardstick here either. What we've been tossing around are all these moral accusations at KOers and whatnot. Let's have a discussion about those points rather than saying "unless Hasbro/Takara are unhappy about it we're not going to have a discussion about it" If that were teh case, there would be a lot of discussions that should just never be had.

And its very sad to see this "legal approach" label being thrown around. I've put forward countless moral arguments yet there are those who still want to see this thread as arguing legality. It isn't. It's a part of the argument but you only need to look several posts back to have a look at some moral points raised. And I might add too, there's a stark and telling silence in response to those moral counterpoints. It'd be quite nice if someone would respond.

The main point I'm trying to assert is actually we don't have solid moral high ground to occupy anymore given you can't support one yet deride the other on some arbitrary basis that conveniently justifies your desire to buy it. There isn't a moral high ground you can with conviction hold unless you buy non of the mass-customs. It's incredibly shaky and the goal posts keep just changing.

Again,

a.) Is it okay to steal another's IP just b/c they aren't currently using it?
b.) Is it okay to steal another's IP just b/c they're " that 'completes' that release for everyone who bought it "?
c.) Is it okay to steal another's IP b/c its too expensive to purchase the whole item again (which happens to be an exclusive)?
d.) Is it okay to steal another's IP if you aren't fraudulent and deceptive?
e.) Is it okay to steal another's IP b/c they aren't currently producing it?

These are very much moral questions here based on the collection of responses so far propogated here.

As mentioned, I see the miniature MP Prime as a knock off and although the same company has indeed made the Grimlock crown - It is not the same thing.

I agree, they're completely different things. One's an accessory, the other's an actual toy. But fact is they both rely heavily on the IP of someone else. And in the case of the crown, it's clearly in direct competition with Takara's exclusive which it went out of its way with to try and make a unique offering to the market. But now it's been stepped all over b/c as yourself and others noted earlier, why buy the more expensive set for just a crown?

To paraphrase you but with reference to say Animated Wingblade Prime if it had been produced by some custom group:

The Grimlock crown is just an accessory made to compensate for the first release lacking it.

The Wingblade armour is just an accessory made to compensate for the first release lacking it.

What this accessory kit is doing is giving us an accessory that 'completes' that release for everyone who bought it and is not willing to go and buy a whole new MP Grimlock just for the crown alone.

What this accessory kit is doing is giving us an accessory that 'completes' that release for everyone who bought it and is not willing to go and buy a whole new Animated voyager Prime just for the armour alone.

The crown kit would only be the same violation as the miniature MP Prime if it actually came with a Grimlock figure. Interestingly enough the crown was also announced before we even knew about King Grimlock.

The Wingblade kit would only be the same violation as the miniature MP Prime if it actually came with a Voyager Prime figure. Interestingly enough the wingblade kit was also announced before we even knew about Wingblade Optimus Prime.
I hope the above illustrates just how tenuous that argument is. So it's okay to directly compete with Hasbro as long as you don't have to buy the whole figure again? You just take out the core appeal of the re-release (Wingblade armour or the crown), sell it separately and it's okay b/c it completes your Voyager Prime/Grimlock? Where does that leave Hasbro/Takara? Someone's making something that directly competes with their upcoming product.

Secondly, another quandry that you've brought up is annoucement. So if Hasbro/Takara don't announce to us what they intend to produce then it's okay to go out there and do it yourself? I think not. It's like previously, you do not build on a part of someone's land just b/c they haven't used it for the last 10 years now, do you? And besides, why should Hasbro/Takara tell us what they're producing so we can decide whether or not to produce ourselvse? They don't have to.

Animated Voyager Prime by the time Wingblade Prime hits will have been available for clsoe to 2 years. I can tell you at the start that Hasbro probably didn't even know that was in the pipeline. But they at some point, when planning for another year, sit down and thought about it and decided to produce Wingblade Prime. It's not quite fair to expect Hasbro/Takara to have to announce everything beforehand when really it's their IP - character or mold. So to produce a crown or Wingblade Prime would not be justifiable. It competes quite directly with what they are intending to offer.

In any event, while there is disagreement on this view I think it will be very interesting in the future. The lines are becoming grayer and grayer and more convenient truths are being used as we see more customs that really test this issue and I'm certainly sure that this topic isn't done with yet given things like Arcee and Defender etc are in the pipeline.

While i have no problem with anyone buying any of these (or KOs), I see a problem when one derides KOs on some moral high ground and yet goes out there and purchases mass custom product. Just accept them all or not at all b/c you have to realise that they only exist b/c of the very same infringement that allows each of them to exist - the theft of IP. And is theft ever moral? Which leads is back to the same old questions

a.) Is it okay to steal another's IP just b/c they aren't currently using it?
b.) Is it okay to steal another's IP just b/c they're " that 'completes' that release for everyone who bought it "?
c.) Is it okay to steal another's IP b/c its too expensive to purchase the whole item again (which happens to be an exclusive)?
d.) Is it okay to steal another's IP if you aren't fraudulent and deceptive?
e.) Is it okay to steal another's IP b/c they aren't currently producing it?

kup

25th August 2009, 07:23 PM

GoktimusPrime

25th August 2009, 08:13 PM

Am I missing something here? We all have the option to vote with our wallets. If you have an objection against unlicensed products, then just don't buy them. Buy choosing to purchase them you are therefore choosing to support them. AFAIK nobody has a gun pointed to their head and is being forced to buy these things.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y227/goktimusprime/moneymouth.jpg
Put your money where your mouth is.

Kyle

25th August 2009, 09:11 PM

If I buy fan customs, then I have no right to be against KO.

If I hit my own kids, then I have no right to be against someone raping my own kids?

Is this the right logic?

Sky Shadow

25th August 2009, 09:29 PM

If I buy fan customs, then I have no right to be against KO.

If I hit my own kids, then I have no right to be against someone raping my own kids?

Is this the right logic?

Knockoffs raped your beaten kids' childhood? :confused:

Kyle

25th August 2009, 09:31 PM

Knockoffs raped your beaten kids' childhood? :confused:

Well yes. :D

Kyle

25th August 2009, 09:38 PM

I suppose if I smoke cigarette, then I have no right to be against taking hardcore drugs as well.

GoktimusPrime

25th August 2009, 10:25 PM

IMHO:
+ If you're cool with fan customs, go ahead and buy them.
+ If you're cool with KOs, go ahead and buy them.
+ If you object to fan customs, don't buy them.
+ If you object to KOs, don't buy them.

