The Energon Pub

We know some of the guys who design TF toys; they've been interviewed here and there. But of course it's ethical not to know who everyone is. We can't know everyone who goes into making our stuff. How could we possibly? Is it ethical not to know who designed your car? Or the farmer who grew your food? Or, Hell, the people who made the server that Seibertron is hosted on?

So, yes, it's ethical not to know who designs TFs.

As for the morality of western consumerism, it's true it's all not peaches and cream. But ... that's really for everything and not just TFs. I REALLY doubt 3rd party or KO toys are made in any better conditions than official ones. But if you want it to come up, why not make a topic just for that?

Gauntlet101010 wrote:We know some of the guys who design TF toys; they've been interviewed here and there. But of course it's ethical not to know who everyone is. We can't know everyone who goes into making our stuff. How could we possibly? Is it ethical not to know who designed your car? Or the farmer who grew your food? Or, Hell, the people who made the server that Seibertron is hosted on?

So, yes, it's ethical not to know who designs TFs.

As for the morality of western consumerism, it's true it's all not peaches and cream. But ... that's really for everything and not just TFs. I REALLY doubt 3rd party or KO toys are made in any better conditions than official ones. But if you want it to come up, why not make a topic just for that?

I pretty much agree with you on all counts, and definitely didn't mean to infer that third parties are likely to have better standards for assembly workers than HasTak.

I just find it somewhat puzzling that, of all the ethical gray areas of exploitation our hobby involves, we keep coming back to this one rather than any of the others, and that a minority of people seem to get really worked up about how a gigantic multinational corporation is somehow 'being abused' by tiny upstarts (much more so than Hasbro or Takara have themselves). I think it makes a fairly substsntial commentary on the time of history that we're living in.

Perhaps morality nor ethics have a place in capitalism as it exists today. Or perhaps it is the opposite; where both are manipulated to mean what conventional wisdom is - according to Hoyle by the 1%'s status quo. Who knows. One thing is for sure: that is where one person judges one thing wrong, another perceives as fair game. Neither one is correct to the other, hence cannot be defined by a third party (no pun intended). I pose that it is perhaps the best interest of all three parties to respect that everyone is wrong including themselves, and they, as three individuals, should attempt to live life on their own terms. If a rule is broken with consequences rendered, so be it. Judgmental POV's aside, the persuasion for understanding of common ground is irrelevant.

Court Jester wrote:Perhaps morality nor ethics have a place in capitalism as it exists today. Or perhaps it is the opposite; where both are manipulated to mean what conventional wisdom is - according to Hoyle by the 1%'s status quo. Who knows. One thing is for sure: that is where one person judges one thing wrong, another perceives as fair game. Neither one is correct to the other, hence cannot be defined by a third party (no pun intended). I pose that it is perhaps the best interest of all three parties to respect that everyone is wrong including themselves, and they, as three individuals, should attempt to live life on their own terms. If a rule is broken with consequences rendered, so be it. Judgmental POV's aside, the persuasion for understanding of common ground is irrelevant.

Well said.

Reality is what you can get away with.

metaphorge wrote:

Gauntlet101010 wrote:We know some of the guys who design TF toys; they've been interviewed here and there. But of course it's ethical not to know who everyone is. We can't know everyone who goes into making our stuff. How could we possibly? Is it ethical not to know who designed your car? Or the farmer who grew your food? Or, Hell, the people who made the server that Seibertron is hosted on?

So, yes, it's ethical not to know who designs TFs.

As for the morality of western consumerism, it's true it's all not peaches and cream. But ... that's really for everything and not just TFs. I REALLY doubt 3rd party or KO toys are made in any better conditions than official ones. But if you want it to come up, why not make a topic just for that?

I pretty much agree with you on all counts, and definitely didn't mean to infer that third parties are likely to have better standards for assembly workers than HasTak.

