The Energon Pub

Abraxsis wrote:I actually think Hasbro should go after these third party companies like the ones making the mini mp prime, and the city commander makers, and sue their butts off.

It would be much easier to take legal action against the production of the Mini MP Optimus Prime/Convoy than the City Commander because with the former, you have a direct copying of an existing design in a product as so:




Not only is it a near perfect copy of a design, it is publically documented in such a way that essentially invites legal action.

Whereas the City Commander design, while still infringing upon IP, is not a direct copy of a design but use of a concept.

Compare City Commander to G1 Ultra Magnus:




and




Mini MP OP is a knock off product, plain and simple. City Commander is an unofficial product that is based upon the Ultra Magnus/Diaclone Powered Convoy concept. Both are fair game in court but the former is a straight forward case of design infringement.

Further distinction can be made in that Mini MP OP is a standalone product that can take the place of the Masterpiece MP-01 Convoy/Optimus Prime as its design is a copy, defining the product as a knock off/counterfeit. Its purpose is to depict the character of Optimus Prime as a humanoid robot and as a truck.

City Commander, on the other hand, must have one of the Classics Optimus Prime iterations to function as it is not a standalone product, it's an add on/upgrade kit/supplement. Its purpose is to function as a trailer for Classics Ultra Magnus and as modular armour connecting to Ultra Magnus to depict "City Commander".

Sure, CC could be cited as a replacement for G1 Ultra Magnus(only if the prosecutor and/or the judge was severely vision impaired) but it would be easily argued in court that City Commander's design is different from G1 Ultra Magnus, though both share the same concept. Then the defense could try to demonstrate lack of wrong doing by stating that the concept of transforming toys is not unique to Transformers(Macross is a good example, more former properties such as Eureka Seven could also be cited) nor is the concept of additional accessories serving as armour/armarment(FAST Packs from Macross and many other mecha related anime).

Now this doesn't mean one 3rd party product is illegal but another 3rd party product isn't. However, a KO, by its nature as a counterfeit item, breaks the law without doubt. The grey area that accessories inhabit in 3rd party production make them less appealing to sue because it's more difficult to guarantee ruling in court in the favour of the prosecution.

convotron and counterpunch..

I have to respectfully disagree with you both on this..

there have been some other versions of Masterpiece Optimus Prime that have shown up in other parts of the world.. and those have been out for about 3 years now, or longer..

so the idea that the Mini MP should be litigated against simply because it is a Knock off is unkind..why center this one out, when there are others that fit the same criteria??

I think knock offs have their place int he transformers world of toys..

sure some are cheaper, and some are made very shotty.. but some are great for those whose limited income has made it impossible for them to buy for their children at the retail price..

honestly, I think that KO's serve a great purpose for that very reason..

now on the high end of the collecting spectrum, the mini masterpiece fills a Fan need, and yeah it is a copy of an existing mold, yet it is also a miniature version of that mold.. so there is a difference..

so it is a knock off and it is also at the same time not.. and if people want to buy it, then so be it..

Hasbro and Takara have a market for their figures, and I don't see how this impacts their market share.. honestly if that Mini prime were another crappy rendition and cheaply made, then we would care less, like so many of the south American knock offs are produced each year..

the only difference I see in the Whole Knock off debate is that the newer stuff getting churned out is on a new quality scale, and there are too many cry baby scaredy cats who think the entire genre will be wiped out because of this fact..

my advice to those people is to stop being such a worry-wort...

Hasbro and Takara made some huge money this year form ROTF toys and merchandise..and that is saying something being in a bad recession..

skywarp-2 wrote:::snip::

You argued for outright theft.

Don't you operate your own business?

How would you feel if your product or ideas were outright stolen and sold at a cheaper market price which literally made your product or ideas unviable?

The gray area in the discussion is really where add-ons and reflections of intellectual property rights are concerned. Outright reproduction or resizing of existing product is clearly and undoubtedly theft.

I'm honestly surprised at you for not being able to see the difference...

skywarp-2 wrote:convotron and counterpunch..

I have to respectfully disagree with you both on this..

there have been some other versions of Masterpiece Optimus Prime that have shown up in other parts of the world.. and those have been out for about 3 years now, or longer..

so the idea that the Mini MP should be litigated against simply because it is a Knock off is unkind..why center this one out, when there are others that fit the same criteria??

Lucrativity. Plain said, the other KO's of Masterpiece Prime have been made by "small fry", smaller companies with inferior product, and are easy to identify by the casual fan. As such, the only thing gained from a lawsuit would be the closure of a factory, only for have someone else to pick it up again. That, and the world of KO companies is too big to "chip away" piece by piece. So it would be a waste of effort to sue each and every single one of them, if you can even find them, thus best left ignored.
The Mini-MP Prime and Mini-Classics are advertised as scaled down versions of the originals, and it seems like the creators are even putting effort in making it an acceptable quality for the fans. One company, with an ambition in copying designs is like a single deer in the Great Plains. Easy to catch.
What also makes a difference (for me that is), is that regular KO's are made by "registered" companies. The Mini-Me's are made by hobbyists. Feel free to correct me on that.