...in short if you don't like something, I dunno, don't buy them? What I'm finding confusing is that some people seem to have a vehemently strong objection against something, _but_ admit that they are willing to buy them. ??? I guess it's like seeing a gambler criticising others who gamble.

kup

25th August 2009, 10:31 PM

IMHO:
+ If you're cool with fan customs, go ahead and buy them.
+ If you're cool with KOs, go ahead and buy them.
+ If you object to fan customs, don't buy them.
+ If you object to KOs, don't buy them.

...in short if you don't like something, I dunno, don't buy them? What I'm finding confusing is that some people seem to have a vehemently strong objection against something, _but_ admit that they are willing to buy them. ???

I think that the argument put forth by STL is not so much if you are cool (or not) with KOs or customs and more that if you buy customs you shouldn't be against KOs because they are the same thing from a moral point. Of course I disagree with such a view.

Kyle

25th August 2009, 11:08 PM

STL

25th August 2009, 11:15 PM

I think that you are missing the point of our arguments. As griffin said you cannot judge everything equally bad in such a black and white manner - You have to also assess the context of the release in question.

If Wingblade Prime kit was suddenly and deliberately announced right after Hasbro had announced their own release then yeah it is a knock off and on top of that its not worth it as the custom is likely to cost as much as the official release as its a lower end toy plus it comes with an official 'adapted' Prime figure to fit the armor but that's irrelevant to the topic in question since this scenario has not happened and we are talking about what makes a custom kit 'good' or a KO. However if Hasbro had announced or it becomes clear that there would never be a Wingblade Prime then that validates the existence and relevance of the kit. It's basically all about context.

MP Grimlock on the other hand is a very expensive high end toy which was supposed to come with a crown which happend to be missing from the final product - Just the crown. Not many people would go forth and spend the same or more likely an increased amount again ranging from $250-$300+ on the same toy only for the crown. The custom crown is only $15-$17 before shipping and 'completes' your first release Grimlock and if it wasn't for the kit several Grimlocks would simply remain 'uncrowned' with the owner not bothering with the new release. Using myself as an example, if the only difference between the first Grimlock and King Grimlock was just the crown I would not have bothered with the newer release at all with or without the custom crown available.

Truth is often a matter of context and perspective such as with Fan Kits. I see the term of 'An inconvenient Truth' on this topic as none applicable as you are trying to enforce a generalized but absolute term of 'True/False' on something that is very much a gray area that can become 'moral' or 'immoral' depending on the context in which its used as well as execution.

This Wingblade Prime a clear knock off and I consider it as bad in a similar way as the miniature MP Prime for reasons already explained:

http://kotoys.com/Photos/Animated/aniOSOPstars01.jpg

:) Gotta love that Animated Cybertron Prime with armour. They stop at nothing, don’t they?

Again, you’re context misses the point. Your context is changing goal posts and rationalize it. The whole price point is moot. You use it b/c its convenient to you. Let’s put it this way then. If someone can’t afford an original G1 Devastator, its okay that they purchase a KO? That that legitimises the existence of the KO? But under your reasoning the context matters. So what’s not to say then KOs are okay? Oh and add to that for instance that Takara has said it’s lost the mold for G1 Grimlock. Well guess what? A counterfeit producer goes out there and reproduces it. Given the contextual points, you’ve made above, does it legitimise the existence of the KO?

The moral high ground really rests on one being able to assert the fraud and theft of the person who steals the IP – be it mold or character. In the cases above, I’ve used your very own arguments to justify KOs which just goes to show how conveniently you can make the truth so that it works for you. That’s why it’s not tenable.

If I buy fan customs, then I have no right to be against KO.

If I hit my own kids, then I have no right to be against someone raping my own kids?

Is this the right logic?

I suppose if I smoke cigarette, then I have no right to be against taking hardcore drugs as well.

I think you’re being facetious here. And I won’t honour it with a petty retort. But to answer your overall point I would answer in the affirmative as the position is not one you can stand on given that both arise from the abuse of IP that they do not belong. I’ve given my reasons before. If you’d like I’d encourage you to address some of those questions I’ve posed above. It’s much harder to do than be facetious.

Am I missing something here? We all have the option to vote with our wallets. If you have an objection against unlicensed products, then just don't buy them.

Again, as I’ve said. I personally have no problem about fan customs. What this Soapbox has tried to contend though is that it’s not possible to occupy a moral high ground on KOs or even pseudo KOs (like iGear Prime) when we’re willing to venture out and purchase other items that stem from the very same infringement of IP. What moral high ground we have is tenuous at best. The Soapbox is not saying you can’t dislike KOs, you still can, but don’t think for a moment that they’re there’s some higher moral high ground you can stand aloft on b/c most of those reasons, quite unfortunately, are simply convenient truths.

Again, I should also note that last year or the year before I was foremost among people to initiate the complaint process on eBay on these forums against KOs. It's not like I have a certain love affair with them either. I don't like them but given the change to our evolving fandom, I've had to reassess my position on them. I'm not a KO lover by any stretch of the imagination but I'm not a hypocrite either

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

All that said, clearly there is divided opinion on the matter. As I’ve previously mention, I don’t think it’s going to get easier. There’s a lot in the pipeline that will only raise more and more questions about what they are and where they sit.

Robzy

25th August 2009, 11:17 PM

Our money should be going to more worthwhile things like feeding the homeless and hungry, charities and children in Ethiopia etc etc.
Yes... and Michael Bay and the "Writers" should never have been paid millions of $$$s for ROTF!

STL

25th August 2009, 11:18 PM

Morally speaking, ALL people on this forum ARE wrong. We shouldn't even be spending money on official Hasbro/TakaraTomy toys. We're all grown-ups! Our money should be going to more worthwhile things like feeding the homeless and hungry, charities and children in Ethiopia etc etc.

When we head out on a Thursday to Sunday and blow a pile of hard earned on alcohol, technically we all are being irresponsible then too, eh? Cos all it ends up is violence on our streets. (well in Melb anyway)

:p

kup

25th August 2009, 11:28 PM

It was fun for a while but now I am tired of dancing around in circles with this topic. I have stated my point of view and why I disagree with your 'soap box' a few times already and no point going on and on repeating ourselves.

