The Energon Pub

All right folks, let's get back on topic please.

Sorry, this is old, but I'm really surprised no one seems to have noticed...

skywarp-2 wrote:but was there a chorus requesting a crasher, which we got in the form of Fracture??

Actually, yes. I remember quite a few comments asking for precisely that concept, especially after Classics Mirage came out (a lot of folks didn't like the idea, too, partly because Mirage looked too "feminine," which people thought Crasher shouldn't be, her actually being a female notwithstanding).

But, anyway, there were quite a few folks out there with the idea. I'm sure Hasbro noticed, and took the opportunity. They don't/won't do this for ALL good ideas, of course, but they've demonstrated a willingness t "pay attention" to fan interests on a few occasions.

G.B. Blackrock wrote:Sorry, this is old, but I'm really surprised no one seems to have noticed...

skywarp-2 wrote:but was there a chorus requesting a crasher, which we got in the form of Fracture??

Actually, yes. I remember quite a few comments asking for precisely that concept, especially after Classics Mirage came out (a lot of folks didn't like the idea, too, partly because Mirage looked too "feminine," which people thought Crasher shouldn't be, her actually being a female notwithstanding).

But, anyway, there were quite a few folks out there with the idea. I'm sure Hasbro noticed, and took the opportunity. They don't/won't do this for ALL good ideas, of course, but they've demonstrated a willingness t "pay attention" to fan interests on a few occasions.

Hmmm.... I wonder what the Magic Number in the "chorus" of fans requesting a figure like Fracture would have to be? If I could figure how many of us have to collectively make a big deal of something we really want, then it would be easy to "organize" support and fill a quota of signatures to send to Hasbro as a multiple fan request.. assuming their attorney's don't bar them from that citing some massive collective fan lawsuits.. even though what we would request from them as fans are better made figures of their own licensed characters??

that is thing that makes me angry..

it is not like I asked Hasbro to make a freaking new character based on my designs or a design of a cool bot I've seen on the net..

I merely asked them to make a proper devastator which resembles the G-1 version.. and really take their time to get it right..

I also checked with them on some ideas for releasing a shockwave for classics, and some other bots..

so How can my "request" for them to make a figure based on a figure they already own the copyrights to, be considered a legal liability.. it's frickin ludicrous!!!

that is like telling McD's that you want no Pickles on your Mc Double, and add Mayo.. and then suing them for making the Burger like that and selling it to you, without giving you a royalty for it being your request??

WTF!!! the more I think about it, the more I think that the Attorney's Answer is complete BS!!!

skywarp-2 wrote:

G.B. Blackrock wrote:Sorry, this is old, but I'm really surprised no one seems to have noticed...

skywarp-2 wrote:but was there a chorus requesting a crasher, which we got in the form of Fracture??

Actually, yes. I remember quite a few comments asking for precisely that concept, especially after Classics Mirage came out (a lot of folks didn't like the idea, too, partly because Mirage looked too "feminine," which people thought Crasher shouldn't be, her actually being a female notwithstanding).

But, anyway, there were quite a few folks out there with the idea. I'm sure Hasbro noticed, and took the opportunity. They don't/won't do this for ALL good ideas, of course, but they've demonstrated a willingness t "pay attention" to fan interests on a few occasions.

Hmmm.... I wonder what the Magic Number in the "chorus" of fans requesting a figure like Fracture would have to be?

There's no such thing. At best, it's a combination of fan request and Hasbro's ability to make it "fit" their intentions for the line (including factors such as "will non-fans like this, too?").

If I could figure how many of us have to collectively make a big deal of something we really want, then it would be easy to "organize" support and fill a quota of signatures to send to Hasbro as a multiple fan request.. assuming their attorney's don't bar them from that citing some massive collective fan lawsuits.. even though what we would request from them as fans are better made figures of their own licensed characters??

Please, please don't.

that is thing that makes me angry..

it is not like I asked Hasbro to make a freaking new character based on my designs or a design of a cool bot I've seen on the net..

I merely asked them to make a proper devastator which resembles the G-1 version.. and really take their time to get it right..

I also checked with them on some ideas for releasing a shockwave for classics, and some other bots..

so How can my "request" for them to make a figure based on a figure they already own the copyrights to, be considered a legal liability.. it's frickin ludicrous!!!

Frankly, I have no sympathy for you whatsoever. Most every company in America has a similar policy, and has had for many, many years now.

that is like telling McD's that you want no Pickles on your Mc Double, and add Mayo.. and then suing them for making the Burger like that and selling it to you, without giving you a royalty for it being your request??