I think knock offs have their place int he transformers world of toys..

sure some are cheaper, and some are made very shotty.. but some are great for those whose limited income has made it impossible for them to buy for their children at the retail price..

honestly, I think that KO's serve a great purpose for that very reason..

That's one point I agree upon. Some of my in-laws have a very tight budget, and some cases as the dutch saying goes, Nood breekt wet, in times of need rules may be broken.
That's how life is, when there's a fad, there will always be someone to copy it for a quick buck.

now on the high end of the collecting spectrum, the mini masterpiece fills a Fan need, and yeah it is a copy of an existing mold, yet it is also a miniature version of that mold.. so there is a difference..

so it is a knock off and it is also at the same time not.. and if people want to buy it, then so be it..

Size difference wouldn't matter legally. The only thing that would matter is that the overall design has been copied, plain and simple. Sure it fills a demand, no doubt on that, but to blatantly steal designs as to save on R&D is just plain rude.

Hasbro and Takara have a market for their figures, and I don't see how this impacts their market share.. honestly if that Mini prime were another crappy rendition and cheaply made, then we would care less, like so many of the south American knock offs are produced each year..

I doubt as well if the market will be affected at all, but it's all about the principle of the whole matter. Taking existing concepts and developing your own creations is fine, what's original these days anyway? But to rip off a design? No.

the only difference I see in the Whole Knock off debate is that the newer stuff getting churned out is on a new quality scale, and there are too many cry baby scaredy cats who think the entire genre will be wiped out because of this fact..

my advice to those people is to stop being such a worry-wort...

Now you're exaggerating a bit. I, for one, am not afraid at all. I'm more concerned with proper education of the fanbase, nothing more. But if they stop caring about legal issues altogether ("So what, it's not my problem, I just buy the stuff"), then obviously something is wrong with their mentality. Not that the Transformers brand will disappear, but the mentality of the fellow fans is what brings some of the fun in collecting. That's how I see it.

Hasbro and Takara made some huge money this year form ROTF toys and merchandise..and that is saying something being in a bad recession..

Amen to that.

And guys, before it gets out of hand, keep it civil. We all share our views, what they do is up to them. No use in pointing figures.

Overcracker wrote:The real discussion is when 3rd party producers start making full fledged Transformers.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong but the design, transformation and look of a character is still property of the creator.

So where does that leave Fans Project Springer and the other figures they where making?

What's the difference? If they're making a replica of an existing figure, sure, but if it's an entirely new design that's intended to resemble a character, I personally don't see any legal difference between the Magnus armor and a Springer figure whatsoever. From Hasbro's perspective, it might piss them off more to attempt to take some sort of action because they may fully intend to do a Springer figure down the road and be concerned this one would outshine theirs, whereas it's much more unlikely they'd ever do an add-on for an old figure, but I don't see one being any more morally right or wrong than the other.

I guess my personal feelings are I’m okay with both as I don’t think it’s really taking any business away from Hasbro. If Hasbro releases a Springer figure with their next Classics series, I think 98% of the people that bought FP’s would still buy Hasbro’s. At the same time, I’d also be fine if they were shut down so the temptation of throwing away big time cash would go away!

Counterpunch wrote:

skywarp-2 wrote:::snip::

You argued for outright theft.

Don't you operate your own business?

How would you feel if your product or ideas were outright stolen and sold at a cheaper market price which literally made your product or ideas unviable?

The gray area in the discussion is really where add-ons and reflections of intellectual property rights are concerned. Outright reproduction or resizing of existing product is clearly and undoubtedly theft.

I'm honestly surprised at you for not being able to see the difference...

you could say the same thing about Macross and Robotech..and all the variations not licensed there of..I think the VF-1A Valkyrie has had so many incarnations it's impossible to tell which is the true version and which is a high quality KO..Even Takara Tomy and Hasbro used the Macross Valkyrie in their original transformers release.. as Jetfire..

since I am apparently advocating out right theft.. (though none of the Hasbro or Takara Molds were used..)

all I am really saying is that it has been done in other toy lines before..so why should the Mini Masterpiece Prime matter in the big scheme of things? History has proven that there are examples the world over that match this sort of thing, and yet no problems occurred there..

I am a business owner, and as such I understand the rights we have to own our own unique products..

But eventually the patents run out and those products, or designs become a public traded commodity and other companies can remake them better and provide advancements where otherwise there would not be with one company's control..it is the nature of the free market and the evolution of advancements in technology..

this Mini Prime fills the need for some of us who would want to buy one, regardless of the moral impact..

that isn't my place to judge.. I am a consumer.. and I am not a police officer or morality officer when it comes to what i buy and collect, unless it directly affects kids..slave labor, sex trades, and abuse I do NOT Tolerate 1 Bit!

which in this case a collectible item I am buying does not have any of those factors associated with it..Hasbro is a big company with lots of other toy divisions, and so is takara Tomy.. they can handle this if they want, if not oh well.. it isn't my business..

to me outright theft would be stealing the original mold and using it for their own gain..this is clearly a downsized version sculpted on the original but with their own unique mold.. because it is smaller..


