The Soapbox XII: The Convenient Truth

[STL]

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.