There is absolutely no similarity whatsoever.

[quote="skywarp-2"]How can my "request" for them to make a figure based on a figure they already own the copyrights to, be considered a legal liability.. it's frickin ludicrous!!![quote]

It's not. What it is is a cop out on Hasbro's part. They don't see your request or needs as important at all. I mean they're not entitled to they're not a charity fund or a build a bear like company, but accepting ideas from fans is not a legal issue. In fact I'd feel they'd do a lot better had they taken some ideas from us guys.

This will be quite a long, rambling post, so bear with me...

Let me nail my flag to the mast right now: I have absolutely no time for any company who infringes Hasbro copyright or breaks the law. I appreciate that some add-ons bear no resemblance to any existing Hasbro design or idea (the Alternator Convoy add-on set, the Aerialbot appendages), but every toy that bears even a remote resemblance to an existing Hasbro design or idea is, in my view, immoral.

Indeed, when I heard that the City Commander sets themselves were being knocked-off... I must admit to indulging in a wry smile when I heard that one.

But let's not draw the line at KO and 3rd party add-ons... there is so much we as Transformers fans take for granted that is in fact illegal. Photos of new toy designs stolen trom Hasbro factories, direct links to cartoons hosted on YouTube - all of this is legally and morally dubious.

In those cases, I'm saddened that Seibertron.com (and the wider Transformers community in general) implicitly legitimises these activities by making them headline news.

By giving these KOs a headline, what you're essentially doing is giving these companies free advertising, and encourgaing people to buy these illegal products (despite the rather feeble disclaimers).

But that's not to say I don't sympathise with the news crew here. Hypothetically speaking, suppose for one moment that seibertron.com were to take the moral high ground, and ban all mention of illegal or legally dubious products or activities.

What would that accomplish? Well, it would cause seibertron to lose traffic to those rival news sites who do not have such high standards. With decreased traffic, Seibertron would then face losing out on some of its site sponsorship monies.

So basically the news crew are actually bound to report on this stuff anyway, because if they didn't they would lose their crown as top Transformers news reporters (which they currently hold, in my view) and the hits would go elsewhere to rival sites.

So as long as fans are eager for the information, the news sites have to report it, for fear of losing traffic.

Therefore, until fandom at large takes a good, long look at itself and quells its collective appetite for KO's (or indeed illegal episode streaming or toy factory leaks), sites such as seibertron.com will be financially-bound to report such things as 'news'.

Not because they necessarily want to, but because to cease these reports would put a dent in their hit-rate and by extension their advertising revenues.

But I doubt that will even happen, so it looks like the KO news will be here to stay.

G.B. Blackrock wrote:

skywarp-2 wrote:

G.B. Blackrock wrote:Sorry, this is old, but I'm really surprised no one seems to have noticed...

skywarp-2 wrote:but was there a chorus requesting a crasher, which we got in the form of Fracture??

Actually, yes. I remember quite a few comments asking for precisely that concept, especially after Classics Mirage came out (a lot of folks didn't like the idea, too, partly because Mirage looked too "feminine," which people thought Crasher shouldn't be, her actually being a female notwithstanding).

But, anyway, there were quite a few folks out there with the idea. I'm sure Hasbro noticed, and took the opportunity. They don't/won't do this for ALL good ideas, of course, but they've demonstrated a willingness t "pay attention" to fan interests on a few occasions.

Hmmm.... I wonder what the Magic Number in the "chorus" of fans requesting a figure like Fracture would have to be?

There's no such thing. At best, it's a combination of fan request and Hasbro's ability to make it "fit" their intentions for the line (including factors such as "will non-fans like this, too?").

I agree with your assessment..

G.B. Blackrock wrote:

skywarp-2 wrote:If I could figure how many of us have to collectively make a big deal of something we really want, then it would be easy to "organize" support and fill a quota of signatures to send to Hasbro as a multiple fan request.. assuming their attorney's don't bar them from that citing some massive collective fan lawsuits.. even though what we would request from them as fans are better made figures of their own licensed characters??

Please, please don't.

that was more of a hypothetical question, and not a statement of intent...

G.B. Blackrock wrote:

skywarp-2 wrote:that is thing that makes me angry..

it is not like I asked Hasbro to make a freaking new character based on my designs or a design of a cool bot I've seen on the net..