I guess I am alone in this view, and I'm sorry If I am defending Igear's products.. but I don't see the difference between an Optimus Prime trailer, and an Optimus Prime figure.. they both are intellectual properties.. and yet one is more acceptable then others??

I have 3 pet peeves...

Liars, Hypocrites, and Double Standards...

and to me the whole Hate directed towards the Mini Optimus Prime is a double standard..

we can accept an Ultra Magnus Armor..which is in effect just about as close to the original as anything else..sure there is a difference, but realistically we all know what it is..

I don't begrudge anyone Else's point of view.. but I am not going to budge on my assessment.. A knock off is a Knock off, and a 3rd Party product that is geared towards transformers, no matter how you parse it, is still a knock off, even if the design is not and has not been seen before.. if it resembles a figure in likeness.. it is a Knock off.. and or a copy of something.. so If you gotta hate the Mini Optimus Prime, then I think you gotta hate on the Fansproject City commander armor..

to me.. in MY view..

it is the same principle..

skywarp-2 wrote:so the idea that the Mini MP should be litigated against simply because it is a Knock off is unkind..why center this one out, when there are others that fit the same criteria??

Not at all, what my post was illustrating was the way that a knock off is more easily shown to be an outright illegal product than an accessory of unique design that goes into IP infringement.

I personally agree with everyone who has said that it's up to the companies of Hasbro and Takara to take legal action. I'm not calling for the crackdown on 3rd party products, KOs or otherwise, because it would be a futile effort. However, legal action against certain producers is more likely, especially when they make themselves targets.

skywarp-2 wrote:I think knock offs have their place int he transformers world of toys..

sure some are cheaper, and some are made very shotty.. but some are great for those whose limited income has made it impossible for them to buy for their children at the retail price..

honestly, I think that KO's serve a great purpose for that very reason..

Definitely, KOs thrive for a reason. In fact I've heard about some collectors who look for KOs to collect.

skywarp-2 wrote:now on the high end of the collecting spectrum, the mini masterpiece fills a Fan need, and yeah it is a copy of an existing mold, yet it is also a miniature version of that mold.. so there is a difference..

so it is a knock off and it is also at the same time not.. and if people want to buy it, then so be it..

With all due respect, there isn't any objective defense for the Mini MP OP not to be viewed as a KO. Change of scale, unless extreme, does not affect copy of design in the eyes of the law and most people, well, with good eyesight.

If people want to buy it, heck a part of me wants to buy it for the alternate head sculpt, then heck yes, do so, but I don't think anyone should delude themselves into thinking the product isn't a KO. With existing Masterpiece OP/Convoy figures available, there is fan desire but not need for the Mini MP OP.

skywarp-2 wrote:Hasbro and Takara have a market for their figures, and I don't see how this impacts their market share.. honestly if that Mini prime were another crappy rendition and cheaply made, then we would care less, like so many of the south American knock offs are produced each year..

In reality, the 3rd party market unlikely makes a noticeable dent in the bottom line profits of Hasbro/Takara but that doesn't somehow magically excuse the existence of KOs or any other 3rd party products. The success or lack thereof of any company doesn't negate or increase the legality of 3rd party products. However, in the spectrum of 3rd party products, KOs are on the end where the light of legality is clearly not on the 3rd party market's side.

skywarp-2 wrote:the only difference I see in the Whole Knock off debate is that the newer stuff getting churned out is on a new quality scale, and there are too many cry baby scaredy cats who think the entire genre will be wiped out because of this fact..

my advice to those people is to stop being such a worry-wort...

I hope that isn't directed at anyone in the fan community because it's clear that the last thing fans are afraid of is the 3rd party market. It's largely embraced. Accusing anyone in the community of being "cry baby scaredy cats" because they don't look as favourably upon the 3rd party market as others undermines this otherwise civil thread.

skywarp-2 wrote:Hasbro and Takara made some huge money this year form ROTF toys and merchandise..and that is saying something being in a bad recession..

This is a great thing and I wish them continued success so that I may continue enjoying Transformers!

skywarp-2 wrote:you could say the same thing about Macross and Robotech..and all the variations not licensed there of..I think the VF-1A Valkyrie has had so many incarnations it's impossible to tell which is the true version and which is a high quality KO..Even Takara Tomy and Hasbro used the Macross Valkyrie in their original transformers release.. as Jetfire..

Strawman.

Completely irrelevant argument.

Point of note, the VF-1A mold was licensed from Bandai, legally, by Hasbro

this Mini Prime fills the need for some of us who would want to buy one, regardless of the moral impact..

Wow. Really? Take that stance to its logical conclusion.

How about a round of “F’ the po-lice!” while we’re at it?

Just because someone wants something doesn’t make it ok. I mean, bootlegged toys are a very minor example, it’s the attitude behind the example that’s troubling…

which in this case a collectible item I am buying does not have any of those factors associated with it..Hasbro is a big company with lots of other toy divisions, and so is takara Tomy.. they can handle this if they want, if not oh well.. it isn't my business..