I just find it somewhat puzzling that, of all the ethical gray areas of exploitation our hobby involves, we keep coming back to this one rather than any of the others, and that a minority of people seem to get really worked up about how a gigantic multinational corporation is somehow 'being abused' by tiny upstarts (much more so than Hasbro or Takara have themselves). I think it makes a fairly substsntial commentary on the time of history that we're living in.

Well, this is the 3rd party forum on a site dedicated to a materialistic hobby. I doubt you'd find many labor rights activists here. I mean, would anyone who thought Hasbro was an evil company and REALLY cared deeply about it be collecting TFs at all?? Let alone 3rd party TFs that run into the hundreads of dollars?

Meanwhile what you would find here are people interested in the Transformers brand. And it's only natural that some people feel very loyal to the guys who make Transformers, whether you agree with that loyalty or not.

Gauntlet101010 wrote:Well, this is the 3rd party forum on a site dedicated to a materialistic hobby. I doubt you'd find many labor rights activists here. I mean, would anyone who thought Hasbro was an evil company and REALLY cared deeply about it be collecting TFs at all?? Let alone 3rd party TFs that run into the hundreads of dollars?

Meanwhile what you would find here are people interested in the Transformers brand. And it's only natural that some people feel very loyal to the guys who make Transformers, whether you agree with that loyalty or not.

I'm quite comfortable with the ethical compromises I choose to make to lead the sort of life I wish to while I'm living on this planet, and I suspect most everyone else who posts here are as well; thus my confusion as to why people keep harping on this question.

Then again, I generally don't grok the behavior pattern of repeatedly engaging in behavior or activities that one feels enough guilt over for that one has to seek validation from their peers that their 'transgression' was acceptable. I do have to admit it does make for more entertaining reading than most chatter on most toy-collecting forums; this is one collecting community that has actually put their 'nerd rage' to productive use.

Then again, again, the sheer quantity of human behavior that seems to be aimed at seeking validation for one's own viewpoint is pretty substantial.

(I agree with you that a degree of 'brand loyalty' is natural amongst collectors, though some of the ways in which apparent loyalty gets demonstrated seem to be of questionable positive effect on Hasbro and Takara's continued successes and existences.)

Well it should be quite clear by now we are all going to Hell. I blame Adam for boosting that apple and selling Eve a knock-off made by a group of 3rd party snakes in an unlicensed chinese factory.

I'm buying Giant anyway......may as well roll with it.

MightyMagnus78 wrote:However I have often wondered how they are able to get away with it, without making trademark/copyright infringements.

Trademarks cover names, and 3rd Parties have intentionally not named their products after actual TF characters to avoid infringement.
Copyright covers the exact representation of an idea. G1, Animated, and Movie Mixmasters each have their own copyrights; HasTak can't copyright "green and purple transforming cement trucks." 3rd Parties have once again intentionally stayed just far enough away from flat-out copying HasTak to avoid infringement.

HasTak themselves have avoided trademark/copyright infringements several times over just like the 3rd Parties. Classics Jetfire is a prime example, being heavily based on the Super Valkyrie VF-1S (now owned by Bandai), but HasTak regularly bases alt modes on real vehicles but making them just different enough to not have to pay for it. In that sense, HasTak isn't much different from 3rd Parties.
EDIT: Also, Kre-O. Same type of bricks as LEGO, and Kre-O packages even advertise they are compatible.

Noideaforaname wrote:HasTak themselves have avoided trademark/copyright infringements several times over just like the 3rd Parties. Classics Jetfire is a prime example, being heavily based on the Super Valkyrie VF-1S (now owned by Bandai), but HasTak regularly bases alt modes on real vehicles but making them just different enough to not have to pay for it. In that sense, HasTak isn't much different from 3rd Parties.
EDIT: Also, Kre-O. Same type of bricks as LEGO, and Kre-O packages even advertise they are compatible.

