The Soapbox XII: The Convenient Truth

[STL]

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]

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]

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:

[jaydisc]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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.