About paying homages and chinese third party minifigures

[Itaria No Shintaku]

PLEASE DO NOT MERGE WITH THE TOPIC ABOUT WORTH/NOT WORTH, THANKS :)

I REALLY BELIEVE THIS TOPIC ADDRESSED A TOTALLY DIFFERENT ASPECT :)

Hello,

I don't want to start a flame, I would like to have educated and polite opinions about a discussion that started on another group. I would like to have a civil and moderate confrontation here. So I please please please ask everybody to renounce posting their answer if it is aggressive.

Now the question.

Premise:

I see the phenomena of chinese third party minifigures spreading very fastly. I see a lot of people buying the replica of Marvel and DC minifigures and even the replica of CMF series 1.

Question:

Considering that these third party do not pay any royalties, credits, or homages to neither LEGO or MARVEL/DC/whatever, don't you feel that it is ethically wrong to buy such minifigures?

Considerations:

If I am a fan of Marvel, I like to endorse that company by actively giving my money via purchasing their products. If I am a Marvel fan I don't sneak in the cinema during The Avengers. I do pay my ticket.

These third parties not only don't pay anything to LEGO, but they don't even pay anything to the company who owns the rights for reproducing that particoular minifigure.

It's not a matther that "Lego doesn't produce that minifigure so I buy it chinese" or "Lego Deadpool is too expensive so I buy it chinese" because the fact that a specific minifigure doesn't exist or is too expensive doesn't make the matther more or less ethically wrong.

Still it stays wrong.

Please discuss. Thanks. It's important to me to have educated point of views to understand better this topic. :)

Edited August 28, 2015 by Itaria No Shintaku

[fred67]

It's not a matther that "Lego doesn't produce that minifigure so I buy it chinese" or "Lego Deadpool is too expensive so I buy it chinese" because the fact that a specific minifigure doesn't exist or is too expensive doesn't make the matther more or less ethically wrong.

Still it stays wrong.

I agree and disagree... it's definitely wrong that they should profit from someone else's IP without any compensation, but at the same time you can beg Marvel/DC/TLG to take your money to make a figure and they won't do it. I want to buy real LEGO.

So that is my line, really. I know nobody "owes" it to me to make the figures I want, and I don't know about what is going on in other people's minds, but if I see something interesting my first choice is to buy it in LEGO, but if LEGO doesn't (or won't) offer it, while I feel a little bad about buying Chinese, I don't feel as bad as I would buying the Chinese version of what I would buy from LEGO.

My Superhero Display currently has over 50 "real" DC/Marvel figures in it, I have a few more that I haven't displayed because they're not quite as iconic as I'd like, and I have the legitimate Hulk Buster Smash set ready to put those figures on display (I need to build a new display for it).

Then there's the Fantastic Four (the only knock off superheros I've bought). I don't even put them in the same case, they have their own little display.

So now with about 60 legitimate figures and four Chinese ones (not even knock offs, because TLG never made them), while I know it's not my place to dictate how much profit a company should make (it's only my place to decide to pay it or not), I figure Marvel/DC/TLG are happier with my buying over 90% of my superheroes stuff from them than not.

I do not like when these companies make knock offs, but I do not think it's as bad as when it's IP that TLG is not making.

I look at it this way: I can buy a Hulk from TLG, or from some Chinese company. If I buy it from the Chinese company, I'm depriving TLG and Marvel their due profit. If I buy something TLG doesn't make, I'm not depriving them of a sale. It's still not entirely ethical, but it's not the same.

EDIT: I agree this is not a worth it/not worth it topic, it's an ethical/unethical topic. I also wanted to add that when there's some exclusive figure, like an SDCC figure that I didn't get, and a Chinese company makes it, I personally would not buy it. But at the same time, I do see it along the same lines - people would be more than happy to pay TLG for it, but if they can't, they can't. The SDCC real figures will still be valuable. Again, TLG doesn't owe it to me or anybody else to make the figures we want, and if they don't it doesn't mean it's ethical to buy it from a third pary, but I just don't see it as being "as" wrong when we're not depriving TLG or Marvel or DC of anything.

EDIT2: If Marvel/DC want to set up websites where the "feeling guilty" can give them money for the IP, I'd be all for it.