We agree.

to me outright theft would be stealing the original mold and using it for their own gain..this is clearly a downsized version sculpted on the original but with their own unique mold.. because it is smaller..

Oh wait, we don’t…because the reduced molds are EXACTLY what Takara engineered and these thieves are passing off as their own product.

I have 3 pet peeves...

Liars, Hypocrites, and Double Standards...

My list is longer…

and to me the whole Hate directed towards the Mini Optimus Prime is a double standard..

I’m not sure we can debate that point because you don’t seem to acknowledge that the mold tooling was stolen, the design was stolen, and these people are going to profit off of the work of others. Changing the size of the thing does not differentiate it.

we can accept an Ultra Magnus Armor..which is in effect just about as close to the original as anything else..sure there is a difference, but realistically we all know what it is..

The armor is different in every way from any established Ultra Magnus armor. They used their own tooling, their own design, their own transformation/change sequence. It’s not even a car carrier. The differences in the case of the armor are clear.

A knock off is a Knock off, and a 3rd Party product that is geared towards transformers, no matter how you parse it, is still a knock off, even if the design is not and has not been seen before.. if it resembles a figure in likeness.. it is a Knock off.. and or a copy of something.. so If you gotta hate the Mini Optimus Prime, then I think you gotta hate on the Fansproject City commander armor..

to me.. in MY view..

it is the same principle..

Not really, you’re mixing your terminology. Knock-offs and bootlegs are made by using an existing physical product to create a new or similar product. Third party merchandise is meant to exist alongside and not replace existing product or to fill market gaps. Gun and car accessories are excellent examples of third party merchandise.

skywarp-2 wrote:A knock off is a Knock off, and a 3rd Party product that is geared towards transformers, no matter how you parse it, is still a knock off, even if the design is not and has not been seen before.. if it resembles a figure in likeness.. it is a Knock off.. and or a copy of something.. so If you gotta hate the Mini Optimus Prime, then I think you gotta hate on the Fansproject City commander armor..

to me.. in MY view..

it is the same principle..

So to you, anything that is not sanctioned by an official company or licensee, no matter how it is designed (original design or stolen), is a knockoff and thus grey area. To us, it would be merely be "unofficial", not a knockoff per se unless (parts of) the original design was used...

Interesting view. Care to expand on that in terms of legal rights?

skywarp-2 wrote:But eventually the patents run out and those products, or designs become a public traded commodity and other companies can remake them better and provide advancements where otherwise there would not be with one company's control..it is the nature of the free market and the evolution of advancements in technology...

And there is that snag that some people would never have realised. I don't remember how long patents last until they expire, but I suddenly remembered that the patents for the NES, Super NES and other products in those eras have expired and become public domain, so it's entirely possible that goes for the toys in that era as well. The designs are public, anyone can use them and HasTak can do zilch about it. The patents for the reissues have been renewed, so there no trouble there.

JelZe GoldRabbit wrote:And there is that snag that some people would never have realised. I don't remember how long patents last until they expire, but I suddenly remembered that the patents for the NES, Super NES and other products in those eras have expired and become public domain, so it's entirely possible that goes for the toys in that era as well. The designs are public, anyone can use them and HasTak can do zilch about it. The patents for the reissues have been renewed, so there no trouble there.

I'm pretty sure that they can renew their patent rights.

Otherwise Coke and other large companies could be in jeapordy.

Counterpunch wrote:

JelZe GoldRabbit wrote:And there is that snag that some people would never have realised. I don't remember how long patents last until they expire, but I suddenly remembered that the patents for the NES, Super NES and other products in those eras have expired and become public domain, so it's entirely possible that goes for the toys in that era as well. The designs are public, anyone can use them and HasTak can do zilch about it. The patents for the reissues have been renewed, so there no trouble there.

I'm pretty sure that they can renew their patent rights.

Otherwise Coke and other large companies could be in jeapordy.

Because the patents are in constant use. Those of the individual toys are not.

Convotron wrote:

skywarp-2 wrote:so the idea that the Mini MP should be litigated against simply because it is a Knock off is unkind..why center this one out, when there are others that fit the same criteria??

Not at all, what my post was illustrating was the way that a knock off is more easily shown to be an outright illegal product than an accessory of unique design that goes into IP infringement.

I personally agree with everyone who has said that it's up to the companies of Hasbro and Takara to take legal action. I'm not calling for the crackdown on 3rd party products, KOs or otherwise, because it would be a futile effort. However, legal action against certain producers is more likely, especially when they make themselves targets.

I think a large umbrella to everyone who makes a transformers related product is how it would be most likely viewed.. if indeed has/Tak decided to crack down on 3rd party products.. I seriously doubt they would allow some to thrive and others to get squashed.. which is my whole thesis on why a 3rd party armor upgrade "Made for a transformer" and a 3rd party "Mini Masterpiece of a transformer" are the same thing..sure we can parse their difference, but honestly all of this stuff treads on the 3rd party market..

besides no one complains about the mini Dinobots..at least not like they have about the Mini Masterpiece prime..