"Autobot Jazz" and "Decepticon Brawl" and their like are also circumventions of trademarks held by other companies.

metaphorge wrote:"Autobot Jazz" and "Decepticon Brawl" and their like are also circumventions of trademarks held by other companies.

Not quite. Jazz, Brawl, and others such as Tracks are deemed too common a word to be trademarked and thus left open for all to use. Thus Hasbro uses the Autobot or Decepticon to create the trademark.

Once a single word such as Megatron or Onslaught has been trademarked by a company, that prohibits its use by other companies, no matter what adjective they put in front of it.

For example you will never see a Red Ranger Megatron or an Assault Onslaught put out by any other companies. However you could see a Blue Ranger Jazz, not that it would make any sense to call a product that, but you know...

Mkall wrote:

metaphorge wrote:"Autobot Jazz" and "Decepticon Brawl" and their like are also circumventions of trademarks held by other companies.

Not quite. Jazz, Brawl, and others such as Tracks are deemed too common a word to be trademarked and thus left open for all to use. Thus Hasbro uses the Autobot or Decepticon to create the trademark.

At what point since 1984 did this change, or did Hasbro simply not bother to trademark all the character names the first time around?

Mkall wrote:

metaphorge wrote:"Autobot Jazz" and "Decepticon Brawl" and their like are also circumventions of trademarks held by other companies.

Once a single word such as Megatron or Onslaught has been trademarked by a company, that prohibits its use by other companies, no matter what adjective they put in front of it.

To be slightly pedantic, "Onslaught" is not a good example due to the Marvel comics character (and subsequent ToyBiz action figures) of the same name, though perhaps it passed muster due to Marvel's hand in the original G1 naming and bio creation process (though I'm not sure they were still handling this by the time the Combaticons came around).

While we're on a digression, what was the precise deal with "Shockwave"?

Motorthing wrote:Well it should be quite clear by now we are all going to Hell. I blame Adam for boosting that apple and selling Eve a knock-off made by a group of 3rd party snakes in an unlicensed chinese factory.

I believe You Win The Internets for today.

Hasbro/Takara circumvent IP whenever they feel like it. As I stated before, Classics Jetfire is a Not-Valkyrie. The alt modes for Classics Sunstreaker/Sideswipe/Red Alert are Not-Lamborghinis, ROTF Sideways is a Not-Audi, and list goes on. Classics Jetfire is the best example though, it's directly based an existing BanDai toy. There is no difference between what Hasbro/Takara did with Classics Jetfire and what TFC Toys has done with Hercules. Hercules is clearly based on Devastator, Jetfire is clearly based on a Macross Valkyrie.

“I know only that what is moral is what you feel good after and what is immoral is what you feel bad after.” - Ernest Hemingway

They're toys. Dissect it all the way you want, but they're toys.

Blurrz wrote:“I know only that what is moral is what you feel good after and what is immoral is what you feel bad after.” - Ernest Hemingway

They're toys. Dissect it all the way you want, but they're toys.

If we where machines we could actually see then that way. But derp, we're humans and we tend to give meaning to things.

****.

Then I'm a machine.

Blurrz wrote:

****

Then I'm a machine.

Me too!

Counterpunch wrote:Oh man...I would so purchase Morality from a Third Party manufacturer if it were possible.

Next Up, Fansproject Morality!

BeastProwl wrote:

Counterpunch wrote:Oh man...I would so purchase Morality from a Third Party manufacturer if it were possible.

Next Up, Fansproject Morality!

You can bet FansProject's Morality will be high quality compared to the dodgy Impossible Toys Morality.

El Duque wrote:

Blurrz wrote:

****

Then I'm a machine.

Me too!

Yeah, and I don't post here because I don't care about TF's.

Blurrz wrote:

****

Then I'm a machine.

I've heard talk amongst the ladies at UVic claiming this to indeed be true.

metaphorge wrote:

Mkall wrote:

metaphorge wrote:"Autobot Jazz" and "Decepticon Brawl" and their like are also circumventions of trademarks held by other companies.