Edited August 28, 2015 by fred67

[Itaria No Shintaku]

I agree and disagree... it's definitely wrong that they should profit from someone else's IP without any compensation, but at the same time you can beg Marvel/DC/TLG to take your money

---cut---

I thank you a lot fred67 this was exactly what I wanted to hear as a "polite debate" over a topic which is often so 'dangerous'.

[Lyichir]

I don't judge other people for buying knockoffs (since everyone's circumstances are different), but I personally wouldn't buy a knockoff fig even if it were seemingly the only way to obtain it. After all, there's no shortage of customizers who would gladly take commissions for such figures, and I would much rather support small-scale fan labor rather than a large-scale operation that bases its entire business model on intellectual property theft.

[Iam epic]

Okay man I agree with some of your points. However I buy bootlegs because:

1. They have figures that lego hasn't made yet or will never make(such as Galactus and the Silver Surfer.)

2. TLG will not make certain figures of certain superheros and the ones that are not in sets are in Polybags, comic on packaging or in a DVD. Not all of us can afford comic con exclusives you know. Also FF minifigures and certain X-Men members aren't going to happen anytime soon since marvel has the merchandising rights NOT fox.

3. The price. I can't afford to buy custom printed minifgures since that cost about $30. Also I can't afford to buy say the Quinjet, but I wanted a black widow minifg so I bought a bootleg set.

4. The quality is great! Sheng yuan brand make copies that are nearly identical.

At the end of the day Its your choice. I support Marvel and DC fully and I don't buy bootleg sets. But since lego isn't going to make a bruce banner minifig anytime soon so I decided to order a HULK MECH? Or and Dargo has SOO MANY figures coming out that TLG hasn't made yet. I can't wait for those!

[fred67]

I have to add to the last post that, while I agree with the sentiment for the most part, the fact is we're not entitled to the figures we want. Nobody needs minifigures, they're a luxury, really, so there's really no justification in violating IP rights.

I do feel a little guilty about it, but at the same time I don't see it as a "loss" for the IP holders, either. If I could anonymously give them a buck for every figure I get, I'd do it.

I also don't think there's any difference between customizers and the knock-offs as far as violating IP is concerned, but it depends - if they start with a licensed figure and customize it to better represent the character (or a variation), then everybody got paid, no problem. If they start with a non-licensed figure, then they're just as guilty as violating IP rights as the Chinese companies. Can anyone claim that it's OK just because the volume is lower? The only difference is the quantity of violations - it doesn't make it "right" for the customizer.

[wilson3a10]

I have to say that most older parents are unable to distinguish between authentic lego and bootlegs.

[Itaria No Shintaku]

Okay man I agree with some of your points. However I buy bootlegs because:

1. They have figures that lego hasn't made yet or will never make(such as Galactus and the Silver Surfer.)

2. TLG will not make certain figures of certain superheros and the ones that are not in sets are in Polybags, comic on packaging or in a DVD. Not all of us can afford comic con exclusives you know. Also FF minifigures and certain X-Men members aren't going to happen anytime soon since marvel has the merchandising rights NOT fox.

3. The price. I can't afford to buy custom printed minifgures since that cost about $30. Also I can't afford to buy say the Quinjet, but I wanted a black widow minifg so I bought a bootleg set.

4. The quality is great! Sheng yuan brand make copies that are nearly identical.

At the end of the day Its your choice. I support Marvel and DC fully and I don't buy bootleg sets. But since lego isn't going to make a bruce banner minifig anytime soon so I decided to order a HULK MECH? Or and Dargo has SOO MANY figures coming out that TLG hasn't made yet. I can't wait for those!

This is exactly what I was saying I find totally wrong because it's violating IP.

One should question himself:

• am I a LEGO Fan?
  
• am I a MINIFIGURE Fan?
  

Because I believe that if you like to buy bootlegs or third parties, you are not a LEGO fan.

You are a MINIFIGURE fan.

Which is very very different.

[fred67]

Because I believe that if you like to buy bootlegs or third parties, you are not a LEGO fan.

You are a MINIFIGURE fan.

Which is very very different.

Buying products from companies Y and Z doesn't preclude you from being a fan of company X, it just means you're not a zealot about it.

I own two Megabloks sets... are you going to say I'm not a fan of LEGO, I'm just a fan of building with plastic bricks? Because I have over 100 times more LEGO sets.