Convotron wrote:

skywarp-2 wrote:I think knock offs have their place in the transformers world of toys..

sure some are cheaper, and some are made very shotty.. but some are great for those whose limited income has made it impossible for them to buy for their children at the retail price..

honestly, I think that KO's serve a great purpose for that very reason..

Definitely, KOs thrive for a reason. In fact I've heard about some collectors who look for KOs to collect.

yeah some KO's are just good to buy if the original is financially unavailable and or too expensive..one of my friends buys nothing but Ko's of transformers.. he likes to customize them..and kitbash.

Convotron wrote:

skywarp-2 wrote:now on the high end of the collecting spectrum, the mini masterpiece fills a Fan need, and yeah it is a copy of an existing mold, yet it is also a miniature version of that mold.. so there is a difference..

so it is a knock off and it is also at the same time not.. and if people want to buy it, then so be it..

With all due respect, there isn't any objective defense for the Mini MP OP not to be viewed as a KO. Change of scale, unless extreme, does not affect copy of design in the eyes of the law and most people, well, with good eyesight.

If people want to buy it, heck a part of me wants to buy it for the alternate head sculpt, then heck yes, do so, but I don't think anyone should delude themselves into thinking the product isn't a KO. With existing Masterpiece OP/Convoy figures available, there is fan desire but not need for the Mini MP OP.

I wasn't arguing that the Mini Prime is not a KO.. quite the contrary, i was arguing that if we are going to center that one figure out as an example of a Wrong KO, then we actually need to step back and see it for what all 3rd party products are.. they are all KO's in one respect or another, regardless of the inventive and unique designs..

I like all the 3rd party stuff, but I can't see attacking one over the other, when it is all related to the idea of the transformers..

Convotron wrote:

skywarp-2 wrote:Hasbro and Takara have a market for their figures, and I don't see how this impacts their market share.. honestly if that Mini prime were another crappy rendition and cheaply made, then we would care less, like so many of the south American knock offs are produced each year..

In reality, the 3rd party market unlikely makes a noticeable dent in the bottom line profits of Hasbro/Takara but that doesn't somehow magically excuse the existence of KOs or any other 3rd party products. The success or lack thereof of any company doesn't negate or increase the legality of 3rd party products. However, in the spectrum of 3rd party products, KOs are on the end where the light of legality is clearly not on the 3rd party market's side.

again, I have to go back to my stance on this.. it is all a KO...if it is a 3rd party toy geared towards the transformers.. regardless of how it is made, if it looks like a transformer and is marketed as basically a likeness of a specific figure.. it is a KO.. so why center one out over the other..that is just my point of view..and I would think if the attorney's got involved and Has/Tak went on the attack, no one would be left unscathed..

Convotron wrote:

skywarp-2 wrote:the only difference I see in the Whole Knock off debate is that the newer stuff getting churned out is on a new quality scale, and there are too many cry baby scaredy cats who think the entire genre will be wiped out because of this fact..

my advice to those people is to stop being such a worry-wort...

I hope that isn't directed at anyone in the fan community because it's clear that the last thing fans are afraid of is the 3rd party market. It's largely embraced. Accusing anyone in the community of being "cry baby scaredy cats" because they don't look as favourably upon the 3rd party market as others undermines this otherwise civil thread.

i don't see how this would affect you or anyone else, I didn't name anyone specific.. and as for the meaning in that, I'm not saying we are afraid of the 3rd party.. What i am saying is I hear allot of people make comments like Hasbro will just stop making transformers because of the 3rd party market, which I believe is just silly...If you took offense to that, then I am sorry you feel that way, but I didn't center or attack anyone directly, nor was it an attack.. just a general statement..

Convotron wrote:

skywarp-2 wrote:Hasbro and Takara made some huge money this year form ROTF toys and merchandise..and that is saying something being in a bad recession..

This is a great thing and I wish them continued success so that I may continue enjoying Transformers!

Ditto

JelZe GoldRabbit wrote:

Counterpunch wrote:

JelZe GoldRabbit wrote:And there is that snag that some people would never have realised. I don't remember how long patents last until they expire, but I suddenly remembered that the patents for the NES, Super NES and other products in those eras have expired and become public domain, so it's entirely possible that goes for the toys in that era as well. The designs are public, anyone can use them and HasTak can do zilch about it. The patents for the reissues have been renewed, so there no trouble there.

I'm pretty sure that they can renew their patent rights.

Otherwise Coke and other large companies could be in jeapordy.

Because the patents are in constant use. Those of the individual toys are not.

Wii Virtual Console and the software emulation of all those systems?

Counterpunch wrote:

JelZe GoldRabbit wrote:

Counterpunch wrote:

JelZe GoldRabbit wrote:And there is that snag that some people would never have realised. I don't remember how long patents last until they expire, but I suddenly remembered that the patents for the NES, Super NES and other products in those eras have expired and become public domain, so it's entirely possible that goes for the toys in that era as well. The designs are public, anyone can use them and HasTak can do zilch about it. The patents for the reissues have been renewed, so there no trouble there.

I'm pretty sure that they can renew their patent rights.

Otherwise Coke and other large companies could be in jeapordy.