Sky Shadow

25th August 2009, 11:41 PM

GoktimusPrime

26th August 2009, 09:49 AM

What this Soapbox has tried to contend though is that it�s not possible to occupy a moral high ground on KOs or even pseudo KOs (like iGear Prime) when we�re willing to venture out and purchase other items that stem from the very same infringement of IP. What moral high ground we have is tenuous at best. The Soapbox is not saying you can�t dislike KOs, you still can, but don�t think for a moment that they�re there�s some higher moral high ground you can stand aloft on b/c most of those reasons, quite unfortunately, are simply convenient truths.
Fan items don't attempt to deceive consumers whereas counterfeits do. From a legal perspective, I would agree that they are both IP infringements, but to very different degrees.

It's like say if I kill someone in self defence as opposed to actually plotting and executing a plan to kill them; from a legal POV the former would be an act of manslaughter whereas the latter is an act of murder. They're both still acts of killing, but the intent is completely different. As I understand it, murder is defined as killing someone with malice aforethought.

So I find the moral/ethical difference between fan items and counterfeits is that counterfeits are made with 'malicious intent'; i.e.: a specific intention to compete with legitimate products and deceive consumers. Fan items on the other hand are generally devoid of this malice.

I'm not a KO lover by any stretch of the imagination but I'm not a hypocrite either
So you don't buy unlicensed products then?

I don't buy unlicensed stuff, but personally I don't hold a real objection against fan items. I'm neither for nor against them. But I _do_ hold an objection against counterfeits though.

jaydisc

26th August 2009, 10:46 AM

As I may have said before (possibly about a thousand posts ago in this thread), I've never bought a fan custom and I think I've only ever bought one knockoff - about ten years ago I bought a cheap plastic downsized version of Dreadwind and Darkwing from Woolworths for less than five dollars: I wanted to see how they transformed and combined since I'd never had a Dreadwind.

Then you sir, along with a select few others (Gok, Griffin, etc.), have what STL would refer to as a tenable position against KOs, should you choose to take it. Interestingly enough, I've not seen you as an outspoken person on that topic. Many can learn from you. ;)

STL and Jaydisc - it seems like intellectual property is the main soapbox issue for you guys.

Well, not so much the issue, as consistency is, but infringement of IP happens to be the consistent theme connecting most MPFCs (Mass Produced Fan Customs - sick of typing it out) to KOs. Others keep getting confused by this. It isn't about being pro or anti KO. It isn't about being pro or anti MPFC. The line dividing the common definitions of the two are graying by the day (literally), and any reason given for deriding a KO can also be used to deride some MPFC, and any reason to defend an MPFC can be used to defend a KO. So it's about consistency. I'm not for or against any side. I'm simply anti-hypocrisy.

According to Kup, he feel he's entitled to an unlicensed product to complete an existing purchase because he saw a picture of it in an unofficially distributed prototype photo!!! Now, even if I can suspend my absolute bewilderment that that is a defense, conversely, why isn't Joey Joe Joe Shabadoo entitled to buy a KO Sunstreaker when the arm on his G1 original breaks off?

Why are group orders for repro parts permitted here but not repro bots? WhatTF is the difference? It's OK to bootleg a gun, but not a leg? WTF?!?!?!

By that logic, would it be okay for people to buy fan customs like this future proposal:

http://www.seibertron.com/images/toys/uploads/1240707690_FP%20Prev%2014.JPG

Or (assuming they have Scramble City pegs) are they a no-go as well? Personally, I'm all for Fansprojects turning in this sort of direction - I'm not interested in trailers or weapon accessories or hands for gestalts or whatever else is going on at the moment, but this sort of thing interests me. What would also interest me is - if something like Glacialbot did come to fruition - would he sell more, less or the same as the toys that do trespass on Hasbro's intellectual property?

I think the above is awesome, and like you, i fully support FP turning in this direction! After initially seeing this when shown, I had a hope and belief that Fans Project has simply used the Transformers fandom, along with some borrowed IP, as a stepping stone in order to get established as their own independent brand of transforming robots. I'm thrilled at the prospect of new toys of new characters from a new company that's more interested in catering to a more expensive, more demanding market that I would like to be part of.

Unfortunately though, I think it would sell less than their borrowed ideas. But, I think they're using the goodwill and publicity for those borrowed ideas so that when they do try to stand on their own feet, they'll have a big enough audience to keep them propped up. Go FP!

Fan items don't attempt to deceive consumers whereas counterfeits do.

We already covered this, but I would argue that most KO purchasers KNOW they are buying KOs, so while some KO resellers choose to use deception, many do not! (e.g. www.kotoys.com) One only has to go a few pages deep at other international forums to see that there is large collector demand for KOs. So, even if you were able to somehow successfully remove KO resellers ability to achieve sales by deception, market demand would still keep them in business.

Because you and others are not interested in that market, it's natural for you to not see it, and thus your only exposure to KOs is from resellers who try to push them off in your non-KO-endorsing marketplaces, so your assumption is natural. To the market that IS interested in KOs, those KOs are filling a market gap just like a crown for MP-8 or a smaller version of MP-1 fills a market gap for others.

Kyle

26th August 2009, 11:10 AM

If I buy fan customs, then I have no right to be against KO.

If I hit my own kids, then I have no right to be against someone raping my own kids?

Is this the right logic?

I suppose if I smoke cigarette, then I have no right to be against taking hardcore drugs as well.

I think you�re being facetious here. And I won�t honour it with a petty retort. But to answer your overall point I would answer in the affirmative as the position is not one you can stand on given that both arise from the abuse of IP that they do not belong. I�ve given my reasons before. If you�d like I�d encourage you to address some of those questions I�ve posed above. It�s much harder to do than be facetious.

I don't remember you replying or addressing post #52 on this thread. That was convenient for you too? :confused:

Your questions were never difficult to be answered:

a.) Is it okay to steal another's IP just b/c they aren't currently using it? No
b.) Is it okay to steal another's IP just b/c they're " that 'completes' that release for everyone who bought it "? No
c.) Is it okay to steal another's IP b/c its too expensive to purchase the whole item again (which happens to be an exclusive)? No
d.) Is it okay to steal another's IP if you aren't fraudulent and deceptive? No
e.) Is it okay to steal another's IP b/c they aren't currently producing it? No
f.) Is it okay to steal another's IP b/c you claim that your success is not built on this IP entirely? No

I never claimed FansProject to be entirely innocent. However, as others already pointed out, I still don't see FansProject to be as bad as KO. And I still don't see why just because I've been naughty in Mr Hasbro's classroom, I cannot point out or report another kid doing something else much worse. And Mr Hasbro has been naughty himself too. He teaches us from notes and books he took from others (eg Mr Lamorgini) without paying, but at least he didn't claim he invented Mathematics.