I merely asked them to make a proper devastator which resembles the G-1 version.. and really take their time to get it right..

I also checked with them on some ideas for releasing a shockwave for classics, and some other bots..

so How can my "request" for them to make a figure based on a figure they already own the copyrights to, be considered a legal liability.. it's frickin ludicrous!!!

Frankly, I have no sympathy for you whatsoever. Most every company in America has a similar policy, and has had for many, many years now.

Uhhhh????? I never.... Asked for sympathy from you???

and yeah no, that has not always been the case, and if I remember correctly there were fan choice requests and contests to create your own Gi Joe figure.. and the fan's choice toys for Star Wars.. I am just perplexed that Transformers hasn't gotten something similar within Hasbro, and not expressly through the Botcons.. or other avenues..

(on a side note, I appreciate the fact that you go back in the threads and post previous comments.... See below:

G.B. Blackrock wrote:Sorry, this is old, but I'm really surprised no one seems to have noticed...

skywarp-2 wrote:but was there a chorus requesting a crasher, which we got in the form of Fracture??

Actually, yes. I remember quite a few comments asking for precisely that concept, especially after Classics Mirage came out (a lot of folks didn't like the idea, too, partly because Mirage looked too "feminine," which people thought Crasher shouldn't be, her actually being a female notwithstanding).

But, anyway, there were quite a few folks out there with the idea. I'm sure Hasbro noticed, and took the opportunity. They don't/won't do this for ALL good ideas, of course, but they've demonstrated a willingness t "pay attention" to fan interests on a few occasions.

I never said they totally ignore fan requests.. however, there is an unequal amount of fan based ideas that get used in tons of other Toy lines by Hasbro..that's all i'm saying..

G.B. Blackrock wrote:

skywarp-2 wrote:that is like telling McD's that you want no Pickles on your Mc Double, and add Mayo.. and then suing them for making the Burger like that and selling it to you, without giving you a royalty for it being your request??

There is absolutely no similarity whatsoever.

Ummm yeah in principle it is similar.. and that is what I find so funny about trial lawyers.. anything has the potential for a law suit these days..our judicial system needs to be reformed.. companies like Hasbro should support such reforms to end frivolous lawsuits.. which keeps costs low for them, retention of legal council fees, and costs associated with legal issues, or potential issues..

Which ultimately could reduce costs for us, the consumer..as per the trickle down theory..

it is almost like that to me, that most companies have to have an attorney present in the room with the toy sculptor to advise as to what legal problems from that toy could be probable if released on the market.. and that kind of business practice seems very counter productive..Not saying Hasbro does this mind you..

But it just seems like our legal system (lawyers run amuck!) makes it harder for anyone to do anything these days.. much less a corporation, who is constantly under attack from extremists and special interest groups, or just those who want to sue to make a quick buck.

and that is the point of this whole argument I was trying to get across..

Rastamus Prime wrote:

skywarp-2 wrote:How can my "request" for them to make a figure based on a figure they already own the copyrights to, be considered a legal liability.. it's frickin ludicrous!!!

It's not. What it is is a cop out on Hasbro's part. They don't see your request or needs as important at all. I mean they're not entitled to they're not a charity fund or a build a bear like company, but accepting ideas from fans is not a legal issue. In fact I'd feel they'd do a lot better had they taken some ideas from us guys.

See I think that there may be some truth to that.. Hasbro is like okay, we hear you Gi Joe fans! We hear you Star Wars Fans! We hear you Marvel comics fans! Huh.... What was that Transformers fans??

let me recite the old argument...

(it costs money to have Hasbro produce a figure, engineering, parts, and molds for each separate piece..)

Ummm... aren't they a toy company?? don't they make a living out of making figures?? soooo... making a toy is too costly for them to do a figure that the "Majority" of the fan community wants??

Sooooo..... a proper devastator is too costly for them to produce? isn't it hasbro's job to figure that out on their own??


to me this argument is just plain stupid.. not calling anyone here stupid, just this statement..

I mean Hasbro is a toy company...so they are in the business to make toys, and with moving parts, they have been doing so since the 1980's with respect to Transformers.. I just don't get it.. will 1 toy bankrupt them?? it is almost like that argument gets slung around too..

"Why doesn't hasbro make this XXXXX?"

Answer:
Hasbro has to concentrate on their bottom line, and make figures most of the public would buy, (cause they are almost out of business) making a fan wanted figure would cost too much to produce, and would jeopardize the franchise..do you want them to stop making figures?? then shut up!! I support Hasbro sucka!