Besides, it's not that I "liked" it, it's that I liked it better than not being able to get those figures at all - it's that there was no alternative offered by LEGO. I'm again not arguing that that makes it ethical or moral, but I sill believe it's much less "bad" than buying products from third parties that compete with LEGO/Marvel or LEGO/DC IP. I realize those companies do that, too, and that's a shame, but it seems to me they're offering a whole lot more.

[Itaria No Shintaku]

Buying products from companies Y and Z doesn't preclude you from being a fan of company X, it just means you're not a zealot about it.

I own two Megabloks sets... are you going to say I'm not a fan of LEGO, I'm just a fan of building with plastic bricks? Because I have over 100 times more LEGO sets.

Besides, it's not that I "liked" it, it's that I liked it better than not being able to get those figures at all - it's that there was no alternative offered by LEGO. I'm again not arguing that that makes it ethical or moral, but I sill believe it's much less "bad" than buying products from third parties that compete with LEGO/Marvel or LEGO/DC IP. I realize those companies do that, too, and that's a shame, but it seems to me they're offering a whole lot more.

"Fan" is a contraption word for "Fanatic".

Fanatic and zealot are nearly synonims.

A "FAN" (AFOL) shouldn't buy megabloks or chinese clones imho, there are differences to be a LEGO enthusiastic (which buys also other stuff) and an AFOL.

Of course these are just my 2p, I think the ones buying third party are AFOCT (Adult fan of construction toys) then it's obvious they have more LEGO than Megabloks or other brands just because LEGO are more spreaded, more known, they have the best licenses and so on.

[Tariq j]

This is exactly what I was saying I find totally wrong because it's violating IP.

One should question himself:

• am I a LEGO Fan?
  
• am I a MINIFIGURE Fan?
  

Because I believe that if you like to buy bootlegs or third parties, you are not a LEGO fan.

You are a MINIFIGURE fan.

Which is very very different.

I respectfully disagree with that statement, just because you buy a Bootleg, doesn't mean you're not a Lego fan.

Then to the original question, is it ethical? I mean everyone's collection is personal to them, some people like collecting third party and Lego while others hate it. I don't mind and have nothing against collecting third party brands, they do produce excellent figures.

[Itaria No Shintaku]

Then to the original question, is it ethical? I mean everyone's collection is personal to them, some people like collecting third party and Lego while others hate it. I don't mind and have nothing against collecting third party brands, they do produce excellent figures.

Well I don't want to sound fussy, but this doesn't answer the question in any way.

[Robianco]

Firstly I'd say it's probably legally wrong to produce any custom figure as long as that figure or the likeness is owned by someone and you don't have permission to do so.... That's aside from any moral or ethical standpoint.

Whether the license holders choose to act over it is actually irrelevant.

The infringement of Lego's IP covers both physically produced figures and game design figures. The copying of game design figures is something that happens more with 'customisers' over 'bootleggers'.

Whether someone chooses to buy a custom figure or bootleg figure is a dilemma and a choice personal to them as an individual. Whether that's a figure produced by Lego or not. I'd say choosing bootleg figures over a genuine Lego one continually makes you a minifig 'fan' but that's also down to whether you build with actual Lego. Minifigs are just a part of Lego as a whole. It could also be argued that you can be a 'fan' of Lego without owning any but that can be down to budgetary constraints.

I'm a Lego fan. I'm also able to buy it but within any budget I restrict myself to. I own many customs and consider that a part of my interest in Lego regardless of the legality of producing them. Bootlegs are a continuation of that for me although I, personally, only pick up a bootleg if it's good quality and there isn't a genuine Lego or pad printed version as that's my preference.

On a side note I don't think the origination of the word 'fan' still applies in the same way. Regardless of the original meaning of 'fanatic' or 'zealot' it now means something less extreme. You can be a fan of one band and a fan of another in the same way you can be a fan of Lego and a fan of another toy. Brand loyalty to an extreme is something else entirely.

There will always be people who 'ethically' think it's wrong and those that 'morally' have no issue with it. On a Lego board you're going to have extremes including many who object but it'll still happen.