So if we buy Fan Customs then we can't be against KO. And if Hasbro infringed on others' IP (like Lamborgini) out of convenience then they're not supposed to stop others from making KO of Hasbro toys? Because then they would be hypocrites? :confused:

I don't consider Hasbro borrowing others' IP out of convenience to be as bad as making a full KO. However, I also don't see it as any better than what FansProject has been doing.

I consider FansProject to be at least creative. All their toys are created from scratch and not extrapolated from any existing toy mould. I just can't see them at the same level of KO.

I cannot speak for others. But if one day Hasbro releases their own Magnus Armour or Prime Trailer, then I would be buying them as well. Another problem is we are judging these fan products by what we think others might or might not do.

jaydisc

26th August 2009, 11:31 AM

Maybe I can field some of these:

If I buy fan customs, then I have no right to be against KO.

Correct. That's the entire basis of the soapbox.

If I hit my own kids, then I have no right to be against someone raping my own kids?

Well, if we are really going to try to shoehorn this example in, it would be more apt to say that if you hit your own kids, that preaching against raping your own kids would be untenable.

I suppose if I smoke cigarette, then I have no right to be against taking hardcore drugs as well.

There's a few different angles here. If you complain that hardcore drug takers can't control their addiction, that would be untenable as you have an addiction.

This is a great example, worthy of its own soapbox, but there are many pro-alcohol, anti-drug people all over the world. Alcohol is one of the most debilitating, violence inducing drugs, and it's the legal one.

1AZRAEL1

26th August 2009, 11:32 AM

I consider FansProject to be at least creative. All their toys are created from scratch and not extrapolated from any existing toy mould. I just can't see them at the same level of KO.

With the MiniMP Prime on its way, that mold is but at the same time isnt from scratch. They have taken the idea and mold and basically shrunk it down. Is that not what a Knockoff I saw of Fort Max? When you compare that, it doesnt seem different, but when you think about it, it is more for the fans to have a more scaled version of prime to be compared to Grimlock that HasTak released.

As most have stated, it is not all black and white, and everyone ill have there own opinions and won't budge on it.

We all have great arguments here, and I am not going to take sides. I have bought a few Fanmade projects, because they add something new that Has/Tak decided to leave out or not even think of.

1AZRAEL1

26th August 2009, 11:37 AM

Alcohol is one of the most debilitating, violence inducing drugs, and it's the legal one.

And tastes soooooooo good :p

And without getting too much into it, anyone with the willpower can break out of an addiction. I drank alot, so much that I cant remember most of 2006. But I broke out of that and drink socially now, and get drunk on the rare occasions.

Robzy

26th August 2009, 12:29 PM

I drank alot, so much that I cant remember most of 2006. You didn't miss much... Galvatron and his cronies travelled back in time to 1986. Unicron took control of Hot Rod, Kup & Blurr and made them do things.

Nothing special! :p

Hereticpoo

26th August 2009, 01:24 PM

I buy fan customs, and I report Ko's on ebay.

So if that makes me hypocritical and/or morally corrupt I only have two solutions;

A) Continue to love and buy Fan made, and cease KO reports on ebay.
The result making me non-hypocritical, but the report I don't make might cause some unwitting sucker to be ripped-off.

B) Don't by Fans mades, continue to report Ko's, and go with the Hastak flow.
The result making me non-hypocritical and Morally superior, with a naked Ultra Magnus to boot. But I'll feel good because nothing is better than a warm cup of righteousness.

Hmmm....I'll go with A! :D

Maybe we could have a Poll? Just to finalise everyone's positions and put an end to the mystery?

Kyle

26th August 2009, 02:27 PM

With the MiniMP Prime on its way, that mold is but at the same time isnt from scratch. They have taken the idea and mold and basically shrunk it down. Is that not what a Knockoff I saw of Fort Max? When you compare that, it doesnt seem different, but when you think about it, it is more for the fans to have a more scaled version of prime to be compared to Grimlock that HasTak released.

Did you mix up FansProject and iGear? I personally see iGear's "mini MP Prime" as a definite KO because it is just a scaled copy of an existing toy:

http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=5450&page=3

They're just asking for trouble, and will get Hasbro to bring the hammer down on the actual fan kit makers. :(

Their products have no real creativity. And there have been rumours they were the ones who've been KO-ing the works of other fan kit makers. :mad:

1AZRAEL1

26th August 2009, 02:34 PM

Did you mix up FansProject and iGear? I personally see iGear's "mini MP Prime" as a definite KO because it is just a scaled copy of an existing toy

I think I may have, but there are too many to count. They just keep popping up all over the place. They were the ones that made the LED gun as well arent they?

Point is, I see them as making a toy for the fans that is more in scale with the Grimlock that was released.

GoktimusPrime

26th August 2009, 02:46 PM

Well, if we are really going to try to shoehorn this example in, it would be more apt to say that if you hit your own kids, that preaching against raping your own kids would be untenable
Are you saying that if a parent believes in and uses corporal punishment, then they don't have any moral ground to complain if someone sexually assaults their kids?

Most parents who are pro-corporal punishment (http://www.child-discipline-with-love.com/pro-corporal-punishment.html) aren't advocates of child abuse. They don't hit their kids with the intention of abusing them, if anything they do it as an act of love. I personally don't agree with corporal punishment (I'm more of an advocate for the Behaviour-Consequences (http://www.child-discipline-with-love.com/behavior-consequences.html) model), but at the same time I don't deny that people who are pro-corporal also have their children's best interests at heart, and they also discipline their children out of love, not malice.

I don't know how an act of love, even if you and I strongly disagree with it, can be compared with something as henious as sexual assault. You could argue that corporal punishment is a form of physical abuse, but again the underlying motivation is completely different - there is NO malice.

And parents who believe in corporal punishment aren't necessarily the same as those who physically abuse their children. There's a difference between spanking your child because s/he's done something naughty, as opposed to bashing your child up because you're drunk and you had a crap day. Again it all boils down to intent.

Apples and oranges are both citrus fruits.

Sky Shadow

26th August 2009, 02:50 PM

Apples and oranges are both citrus fruits.