(and yet Hasbro releases figures that sit on the shelf for ever..and ones fans didn't request.. looking at you ultimate bumblebee..and transformers unleashed statues)


If you support Hasbro all the way then fine, but I see the need for the 3RD party market.. and the old tired excuses for Hasbro have got to go..they just don't work..

not if you consider the fact that they are a TOY company.. and they do this stuff for a living..maybe if the laws weren't so stringent (attorney retention and costs associated with them), no recession, or Hasbro just decided to produce one less unwanted Gi Joe vehicle, we would have gotten an Ultra Magnus including trailer.. but that didn't happen..

So yeah to some extent.. it is the Lawyers and laws that cause things to hold back Hasbro..
But it is also their job to be innovative and figure out how to do a figure (that fans want and consumers would buy) without costing too much to produce.. I think Hasbro could have gotten some stuff right the first time and not just sit back and expect people to take it..


which they didn't...

hence the 3rd party market..

skywarp-2 wrote:and yeah no, that has not always been the case, and if I remember correctly there were fan choice requests and contests to create your own Gi Joe figure.. and the fan's choice toys for Star Wars.. I am just perplexed that Transformers hasn't gotten something similar within Hasbro, and not expressly through the Botcons.. or other avenues..

In their defense, both Hasbro and the TFCC has expressly explained that the tooling costs of specific figures is too great where Transformers are concerned when compared to a potential flop. See Club Astrotrain for a specific example.

skywarp-2 wrote:Ummm yeah in principle it is similar.. and that is what I find so funny about trial lawyers.. anything has the potential for a law suit these days..our judicial system needs to be reformed..

Again to be fair...

The idea of "frivolous lawsuits" is grossly overstated in popular culture. Those kinds of lawsuits are regularly dismissed in court and most good lawyers are hesitant to bring them to trial anyway because repeated attempts at doing so can lead to sanctions or disbarment.

Counterpunch wrote:

skywarp-2 wrote:and yeah no, that has not always been the case, and if I remember correctly there were fan choice requests and contests to create your own Gi Joe figure.. and the fan's choice toys for Star Wars.. I am just perplexed that Transformers hasn't gotten something similar within Hasbro, and not expressly through the Botcons.. or other avenues..

In their defense, both Hasbro and the TFCC has expressly explained that the tooling costs of specific figures is too great where Transformers are concerned when compared to a potential flop. See Club Astrotrain for a specific example.

Same could be said for specific flops in regular releases.. I don't see the difference..

If Hasbro or TFCC loses money on a retool release, it is just the same as them losing money on a regular release that ends up a shelf warmer..

Counterpunch wrote:

skywarp-2 wrote:Ummm yeah in principle it is similar.. and that is what I find so funny about trial lawyers.. anything has the potential for a law suit these days..our judicial system needs to be reformed..

Again to be fair...

The idea of "frivolous lawsuits" is grossly overstated in popular culture. Those kinds of lawsuits are regularly dismissed in court and most good lawyers are hesitant to bring them to trial anyway because repeated attempts at doing so can lead to sanctions or disbarment.

that may be true, but the amount of trial lawyers in this country is staggering.. so I think making a general statement about the "Good Lawyers" is kinda subjective.. Honestly even if many frivolous lawsuits get thrown out, it costs companies money to go to court in the first place.. and then, there is always the "potential" lawsuit considerations, which cause caution, increased play testing, and reviews by attorneys on the doll to figure out what potential problems a toy has "under legal" considerations before they release it..

So when I site that the Trial Lawyers and Frivolous lawsuits should see reform, I am also taking into account the amount of Legal Preparation that Hasbro has to Pay for before a toy even reaches the shelf.. which is an added cost..

without that cost, Hasbro may have not had to or decided to cut off the whole "trailers" and may have released a proper Ultra Magnus in classics. Or maybe we would have gotten a few more figures..

However, with a company as big as Hasbro, and with how much money and resources they possess.. it just seems unlikely to me that producing a figure that makes the fan community happy and taking a chance on the larger market.. is too expensive for them to do.

Honestly, there have been some major flops by Hasbro in the transformers toy world.. and to say, well if we did a fan made "only" transformer for major release.. (all I am talking about is one figure) and they site it wouldn't be cost effective.. seems like a copout..

seriously, what about their other flops??