Because the patents are in constant use. Those of the individual toys are not.

Wii Virtual Console and the software emulation of all those systems?

That's different. They don't use patents (they're not devices), but all fall under general copyright law. In this case, it doesn't expire until a max of 70 years from the date of original creation. Still, it can be renewed, evident on the multiple years stated on games for instance.
Look at it from the "Famiclone" (NES Clone) angle. The device itself is perfectly legal with the NES patents being public domain, the games inside it however are still illegal as they're copied.

I know, it's a weird world of law.

skywarp-2 wrote:I wasn't arguing that the Mini Prime is not a KO.. quite the contrary, i was arguing that if we are going to center that one figure out as an example of a Wrong KO, then we actually need to step back and see it for what all 3rd party products are.. they are all KO's in one respect or another, regardless of the inventive and unique designs..

I like all the 3rd party stuff, but I can't see attacking one over the other, when it is all related to the idea of the transformers..

You act like those of us who've argued against mini-Prime (but have been silent about other MP Prime KO's) would argue that other MP Prime KO's are pefectly fine, but mini-Prime should be fought against....

I see no one doing any such thing. At worst, a few folks have said that other MP Prime KO's may not actually get the legal attention because it isn't worth Hasbro/TakaraTomy's time to do so. This is a practical argument that I think is a fair one to make. But in the sense of what items should be opposed, I see no one actively favoring one MP Prime KO over another.

Drawing attention to a particular violation (but failing to do so for others) should not be confused with saying that other violations are acceptable.



Changing topic just a little. We're finally starting to talk a little about the issue of third-party licensees. Truth be told, when I read the subject, but before actually reading the thread, I was wondering if the thread would be about these fully-licensed items, rather than about the items such those put out by Fans Project, Justitoys, and others. Now, obviously, there's no moral issue behind, say, the fully-licensed Transformer character busts we've seen in recent years, or with, say, TF: ROTF party favors. The companies doing such TF-related items have gotten full permission from Hasbro (and whatever other relevant parties might be involved) to produce TF-related product.

The relevance to Fans Project stuff is this: they could seek such a license themselves, yet have not done so. Presumably, the license is cost-prohibitive, or the safety regulations that Fans Project (I'm just using them as an example, so we're clear) would have to follow would make continuing with getting such a license somehow inviable. I don't know, although I'd certainly like to. But do we give them a "pass" just because "doing the right thing" (in quotes because I know there'd be debate on precisely that point) is too hard?

The way I view the situation, skywarp-2, is that all 3rd party products are equally fair game in legal action. However, different 3rd party products are going to be treated differently in court with respect to prosecution and defense as well as sentencing due to the varying types of 3rd party products.

With respect to the mini Dinobots, they are no more legal, as far as I'm aware, but the difference they have to the mini MP OP as well as the City Commander or other 3rd party accessory products is that they(except Grimlock) do not replace a currently available product in the market. MP OP and the UM repaint are still available through vendors, MP-01B is going to be released in several months. The Mini MP OP is a smaller scaled duplicate of a design that exists in currently marketed products.

The only currenly re-issued/re-invented Dinobot that I know if is Grimlock. Now I still view the WST Dinobots as KOs so I would put them in the same boat as Mini MP OP because of closely duplicating design, regardless of scale, though they do not compete against any Dinobot as none are currently produced on the official level except for MP Grimlock. However, I'm not calling for them to be wiped off the face of the Earth. I'm just saying on the list of 3rd party products to be targeted for action, WST and Mini MP OP are likely higher up due to being KOs.

There are no Wrong KOs, there are no Right KOs, there are just KOs of varying quality. Mini MP OP is a KO because it is a perfect example of design duplication. City Commander is not a KO as it does not copy an existing design. What it does is use the concept of G1 Ultra Magnus/Diaclone Powered Convoy. It's still violating IP law because it's using a concept owned by Hasbro/Takara but it's easier to argue its case in court due to degrees of separation from G1 Ultra Magnus whereas iGear can only say of Mini MP OP "It's smaller and we have an additional head sculpt.".

I know you didn't name anyone specific but honestly, this is a topic that is inherently dividing and the less chance something can be misconstrued, the better for the discussion. I didn't take any offense, I was pretty sure of your intent, but again, it's easy for some people to take that kind of statement the wrong way.

Now let's move away, for a moment, from Mini MP OP, City Commander, anything else that is more of a hot topic in the 3rd party market. Let's look at the TFX-ABT-01, the gas tank/gun and Matrix accessory created by FansProject. I look at this item as an example of an original design(except the Matrix) that has never had an official product equivalent. Yes, it's a 3rd party product that is based upon the concept of being used with an Alternators/Binaltech Transformers toy but nothing of the sort was ever released for the Alternators/Binaltech line. I think this is a great product that may not be as appreciated as things like City Commander or the Aerial Team Appendage kit. If I had an Alternators OP or Binaltech Convoy, I'd get this because its concept is so great, that of a multi-functional accessory, which seems to be a normal design feature of FP products.

skywarp-2 wrote:
I wasn't arguing that the Mini Prime is not a KO.. quite the contrary, i was arguing that if we are going to center that one figure out as an example of a Wrong KO, then we actually need to step back and see it for what all 3rd party products are.. they are all KO's in one respect or another, regardless of the inventive and unique designs..