Except for apples, which aren't citrus fruits. Which leaves oranges. :D

jaydisc

26th August 2009, 02:55 PM

I'm not digressing into a discussion about child-rearing. It was a ludicrous analogy to being with. Your Parenting Thread is here (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=3799).

GoktimusPrime

26th August 2009, 03:12 PM

1. It was actually Kyle who first introduced the child abuse analogy. Then you responded to it ("Well, if we are really going to try to shoehorn this example in,"), so I in turn responded to that. So it was never about me trying to redirect this discussion into one about parenting - it was an _analogy_.

2. How is it any more or less ludicrous than other analogies that have been presented?
e.g.: stealing, killing etc. - the point I was trying to make is that there are different moral and legal grounds concerning even the same acts depending on the intent and motivations behind those acts.

e.g.:
+ stealing because you're starving vs. stealing to make money
+ manslaughter vs. murder (they're both forms of killing)

Which comes down to:
+ infringing IP to create products that don't exist vs. infringing IP to counterfeit already existing products

What I'm saying is that _intent_ and _motive_ are factors which ought to be taken into account.

Kyle

26th August 2009, 03:34 PM

I'm not digressing into a discussion about child-rearing. It was a ludicrous analogy to being with.

My bad.

Hereticpoo

26th August 2009, 04:03 PM

Except for apples, which aren't citrus fruits. Which leaves oranges. :D

Hilarious! Tear inducing Laughter! :D

d*r*j*

26th August 2009, 05:40 PM

About KOs

Hasbro appears to have sold a large selection of moulds in china. It is a pretty common theory on the internet that Hasbro just pretty much dumped everything when transformers lost popularity. It was the thinking of the time that everything was over. They sold the factories, moulds, plans, machines that print the boxs etc. They didn't store their property properly nor did they dispose of it thoughtfully... Like it or not but they are responsible 100% for this mess, they didn't count on this nostalgia boom... all they ever do is what is profitable for themselves.

Would you buy all this up and not use it?

About IP stealing new products

It's great. In this day and age competition should be encouraged. Hasbro has shown that they are not willing to care about the adult collector market at all. If they cared they would have gone to china (you can go anywhere online now) and offered these talented designers jobs. What they did was typically american "you can't do that, it's mine!! I'll sue!" whatever.

STL

26th August 2009, 06:29 PM

You didn't miss much... Galvatron and his cronies travelled back in time to 1986. Unicron took control of Hot Rod, Kup & Blurr and made them do things.

Nothing special! :p

Now someone�s gonna have light their darkest hour! :P

I think I may have, but there are too many to count. They just keep popping up all over the place. They were the ones that made the LED gun as well arent they?

Point is, I see them as making a toy for the fans that is more in scale with the Grimlock that was released.

That�s certainly how I see it. It�s more in scale with the BTs and MP-08 and that�s their reason for doing it.

I'm not digressing into a discussion about child-rearing. It was a ludicrous analogy to being with. Your Parenting Thread is here (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=3799).

That�s exactly why I wasn�t gonna touch it. Not even with a forty foot pole.

I don't remember you replying or addressing post #52 on this thread. That was convenient for you too? :confused:

My sincerest apologies for missing it. With the degree of posts in this thread, I was bound to be remiss at some point. And if anyone else feels I�ve missed their points, I apologise and will respectfully respond if you point it out to me.

Just because HasTak does not rely on the infringements it makes to succeed in selling toys (this is still debatable), then the infringements it makes are no longer infringements?

If I don't need to steal but I go ahead and steal from a shop anyway, is it a lesser offence than someone who steals from myself?

But my response is that I don't think it absolves Hasbro/Takara if they are touching on other's IP but two wrongs also do not make a right.

I suppose if I smoke cigarette, then I have no right to be against taking hardcore drugs as well.

I think there's a high degree of provocative flippancy within your tone in this statement and the ones that preceded it and I've felt it most apt to sidestep that to avoid digression onto awkward discussions on other social issues. Mind you, I do not think that is the best way to conduct oneself across the board when trying to convey a point but if that's what the board passes as okay these days then perhaps we should all start posting like that in other threads. To answer your overall point; I completely agree FP have a high degree of creativity. It's truly breathtaking a lot of the stuff that they produce and I have no problem with buying it. My only problem is how one can maintain some air of moral superiority when what they support stems from the very same infringement - theft of someone else's IP. As Griffin pointed out there is a spectrum of products but at their most fundamental level they all include theft of IP. If you are more creative in terms of what you do, does that make it okay? So I steal a part of the block of land u no longer use and build a spectacular waterfall, that's okay as long as its wonderfully creative? I think not. I don't have a problem with either KOs or mass customs. I just think there needs to be a recognition that they only ever exist b/c you are stealing someone's IP. You can't steal from someone and then rationalise that it's okay b/c of whatever reason you conveniently want to use.

And yes, I do acknowledge that i think there is theft of IP by all along Griffin's spectrum but the very reason why I don't really care is b/c to me, as Kyle points out, there are a lot more important moral issues out there. Some that are substantially more weighty. I just refuse to be hypocritical b/c I full well realise that both stem from the same infringement and the moral high ground shouldn't be taken on one but not the other.

f.) Is it okay to steal another's IP b/c you claim that your success is not built on this IP entirely? No

I never claimed FansProject to be entirely innocent. However, as others already pointed out, I still don't see FansProject to be as bad as KO. And I still don't see why just because I've been naughty in Mr Hasbro's classroom, I cannot point out or report another kid doing something else much worse. And Mr Hasbro has been naughty himself too. He teaches us from notes and books he took from others (eg Mr Lamorgini) without paying, but at least he didn't claim he invented Mathematics.

I just can't see them at the same level of KO.

I cannot speak for others. But if one day Hasbro releases their own Magnus Armour or Prime Trailer, then I would be buying them as well. Another problem is we are judging these fan products by what we think others might or might not do.

Firstly, I do want to clarify again that I�m not attacking FP by any stretch of the imagination. I�m not supporting anti-KOs. I�m not supporting anti-fan customs. I�m simply trying to make the point it�s very hard to reconcile how you can deride one but not the other. Both stem exist and only exist b/c of the very same reason. You steal someone�s IP and produce something based on it whose complete success relies on that IP.