ROTF Devastator is still in full stock on the shelves at many a toy store aisle here in my neck o' the woods..

skywarp-2 wrote:

Counterpunch wrote:

skywarp-2 wrote:and yeah no, that has not always been the case, and if I remember correctly there were fan choice requests and contests to create your own Gi Joe figure.. and the fan's choice toys for Star Wars.. I am just perplexed that Transformers hasn't gotten something similar within Hasbro, and not expressly through the Botcons.. or other avenues..

In their defense, both Hasbro and the TFCC has expressly explained that the tooling costs of specific figures is too great where Transformers are concerned when compared to a potential flop. See Club Astrotrain for a specific example.

Same could be said for specific flops in regular releases.. I don't see the difference..

If Hasbro or TFCC loses money on a retool release, it is just the same as them losing money on a regular release that ends up a shelf warmer..

Honestly, there have been some major flops by Hasbro in the transformers toy world.. and to say, well if we did a fan made "only" transformer for major release.. (all I am talking about is one figure) and they site it wouldn't be cost effective.. seems like a copout..

seriously, what about their other flops??

Sorry dude, there's nothing to argue about here.

It's word of god stuff. They pass down the information and we don't have enough additional insight as to marketing, cost of production, or corporate policy to second guess them.

The only thing we can be sure of is that the company will pursue strategies that maximize their profits. Since fan-based character decisions have not been offered to TF fans, we have to assume it's not cost effective.

Counterpunch wrote:

skywarp-2 wrote:

Counterpunch wrote:

skywarp-2 wrote:and yeah no, that has not always been the case, and if I remember correctly there were fan choice requests and contests to create your own Gi Joe figure.. and the fan's choice toys for Star Wars.. I am just perplexed that Transformers hasn't gotten something similar within Hasbro, and not expressly through the Botcons.. or other avenues..

In their defense, both Hasbro and the TFCC has expressly explained that the tooling costs of specific figures is too great where Transformers are concerned when compared to a potential flop. See Club Astrotrain for a specific example.

Same could be said for specific flops in regular releases.. I don't see the difference..

If Hasbro or TFCC loses money on a retool release, it is just the same as them losing money on a regular release that ends up a shelf warmer..

Honestly, there have been some major flops by Hasbro in the transformers toy world.. and to say, well if we did a fan made "only" transformer for major release.. (all I am talking about is one figure) and they site it wouldn't be cost effective.. seems like a copout..

seriously, what about their other flops??

Sorry dude, there's nothing to argue about here.

It's word of god stuff. They pass down the information and we don't have enough additional insight as to marketing, cost of production, or corporate policy to second guess them.

The only thing we can be sure of is that the company will pursue strategies that maximize their profits. Since fan-based character decisions have not been offered to TF fans, we have to assume it's not cost effective.

I'm agreeable to that logic..

but I will say this...

the Upcoming Botcon Punch/Counter Punch repaint and retool figure.. now that is pure cost effective genius!! I can't wait to see prototypes of it!! Worth every penny..

I'll take my own stab at the topic at hand. No, not whether hasbro "cares about the fans" - third party companies.

I've said it before, but I feel like saying it again. These things are only a little better than KOs (and some just no better). Simply put, none of the 3rd party companies has the licence to make official toys. They make their money piggybacking on HasTak's product. The legalities might be dubious and make me wish I knew more of copyright law ... but ethically, it's wrong to rip off someone's idea (and characters and toys and designs) and make money off it. Just is. No matter how cool it is, stuff like teeny tiny Grimlock is an KO. City Commander is unethical (wish there was a work like KO that could describe him, but there isn't). It's just how it is.

And yet, knowing this, I just don't care.

There's a certain amount of loyalty HasTak has gained from me by making TFs and, especially, homages and stuff like the Classics line (and MPs and Alternators). So I can't support statements like "HasTak doesn't care about the fans so it's fien if these guys do whatever"; I feel they do and that their decisions make sence for them. However, this loyalty doesn't stop me from purchasing 3rd party figures or the occasional KO (if I want a KO). Because, as far as toy collecting goes, it's a product-by-product decision. I'll buy whichever Transformer I like, whether it's from the official sources or not if I happen to like. And whichever I don't like, I won't buy and will possibly pick apart here on the forums.

This, I suppose, isn't totally on the moral high ground. But I am perfectly fine with owning a nice 3rd party figure instead. To me it's important to be honest, though. So I acknowledge the immorality of the 3rd party figures.