Here’s the direct link to taobao

商品详情

 

we weren't really discussing legality though, we were discussing morality, which is an entirely different concept. Morality is not subject to governments or laws, morality is only determined by the society we live in.

 

Sometimes i buy supermarkets own brand rip-off snickers
Sometimes i feel bad i am not buying the real snickers
Then i remember they are both slashing and burning the rainforests for palm oil

Ethics lol

 

Also a point on ethics and knockoffs:

If I don’t have to do anything illegal to obtain a knockoff then as a consumer I don’t find it to be morally wrong to buy it.

 

On the official it didn't matter. Paint still scraped. The THF version doesn't have that problem and I've installed the silencer multiple times and not a single scratch.

 

Νοt so, you are still a part of the crime, I think its called guilty by association. Consider smugled goods: You are just buying them without doing anything illegal but still if you are cought by the Authorities you will get a handsome fine at least. Which brings us to the point: If there were no buyers there would be no KOs. Given that all of us are....lax there is a market.

Damn that paintjob is just a work of beauty...I still cant look at this different from any angle except front but that paintjob is slowly making me to cave in.....THF right?

 

Yeah the more silver paint job on KO Megs is what won me over the Takara.

 

Do it.

 

Gimme the money dude, gimme the money.

 

Well, "theft" IS a legal term and needs to be proven in a court of law. Whether it's morally "right" to create similar looking products or works (of art) and/or have the intent for such products or works to complete with the originals is, of course, up for debate. However, that debate is, I'm sure you'll agree, a complex one

 

I am surprised we are flexible enough to discuss whether there is a need to prove something legaly...theft is theft (and any crime really) regardless of you been caught in the act or not...

 

What you are trying to state, I believe, is the distinction between crime and deviance:

- Difference Between Crime and Deviance

However, I disagree that it is morally wrong to copy, or create similar works as "wrong". To do so stifles creativity. In that capacity, it is for the law to decide which works, if aspects thereof are illegal, or civil courts to decide if damages have been suffered and penalise/reward accordingly. Even within the law, there are issues with stifling creativity and innovation for fears of legal action, such as with patent trolls.

One person's "theft" is another person's "inspiration". Morality is not set.

 

we've all known what stealing is since we were 4 years old. just because you got away with something doesn't make it right.

 

Meh the mental gymnastics are real      

 

my

In the UK, copying music (and possibly video, such as from the TV) onto a tape, VHS or CD was copyright infringement (which, by some people's views already stated, could be called "theft"), whereas in the USA, I believe, it was not. If these two examples are accurate, which culture or country to we use to decide who is morally wrong here, especially in the internet?

Also, as stated before, "theft" is a legal matter. It is for the courts to decide if something was "stolen" or a copyright (or related issue) was infringed upon. If you look at "legit" products, such as smartphones, there are the recent court cases of Samsung vs Apple to see that the line between "legitimate product" and "copyright infringement" is a complex one. To simply state that something is "so" is a rigid way of thinking.

Similarly, Japanese companies were notorious for copying Western products and then creating cheaper "KO" products, which is what Chinese companies these days are infamous for. Should we, as moral champions, veto current Sony products for their past? After all, their current strength was built upon what could be considered now as theft in the past.

Also, in the recently "The Toys that Made Us" documentary on Netflix, it was shown that the original Barbie was basically a modified KO of an existing European doll aimed at adults. I think the (currently sized) GI Joe figures also had an element of copying from another company's figures (which previously copied Hasbro's figures as cheaper KOs). Mattel, btw, quickly brought out a Barbie rock group to complete with the upcoming, Hasbro created "Jem" line, and brought it to market before Hasbro could, to make it look like Hasbro copied Mattel.

Is that morally wrong? If so, aren't we all supporting KOs or the culture thereof, by even buying "official" toys?

 

You’re reaching pretty hard there. Even Stretch Armstrong is saying ‘whoah buddy’

 

As I said Mental Gymnastics. We all know what is right or wrong. When someone creates or works to create something and it is his and his alone and you require to come to an arrangement to use it, and you ignore that, you are at error. I dont concearn myself with words but what it actually is happening. The rest is mental gymnastics, falasies and frankly pretence.

Do I buy KOs? Yes. Do I Download music and games? Yes. Do I care? No. Why? Because I can. I am I wrong? Yes.

I am an honest thief.

 

Well this thread was completely de railed....
We all know Ko's are a shady business. No need to drag it out like this.

 

Please do! I hope Sirtoys can get them if your review is good.

 

No. You are implying that "your" standards of what are "right" are defacto, when they are not. To ignore they is not helpful to the discussion, which is complex due to areas of law and morality amongst different peoples if the world.

For example, I'm against the imagery and themes in the Takara Legends pack-in comics. Simply stating "it's wrong/porn" isn't helpful to either side of the argument. I need to look at the context of the comics, and then see if they are inappropriate amongst the target culture/country, to understand what porn us, etc. Although I AM against it, I have to understand that generally speaking, it's not porn and that SOME people don't see the content as inappropriate.