To inadvertently answer Sky Shadow�s query, the creativity behind designing an all new transforming toy is not the same. I think those are legit. In many ways, they are competitors b/c they focus on making a transforming toy as opposed to stealing the character developed and nurtured by Hasbro. Why do we get unhappy that when we get Hardshell instead of Bombshell? Tankor instead of Octane? What�s in a name you say? An awful lot. B/c of the time, money and energy put into developing that trademark. That�s IP. To build your own transforming toy is something I�d definitely support as I do like transforming toys and not dependent on the IP of another. KOs and fan customs, wherever they sit on the spectrum breach that. You cannot steal something and after the fact try and justify it with whatever convenient reason there is.

And nor do I see fan customs as being exactly the same thing as KOs. I do appreciate that they sit somewhere else along the spectrum. But the fact is though the very reasons anyone wants to use to justify the existence of one in favour of the other can be twisted to justify the existence of the other. If you want to chastise one you have to chastise the other b/c they exist b/c of the very same reason: theft of IP. To do otherwise is a pretty hypocritical situation.

And lastly, even if we agree that Hasbro/Takara are stealing IP themselves, two wrongs do not make a right.

I buy fan customs, and I report Ko's on ebay.

So if that makes me hypocritical and/or morally corrupt I only have two solutions;

A) Continue to love and buy Fan made, and cease KO reports on ebay.
The result making me non-hypocritical, but the report I don't make might cause some unwitting sucker to be ripped-off.

B) Don't by Fans mades, continue to report Ko's, and go with the Hastak flow.
The result making me non-hypocritical and Morally superior, with a naked Ultra Magnus to boot. But I'll feel good because nothing is better than a warm cup of righteousness.

Hmmm....I'll go with A! :D

Maybe we could have a Poll? Just to finalise everyone's positions and put an end to the mystery?

Which is pretty much what I�ve done. Ironically enough it wasn�t all that long ago, maybe a year, that I was spouting hatred of KOs. Funny how things work out, huh?

I don�t think we need a poll though b/c it�s clearly that not everyone agrees but I think there�s some challenging times ahead and the issues become more and more blurry. I think it was a very worthwhile discussion to have though.

e.g.:
+ stealing because you're starving vs. stealing to make money
+ manslaughter vs. murder (they're both forms of killing)

I don�t want to get into these analogies and will not argue those. As with some of the child rape ones which are inherently loaded and flippant, I think to compare this (stealing of IP) to murder is quite far fetched. To compare it to stealing b/c you�re starving? I don�t want to go any further but are you trying to compare fan customs to starving people? People who are struggling to get by? That�s a bit rich.

Or are you comparing the motives and intent of fan customs to those of charitable organisations? That they�re pure and noble? Again, isn�t that a bit rich? Especially when you have to steal first to be pure and noble of intent and motive?

Which comes down to:
+ infringing IP to create products that don't exist vs. infringing IP to counterfeit already existing products

What I'm saying is that _intent_ and _motive_ are factors which ought to be taken into account.

I think we do try and compute why a KO or mass custom has been built. As you and others have pointed out, there are a number of reasons. Some better than others. Some less so than others.

But let me put it this way:

So I steal from you what�s rightfully yours and then turn around and say to you �well you weren�t using it anyway.� Would any of us like that?

So I find the moral/ethical difference between fan items and counterfeits is that counterfeits are made with 'malicious intent'; i.e.: a specific intention to compete with legitimate products and deceive consumers. Fan items on the other hand are generally devoid of this malice.

So you don't buy unlicensed products then?

I don't buy unlicensed stuff, but personally I don't hold a real objection against fan items. I'm neither for nor against them. But I _do_ hold an objection against counterfeits though.

Which as I�ve previously said you�re perfectly entitled too. You don�t buy either. It�s those that buy one yet deride the other as if they�re some unholy evil.

When you say malicious then, if a producer of a KO is completely open and discloses that it is a KO then is it okay? They�re not deceiving anyone then, are they? How can they be malicious? Isn�t that validating the existence of KOs? KOers as I said could be viewed that they are simply producing something that Hasbro/Takara have said in the past that they have no intention of producing. They do the research that Hasbro/Takara find too expensive to do by recasting the molds and put it out there so people have the opportunity to buy a nice minty version of a vintage toy. Is that all okay then for a KO to exist?

Again, please don�t see this as defending KOs. It isn�t. It�s trying to point out many of the reasons for mass-customs can be applied to KOs. And the reason that is, is b/c they steal IP that is desirable in the first place � whether it be in a mold or a character. KOers aren�t going to produce Go-Bots. Mass-customs aren�t going to produce Go-Bot accessories. And the fundamental reason for that is b/c there is no value in that.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

While I have enjoyed this discussion, I do have to agree with Kup that this is becoming rather circular.. Hence why my subtle suggestion in my previous post to let's finish this. I think all points of views have been conveyed and the positions set out and at the very least this is an issue that's been raised and put out there. I don't think it'll go away and we'll see more fan customs to come that test the very boundaries. That said, if there is further debate, I do certainly welcome it.

Kyle

26th August 2009, 07:21 PM

I think there's a high degree of provocative flippancy within your tone in this statement and the ones that preceded it and I've felt it most apt to sidestep that to avoid digression onto awkward discussions on other social issues. Mind you, I do not think that is the best way to conduct oneself across the board when trying to convey a point but if that's what the board passes as okay these days then perhaps we should all start posting like that in other threads.

No no. It is not okay to use provocative flippancy on the board. If I came across as using it or did accidentally use it then I also offer my sincerest apologies. :)

While I have enjoyed this discussion, I do have to agree with Kup that this is becoming rather circular.. Hence why my subtle suggestion in my previous post to let's finish this. I think all points of views have been conveyed and the positions set out and at the very least this is an issue that's been raised and put out there. I don't think it'll go away and we'll see more fan customs to come that test the very boundaries. That said, if there is further debate, I do certainly welcome it.

I do believe this is the very least that all can agree. :o:)

griffin

27th August 2009, 02:04 PM

If the discussion is meant to be about morals instead of legality, it should be known that most people regard following the law as a moral and ethical thing to do. For those who don't respect the law, legality isn't a moral issue, and their opinions would differ on this matter. Because morals is, doing what makes you feel good about yourself, based on what you have been taught and what you have learnt. If you don't respect a law, or it is an unjust law, does adhering to it make you feel good about yourself? If you've learnt, or been taught the values of honour, respect and decency towards others and yourself, you wouldn't object to adhering to most laws, because most laws are ethical.

Legally, we've discussed this issue. And most have only looked at the raised concepts from this perspective, because to most, legality = moral values. At least, when the Law is Just, Fair, and Ethical.