I like all the 3rd party stuff, but I can't see attacking one over the other, when it is all related to the idea of the transformers..

again, I have to go back to my stance on this.. it is all a KO...if it is a 3rd party toy geared towards the transformers.. regardless of how it is made, if it looks like a transformer and is marketed as basically a likeness of a specific figure.. it is a KO.. so why center one out over the other..that is just my point of view..and I would think if the attorney's got involved and Has/Tak went on the attack, no one would be left unscathed..

See that's where you are wrong.

Not all third party products can be classified as Knockoffs.

The Magnus Armor, The Superion add-on set, the Roadbuster Wepaons set etc... those are all designs that in no way copy or infringe upon Hasbro property. They are their own design, made only to match a pre-existing product from another company.

Think of the Automotive business. There's lots of third party maker that produce accessories for cars, and trucks. everything from Hub caps, rear view mirrors etc. to body kits, exhaust pipes, turbo chargers etc...

All these are made for cars designed and produced by established manufacturers but do not attempt to knockoff or copy any of the cars.

They add onto the pre-existing car.

This is all perfectly legal.

Copying an existing design even if it is reduced in size is illegal, it is theft, and infringes upon the copyright owner.

Yes some patents pass into public domain, but I hardly think the Masterpiece Prime patent has had time to lapse. Even more so considering Takara is about to re-release their MP-04 in October.

Blatantly copying the transformation, design, and look of a character is illegal.

Its like copying a movie and changing its name, cutting out a few scenes and pushing it out as your own product.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the WST's were at some point legally licensed from Takara. Just like Hasbro legally licensed and payed for the molds for figures like G1 Jetfire from Bandai, Shockwave, Omega Supreme etc.. Those were all payed for and Habsro could legally use them to produce their toys.

guys....

whether you call it a Knock off, an armor upgrade, unique or not.. it is still infringing on the "Idea" or "Intellectual Property" owned by Hasbro..

the FP armor can be argued as an accessory, but who is the accessory clearly made for, same as the superion parts..

I don't see the difference between that, the Mini Dinobots, the Mini MP prime, the Ark Base, or anything else that Is NOT licensed by Hasbro or Takara Tomy..

Car accessories are clearly licensed and those that aren't well, they get caught sometimes..but it is the same principle.. and if you buy a 3rd party unlicensed product for a car, then what is the difference here?

to call one's Morality over which is which and which is stolen and which is just inventive is to justify the purchase to yourself.. it is ALL Unlicensed...

So my only argument is that if we attack one aspect and allow another to skate free, I feel like that we are not being fair.. or not acknowledging that any of this 3rd party stuff is on some level infringing on Hasbro or Takara Tomy..

So, if we are going to be honest about this subject, then we need to be honest with ourselves.. all the 3rd party stuff is outside the norm.. and I'm okay with that.. I just want to make it clear.. don't judge me because I support one 3rd party product and choose to purchase it..

in my view, this whole 3rd party thing is what it is.. and is not part of the main lines or licensed.. so whether you buy a rip off (knock off) or a cool and uniquely designed add on set for a transformer.. the bottom line summed up is that you bought something not sanctioned By Hasbro or Takara, specifically for use with an item from Hasbro or Takara's toy property..



We are all guilty... We're all going to Jail..

skywarp-2 wrote:guys....

whether you call it a Knock off, an armor upgrade, unique or not.. it is still infringing on the "Idea" or "Intellectual Property" owned by Hasbro..

the FP armor can be argued as an accessory, but who is the accessory clearly made for, same as the superion parts..

I don't see the difference between that, the Mini Dinobots, the Mini MP prime, the Ark Base, or anything else that Is NOT licensed by Hasbro or Takara Tomy..

Car accessories are clearly licensed and those that aren't well, they get caught sometimes..but it is the same principle.. and if you buy a 3rd party unlicensed product for a car, then what is the difference here?

to call one's Morality over which is which and which is stolen and which is just inventive is to justify the purchase to yourself.. it is ALL Unlicensed...

So my only argument is that if we attack one aspect and allow another to skate free, I feel like that we are not being fair.. or not acknowledging that any of this 3rd party stuff is on some level infringing on Hasbro or Takara Tomy..

So, if we are going to be honest about this subject, then we need to be honest with ourselves.. all the 3rd party stuff is outside the norm.. and I'm okay with that.. I just want to make it clear.. don't judge me because I support one 3rd party product and choose to purchase it..

in my view, this whole 3rd party thing is what it is.. and is not part of the main lines or licensed.. so whether you buy a rip off (knock off) or a cool and uniquely designed add on set for a transformer.. the bottom line summed up is that you bought something not sanctioned By Hasbro or Takara, specifically for use with an item from Hasbro or Takara's toy property..