I'm worried that this discussion will go around in circles until the threads falls off the page. Ultimately it's ethically, morally, and even legally wrong.... will that deter people from doing it? No. Regardless of how many people will say it's wrong there are others who don't care. When it comes down to it I don't care what anybody thinks of my decision to do anything whether that's buying a bootleg figure to buying a custom figure to wearing odd socks. I'm too old to worry about other people's opinion and this site isn't a popularity contest. As an individual I don't think it matters what other people do so I'll happily let them get on with it.

Edited August 29, 2015 by Robianco

[Peppermint_M]

A note, I think that in modern parlance "Fan" and "Fanatic" have been separated from each other, Fan is no longer associated with Fanatic in the same way. To say you are a fan, it leaves the impression that you enjoy/appreciate something. Be it a TV show, film, series of books, sports team or toy. To say someone is a fanatic does still mean that you are on the slightly manic side of liking something, not to quite the degree of a zealot (think of it like the difference between "Large" and "Huge") but still more deeply than the average person who likes or enjoys the same thing.

On to the point at hand: Personally thinking (and probably legally). Whether it is a company or a small scale customiser, replicating someone else's character is IP infringement if you make money on it.

That said, I don't care if someone buys them or produces them. The company who owns the IP will deal with it if they see it as a problem.

I buy clone brand products for parts LEGO does not produce but I only use the minifigure accessories, the bricks themselves are something too many people object to. However I am happy to use baseplates that are good quality in the same way an artist will use paper of a quality that they approve. If it is fit for purpose it can be useful.

I won't buy bootlegs of characters owned by other companies (No matter how much I want a Winter Soldier and Shazam) but I have bought bootlegs that are a mish-mash of Mega, Best-Lock and LEGO parts, out of curiosity.

Ethics and morals are personal things when you get down to the nitty-gritty smaller things (Vegetarian? Vegan? Eco-friendly? etc). In fact, some would call us all ethically and morally stunted for enjoying and purchasing petro-chemical based products!

I leave each to their own.

[CMP]

That said, I don't care if someone buys them or produces them. The company who owns the IP will deal with it if they see it as a problem.

Issue is, I don't believe LEGO can do anything to Chinese bootleggers because copyright laws can't be enforced there effectively.

[Peppermint_M]

Issue is, I don't believe LEGO can do anything to Chinese bootleggers because copyright laws can't be enforced there effectively.

Yes, but TLG, WB and Disney can prevent the import and sale of these items. So they make some effort to enforcement even if it doesn't shut down the manufacturer.

[thelegoaddict]

Question:

Considering that these third party do not pay any royalties, credits, or homages to neither LEGO or MARVEL/DC/whatever, don't you feel that it is ethically wrong to buy such minifigures?

-Absolutely, I believe it's ethically wrong to purchase unlicensed minifigures. I must be living under a rock, because I don't even know where such items would be sold. I only purchase from TLG or BrickLink, and on rare occasion from a vendor at an AFOL fair.

[Robianco]

Yes, but TLG, WB and Disney can prevent the import and sale of these items. So they make some effort to enforcement even if it doesn't shut down the manufacturer.

Lego's legal team are constantly working to close down listings on eBay... at least for UK based listings. Sellers will continually come and go though.

I've never seen any bootleg for sale in the UK at any kind of legit retailer... only place I've seen is a guy who has a weekly stall at a various car boot sales in the North West.

[Artanis I]

I would like to point out that morally/ethically wrong is not the same as legally wrong. What is legal somewhere is illegal somewhere else. What is moral or ethical often depends on the individual, (and can influence changes of law,) but does not over-ride law. Laws are made to support the morals held by the majority, with the intention of being for everyone's good. But that isn't always the case.

If you are caught breaking a law you don't agree with, unless that law is unpopular enough to have it changed, you will be charged. But that doesn't make that law morally/ethically correct or not. For some people, if it is illegal then it is therefore also immoral - they would keep a law they don't agree with for the simple fact that it is law.

Some would suggest that IP is not a legitimate thing in a moral sense. It appears that some governments do not recognise IP in a legal sense. These people would have absolutely no moral objection to the buying & selling of goods that are not "approved" by certain companies who claim exclusive control of relevant IP.

---

I don't personally believe that anyone has a moral right to "own" ideas or demand royalties etc, nor that people should blatantly copy other people's work for profit without acknowledgement - especially when art is involved. I think there's a line somewhere. People should get something for their efforts, but no one is entitled to complete control of everything.