And Ethics relates to both.
A moral compass relates to the ethics of an individual. If it is ethical to adhere to the law, than the legal position is a moral one. If one does not believe a law is ethical, the moral position is to break the law. Sure, you get in trouble, but you will feel good about yourself for doing 'the right thing'.

This is the basis of the American Constitution - the people are obligated to replace the people/person in power if they are corrupt or abuse their position. Sure, it would be considered treason by the people in power, but in the minds of those overthowing the government (or 200 years ago, overthrowing British rule), they are doing the ethical, moral thing.
The character of Robin Hood was inspired by the same concept, that an unjust law needs to be fought by those who have the power and ethics to stand up to it, or else they can't feel good about themselves (morally).

In capitalist societies, laws can sometimes be unethical, or used unethically, because the priority of a business is to make money (a selfish ideology) rather than providing for the needs of others (a selfless ideology).

The laws relating to patents are ideally meant to protect the hard earned time and money of the inventor/creator, by giving them exclusive rights to any profit from that item/design. That seems fair doesn't it? If you personally invented something, like a clean energy device that would revolutionise and save the world, you should be rewarded for it by preventing anyone else from manufacturing it, or an inspired item, without authorisation. But what if an oil company buys up the patent (because you name a price and easily make your millions), and locks it away to prevent anyone from being able to ever use it? Is that ethical of the oil company? No, but it is legal. The global warming issue gets worse and you are the only one with the knowledge to offer a clean energy source. Legally you wouldn't be allowed to help the people of the world, but morally... what would you do? Adhere to an unethical situation because you are bound by the law, or do the illegal, yet moral act of making public the clean energy technology?

Okay, so that is just an extreme example to illustrate that adhering to the law isn't always a moral or ethical issue. But it does relate to this discussion about toy Intellectual Property.

So a more relevant example.
Gun-Formers are illegal in Victoria, but how many of you have one... and how many of you have complained about it being illegal to own them? Would it make you feel good to not own some prized TFs just because it is illegal in your state? Those whose fear of imprisonment outweighs the desire to own what others are legally allowed to own, will feel good NOT to own them. But those in the reverse, or feel it is an unjust, unfair law, would only feel good if they owned them. Who has the moral high ground? Well, both do, based on what they believe to be more important to themselves and their personal moral welfare.

Back to the topic - Legally, all unauthorised product that sells off the back of the Transformers Brand, is illegal, because it infringes on Hasbro/Takara's ownership of that IP.

But morally, it comes down to the ethics of both the producers of the unauthorised stuff, and the ethics of the IP owners (and the laws that protect their capitalistic, greed oriented objectives). So the extent of how much you care about your impact on Hasbro/Takara with your purchases, your morals will reflect that. If you prefer to support all official product, than morally, you wouldn't buy anything unauthorised. If you prefer to support 'ethical' official product, morally, you'd still avoid just about everything unauthorised, but wouldn't feel bad about purchasing an item that substitues an official item that Hasbro/Takara have packed in with an expensive, unwanted item. And even then, those people have the morals to not pass it off as the real thing or claim it is. Those who don't care about their impact on Hasbro/Takara, or don't care about the purity of their collection, will not feel bad about buying anything unauthorised.
Moral standards are not universal - to each other, or to everything.
It comes down to what they see is the right thing to do for themselves and for others (IP owners, other fans, etc), to make themselves feel content with their decisions.

Since the purpose, intention and legality of these things (replica figures, replica accesories, fan-custom stuff) vary, it is wrong to expect people's moral standards on each to be the same.

There is no 'all is right, all is wrong' morality here.

To prove it, here is my moral values on each of these elements.

Replica past figures (of any size scale) don't pay any commission to the entity that created or own the designs, and actively intend to deceive the consumer by trying to make sure the product can pass as the real thing without close inspection. Since these toys are progressively going to disappear as time goes on, if the official owner of them doesn't produce more, then we should accept that certain items are going to become rare, and not have the expectation that all old TFs will forever be cheap and easy to acquire. Morally, I don't respect the intentions of replica producers, and don't support or condone buying them. The greed in me would love to easily find and buy all the toys I don't have, but I wouldn't feel right about it, because they wouldn't count in the collection, and would remain on my purchase list. But others who can't yet afford the real thing, would see them as a temporary place-filler, to inspire them to buy the real thing. I can't recall anyone on this local forum proudly displaying replica TFs toys in their collection, because morally, I don't think anyone here sees them as actual replacements of the real thing.

Competing 'entire' product (both custom or replica), like Arcee or Drift, or past figures that are going to be reissued, are more illegal because we definitely know that it would take away sales of current/future official (ethical) product. One of the reasons I don't support items in the first category, is based on the slight possibility of them ever being reissued. But as soon as they are definitely going to be reissued, there is no excuse for buying a conterfeit figure. So morally, I wouldn't support any figure that competes with the real, official thing, because, I don't feel bad about avoiding them.

Exact replica replacement parts/stickers/accessories, also don't pay any commissions to reproduce those parts, but the intentions by those producing them and selling them are often mixed (selfless and selfish), so I also don't pursue these for myself, (but more for the purpose of me keeping my collection pure). In a similar vein to the first category, I feel that items that are no longer in production, should be allowed to become rare and expensive over time. I might not like paying out more for a rare figure or part, but I will feel happy that it is a legit item and keeps the collection as a purely Transformers (r) Brand collection (my moral position on this particular issue). Stickers are probably the only repro items I wouldn't be too fussed about, because they are fairly insignificant to the overall toy, but I do have a problem with repro parts/accessories, because like replica figures, they can end up in circulation as the real thing, contaminating collections of real figures and parts.

Custom figures/parts/accessories - provided they are obviously different to anything officially available, or don't compete with any current/future/foreseable item, these do not negatively impact on the IP owners' earnings.
This differs to 'entire' custom figures that compete with official product, because a custom accessory is only worth buying if you buy something in the official product line. And as such, creates a sale, rather than prevents it. Even the recent MP Grimlock crown accessory (provided it is a non-replica, fan-custom), ensures the purchase of *A* MP Grimlock, which makes Hasbro/Takara profit.
But when the official source unethically wants the more serious/bigger collectors to re-buy an entire, expensive toy just get a new accessory, that should have been in the first release (which is like when they have a multi-pack with just one new figure), you either miss out, or pay a fortune to get it (if you really wanted one). Either way, you feel bad it, and if you have to have the exact same moral position on every unauthorised item, those negative feelings shouldn't be there. After all, the 'moral highground' is supposed to make you feel good about yourself and your decisions. It might be illegal to produce or purchase an unauthorised Custom item, but ethically it comes down to how much you despise the intentions of the IP owner for how they are making the official item available. I personally wouldn't support an exact replica of the official crown, but don't see how a non-replica crown is any different from any other fan-custom item that actually guarantees the purchase of an official item.
Since I don't much care about having a Crown for MP Grimlock, I don't feel bad about not having one or missing out on one. But morally, I wouldn't have a problem with a custom item being produced to compete with an unethical officially released item.
And since it is okay for Hasbro to produce figures that are inspired, but not authorised, by other IPs, it would be hypocritical and unethical for them to complain or prevent non-replica, Custom items.