When you boil the matter all the matter all the way down, then yes, all third party accessories infringe on IP one way or another. I'm not denying that, neither have I said they were perfectly legal. Heck, one of Hasbro's Q&A stated that. (Could someone dig that up for us please?). In short, Hasbro does support the creativity, but draws the line when it severely infringes on their IP.

Another matter, perhaps the most important here, is personal acceptance. Clearly, some products we accept, some we don't, no matter how much we try and argue with the other in order to convince the other. As I said before, if one doesn't care about law, then something is wrong to me. On the other hand, if one knows the law properly and the risks involved, then I'll let them be. The best choices are educated choices.

We are all guilty... We're all going to Jail..

No comment on that one

skywarp-2 wrote:We are all guilty... We're all going to Jail..

None of us may pass GO, nor may we collect 200 dollars.

Sorry. Just wanted to lighten the mood.

Don't want to see anyone's emotions run to high on this issue.

I guess things fall into three categories here:

• WST Dinobots, Mini MP Prime, and similar, which are scaled likenesses of existing figures.
  
• City Commander, etc., Kremzeek, Quintessons, Gnaw, Alt Matrix, Unicron.com Animated Accessories, etc that "borrow" ideas but aren't based on physical molds.
  
• Wholly independent items like the Alt Rifle, Aerial bots limbs, etc. that are pretty much brand new, or based on non-trademarkable ideas.

The first category is clearly the most dangerous for everyone involved (both Has/Tak and the manufacturers). It's most likely that these will invoke the wrath of Has/Tak, and also could be the ones that hurt Has/Tak's bottom line, i.e. collectors choose Mini MP Prime instead of the real thing because it's cheaper, or somehow more accessible.

The second category is intellectual property based and is very sticky for international laws. Any US based company would probably be screwed and end up in a lengthy and ugly lawsuit. International companies may be fine. Lots of variables here, and I'm glad I'm not a lawyer.

The third category should probably be encouraged by Has/Tak. It fills a void that they don't feel like filling themselves without infringing on IP or physical assets.

You may argue that City Commander falls in this third category, and I'm waffling myself, but that bot-mode is very similar. Other things, like the Animated Accessories, are definitely copied directly off the cartoon without licensing, so they're much more black and white IP infringements.

iGear could either pay some royalties like jizai toys or name the mini MP Prime real Masterpiece or Commander or something. But the iconic red/white and blue though, how the heck will they implement that?

Btw, from where I hail from, the are quite a few KO MP Primes and Binaltechs, quality wise zilch, I can't give 'cause I wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole.

Overcracker wrote:Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the WST's were at some point legally licensed from Takara. Just like Hasbro legally licensed and payed for the molds for figures like G1 Jetfire from Bandai, Shockwave, Omega Supreme etc.. Those were all payed for and Habsro could legally use them to produce their toys.

Errrr. I'm pretty sure that's not correct, but I'd love to see evidence to the contrary....

skywarp-2 wrote:

Third party items related to Transformers are a violation of the Transformers brand and gives Hasbro no real incentive to make their own version of something.

this statement is completely contradicted by the next statement below..

I mean, given the chance, Hasbro will make something way better than these Knock-Off company for less money. Case in point, Universe Cyclonus, much better than the Garage Kit, and less money.

the fact that a garage kit was released before the Hasbro figure just shows that even with 3rd party merchandise out there, Hasbro will make their version regardless...

So if you don't want Hasbro to come out with cool stuff and you want to risk diluting the Transformers brand into just another boring product, then continue to buy these knockoffs.

Intellectual Property rights are one thing, but I don't think that the City Commander trailer set is a knock off of anything made by Hasbro or Takara..Fan's Project made that kit and was very original about how the design was implemented.. If anything these 3rd party products have made the classics series more exciting for me as a collector..Ultra Magnus was a Boring classics action figure..that was before the FP city commander trailer..

I mean if we look at the stuff Hasbro has made, they more than not listen to the fans.

yeah this is true.. but I am so glad that the 3rd party market exists.. because we would never have gotten the Powered commander set, and the G3 trailer which turns my Henkei Optimus Prime into this badass set up..

My statement while seeming contradictory is the only time it has been done and it is the only way to show a comparison of what we all thought was once an awesome 3rd party figure, get shown up big time by Hasbro.

And your view of intellectual property is incorrect, while Hasbro never made a City Commander like they did, it is a violation of Ultra Magnus as a character.

skywarp-2 wrote:A knock off is a Knock off, and a 3rd Party product that is geared towards transformers, no matter how you parse it, is still a knock off, even if the design is not and has not been seen before.. if it resembles a figure in likeness.. it is a Knock off.. and or a copy of something.. so If you gotta hate the Mini Optimus Prime, then I think you gotta hate on the Fansproject City commander armor..

to me.. in MY view..

it is the same principle..

I agree with this.

GetterDragun wrote:
My statement while seeming contradictory is the only time it has been done and it is the only way to show a comparison of what we all thought was once an awesome 3rd party figure, get shown up big time by Hasbro.

And your view of intellectual property is incorrect, while Hasbro never made a City Commander like they did, it is a violation of Ultra Magnus as a character.

I have to say I agree with this...