The Soapbox XII: The Convenient Truth

[STL]

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?