As this forum admin though...
I would prefer to have no unauthorised/illegal stuff on this forum, but due to Hasbro's position on different issues and their own unauthorised use on 'inspired' likenesses of other IPs, I allow the items that Hasbro appear to have no problem with (small production, non-replica, Custom items).

The only 'convenience' I see here in this topic, is trying to apply the same moral value to different issues and different people. As soon as two things like Replica items and Custom items can be distinguished legally, ethically and to their intention, the moral values assigned to each differs. Especially when taking into account the beliefs and integrity of each individual person.

GoktimusPrime

27th August 2009, 02:52 PM

Well said. :)

I can't recall anyone on this local forum proudly displaying replica TFs toys in their collection, because morally, I don't think anyone here sees them as actual replacements of the real thing.
There was someone who did post images of their undersized KO G1 Seeker jets in a manner that, at least in my interpretation, seemed as if they were proudly showing them off as if they'd just finished their G1 Seeker collection. They even posted size comparison pics with more recent Universe toys. I'm not going to say who it was because I honestly don't remember! (even if I did I wouldn't publicly name them :p) There are other boards where people do boast about acquiring KOs... some people even start discussion threads about specific KO toys and even make reviews of them.

Kyle

27th August 2009, 04:00 PM

The custom crown for MP Grimlock is an interesting example. When the Japanese toy magazines showed the MP Grimlock prototype with a crown, it got fans excited. Fans were then disappointed with the general release of MP Grimlock not including the crown. This custom crown now "discourages" fans from buying MP-8X, but at the same time "encourages" fans to buy the general release MP-8 as the crown can "complete" the toy.

Now I don't feel like debating or arguing with anyone, but do feel like simply sharing my own collecting habits after reading griffin's post. This is in no way saying what I do is correct, nor trying to get anyone to agree with or follow what I do.

I have only kept 2 items which I consider to be KO in my own collection: (1) KO Super God Sword for Brave Maximus/God Fire Convoy and (2) KO MP sized Roller with accessories.

I suppose I'm "morally" ok with (1), as I could only "officially" get the sword as either a lucky draw item or with the purchase of JP TRU exclusive clear God Fire Convoy boxset. I felt cheated when Takara released the sword with the TRU boxset but provided no other means to "purchase" the sword if I already bought their general release Fire Convoy and God Magnus earlier. Granted, as much as I don't agree with Takara's decision, it's Takara's IP and they were legally free to do whatever they wished with their IP, and I did happily buy the Fire Convoy and God Magnus toys for exactly what they were (before they announced the sword).

When I came across the KO sword on eBay much later, the stock of the TRU boxset was long gone from JP TRU store shelves. I could only see my purchase affecting directly the aftermarket value of either the lucky draw sword or the TRU boxset, with minimal damage (I'd hope :o) to Takara itself. Call me selfish but I don't really care about the aftermarket value of other people's toys. :D This KO sword allows me to enjoy my official Fire Convoy and God Magnus toys to their fullest. However, if Takara one day decides to reissue the sword with new or no changes, then I would HAPPILY buy an official Takara one.

Now on to (2). I'm a fan of Takara's Masterpiece series, and have collected every single release so far. When Takara released MP-4 with the trailer, I again felt cheated. But again it was well within Takara's right to do whatever releases they wished to. And I bought the MP-4 toy. (I would also like to point out that I have bought two of every single Takara MP releases.) I then saw the scaled up MP sized Roller as an opportunity to complete my enjoyment of my own official Takara MP-4 toy, and I didn't see it competing with Takara directly since Takara already missed their own opportunities to include MP-1 and MP-4 with a Roller toy. Is this legal? No. Do I feel good about it? Yes. However, if Takara one day releases an official MP sized Roller toy, or even like a MP-4 toy AGAIN but with an extra Roller (say MP-4X), I WILL still buy two of any of these official Takara items again because I'm crazy. :o

The new "mini-MP OP" though, is definitely something I'm not a fan of. It (a) does not complement or complete any exisitng Takara toy, (b) is extrapolated from an existing toy, and (c) has zero creativity whatsoever.

I can argue that my (1) KO Super God Sword is the same as (b) and (c), however it does not agree with (a) so I'm still ok with it. Similarly for (2), it is the same as (b) and (c) but again does not agree with (a). And keep in mind that I will be buying the official versions of these items if they can be made available to me.

Now an interesting question is would I buy a KO for parts to complete a broken toy? Now I have never done this yet, but I would say yes as it goes against (a) and will "complete" my original official toy. I would find this acceptable as long as I keep this toy in my own collection, and I will be even ok to sell it as long as I make sure the potential buyers understand exactly what the toy is.

I would like to point out that I was at some point very tempted to have "WST Dinobots" and "KO mini Seekers" in my own collection, but I ultimately decided against having them. I can however understand their appeal to some fans though. But since they agree with all of (a), (b) and (c) I would prefer waiting for official Takara/Hasbro reissues at some point.

And yes, I made up my own rules about what's right and what's wrong. Did I change them or update them to accommodate my own needs and make myself feel better? Certainly. Will I continue to change my own rules if I see them as convenient? Of course yes. I simply don't see why I can't change my "moral goal posts", and why someone else should come up to me and tell me that I'm not allowed to change them. :D

Now onto fan customs. Since you all know I'm a big fan of FansProject stuff, I'll only use them here as my examples. All of the FansProject stuff don't agree with (a), (b) or (c). So I'm perfectly ok with them.

Will I still buy an official Magnus Armour and Prime Trailer, if Hasbro/TakaraTomy decide to bundle them with their old toys so I have to buy the old toys again? I would say yes (but I'm only speaking for myself here.)