Not quite. Jazz, Brawl, and others such as Tracks are deemed too common a word to be trademarked and thus left open for all to use. Thus Hasbro uses the Autobot or Decepticon to create the trademark.

At what point since 1984 did this change, or did Hasbro simply not bother to trademark all the character names the first time around?

Not sure how things were like in the 80's. All I know is how things are now.

metaphorge wrote:"Autobot Jazz" and "Decepticon Brawl" and their like are also circumventions of trademarks held by other companies.

Mkall wrote:Once a single word such as Megatron or Onslaught has been trademarked by a company, that prohibits its use by other companies, no matter what adjective they put in front of it.

To be slightly pedantic, "Onslaught" is not a good example due to the Marvel comics character (and subsequent ToyBiz action figures) of the same name, though perhaps it passed muster due to Marvel's hand in the original G1 naming and bio creation process (though I'm not sure they were still handling this by the time the Combaticons came around).

While we're on a digression, what was the precise deal with "Shockwave"?

I know that Hasbro lost the Onslaught Trademark for a while, but re-aquired it and released Generations Onslaught to commemorate it. Maybe Marvel had it during that time? I don't know.

As for Shockwave, I too have no clue maybe him too was a loss/reaquire? Your guess is as good as mine.

uhh, it was a joke, like they're "Causality" Thing. If their next Box Set says "Morality", Bix will be Shat.

Noideaforaname wrote:Trademarks cover names, and 3rd Parties have intentionally not named their products after actual TF characters to avoid infringement.
Copyright covers the exact representation of an idea. G1, Animated, and Movie Mixmasters each have their own copyrights; HasTak can't copyright "green and purple transforming cement trucks." 3rd Parties have once again intentionally stayed just far enough away from flat-out copying HasTak to avoid infringement.

HasTak themselves have avoided trademark/copyright infringements several times over just like the 3rd Parties. Classics Jetfire is a prime example, being heavily based on the Super Valkyrie VF-1S (now owned by Bandai), but HasTak regularly bases alt modes on real vehicles but making them just different enough to not have to pay for it. In that sense, HasTak isn't much different from 3rd Parties.
EDIT: Also, Kre-O. Same type of bricks as LEGO, and Kre-O packages even advertise they are compatible.

El Duque wrote:Hasbro/Takara circumvent IP whenever they feel like it. As I stated before, Classics Jetfire is a Not-Valkyrie. The alt modes for Classics Sunstreaker/Sideswipe/Red Alert are Not-Lamborghinis, ROTF Sideways is a Not-Audi, and list goes on. Classics Jetfire is the best example though, it's directly based an existing BanDai toy. There is no difference between what Hasbro/Takara did with Classics Jetfire and what TFC Toys has done with Hercules. Hercules is clearly based on Devastator, Jetfire is clearly based on a Macross Valkyrie.

I'm still waiting to see a response to these points from the 'KOs and 3rd Parties are equally bad and both are wrong' side... I'm fine with that argument as long as you're equally against the Hasbro product that's also infringing, but funny, that never seems to be acknowledged.

It's not Aknowledged because he's not against it.

BeastProwl wrote:It's not Aknowledged because he's not against it.

I'm not saying these two guys are...they were quoted for having good points. But the people that are all high and mighty about 3rd Party figs being wrong and immoral probably have all the figures mentioned in the two posts I quoted along with all the others that borrow from others' IP.

These 3rd party products are awesome they are very detailed, with tons of poseability, they are truely designed by fans! I own the Igear Optimus and Nemesis Primes, the KO Animated Arcee's, TFC Hurcules, FP Insecticons, and the KO version of FP dark Ultramagnus. I sleep pretty good at night, I have no regrets. Hasbro has been disappointing the fans since beast machines. If Aaron Archer isnt fired Hasbro will probably go in the toliet and probably be bought up by IGear.