[GallardoLU]

growing up I was one of those people show looked at Mega Blok and Lego as the same thing, and for the purpose of this topic that is still true (the both are legitimate companies who do not steal from one another, and pay licensing fees as expected) and based solely on that distinction I can say I own about 4 figures that are loosely based on 3rd party parts.

These are Arealight helms and printed chests, brick arms weapons. Meaning I still needed to supply arms and legs and heads to complete the figures. Those other parts are true Lego parts. The brickarms weapons are based on either their own designs or weapons no one can claim a copyright for, so I see nothing at all morally wrong with those purchases. The Arealight parts are however based on star wars themes and characters, which as far as I can tell are copies of parts of figures, not whole figures.

This is a gray area, the individual parts are not advertised as parts for certain figures but clearly are intended to be, but at the same time are not whole figures. So I’m uncertain if there is truly an infringement (legally) I do personally view it as morally suspect but only to the same extent as omitting the truth (it’s not doing something wrong, but neither is it the right thing to do)

They are also custom molds (I only buy their female body chests, with the sides scalloped, or custom molded helms) so I personally don’t see an issue from a Lego stand point other than the basic “not purist” but it definitely isn’t a copy either.

As for the DC/Marvel figures I personally am against, those are Lego molds, with obvious IP infringements (especially the one Lego is also making)

Edited September 2, 2015 by GallardoLU

[rodiziorobs]

...replicating someone else's character is IP infringement if you make money on distribute it.

I had to point this out to correct a misconception about IP generally speaking. Many people think that legal rights are only infringed upon if money is transacted, but that is not true.

If you were to draw a picture of Captain America for your own use, or sculpt a bust of Batman to display in your home, or make yourself a Spider-Man costume, this is completely allowed. If you were to sell it, however, that is illegal. Here's the catch, however: even if you were to give it away for free, that would also be illegal, in the same way that copying an album for a friend is copyright infringement. Money does not have to change hands for it to be criminal.

Do companies who hold oft-copied IPs go after this kind of infringement? Very rarely, unless it is (1) done on a large scale, or (2) portrayed as if it were an officially licensed product.

Most Chinese bootleggers strike out on both counts, yet enforcement in that market is so difficult that most companies try to simply outdo the bootleggers through better quality product and hard-to-mimic design.

On the other hand, most customizers neither work in bulk--most are small-scale operations--nor do they try to pass themselves off as the real deal. Because of that, the IP holders tend to ignore it; pursuing such infringement is not worth it to them. Fan art helps spread brand awareness and goodwill, and the scale to which it hurts their brand or image is negligible, at least enough so that it is not worth it for them to combat it. Does that change the legality of it? No, but there is no real danger of repercussions by the IP holder, so customizers still do it, often ignorant of the fact that they are in fact committing a crime. Whether they sell their work or give it away, reproducing and distributing someone else's IP without consent is criminal.

Edited September 15, 2015 by rodiziorobs

[fred67]

^^ reminds me of when some schools painted Disney murals; you could do this in your private residence, but not a public school or business. Disney threatened to sue them - Hanna Barbara stepped in and let them use their characters on the school murals for free.

The more you tighten your grip, the more systems will slip through your fingers.

[Robianco]

Don't be so sure that license holders let customisers 'get away with it'... Even on a small scale. They're happy to step in with a quiet word when it suits.

[agoodfella77]

Is it ethically wrong? Depends on your point of view. Can a case be made against the distributors? Yes. Can a case be made against the manufacturers? Absolutely.

But as a buyer? That's a grey area. I didn't "steal" anything. If I buy a bootleg, I am handing over my hard earned cash for it. So, in my mind this is a more than fair transaction. People can argue "but you know that this is counterfeit goods". It's a fair point. But if I make an incredibly awesome MOC or Custom MARVEL fig and sell it to my neighbor (or vice versa I am the buyer) -- does anyone bat an eye? Why is that OK? What if I have a pad printer, have a proper design team and am printing them by the hundreds -- NOW it's an issue? So it's really economics? It's OK if I make a couple of bucks, but if I make hundreds of thousands of dollars -- then I've crossed the line? If so, then there is a HUGE flaw in the argument. Then we are really talking about economics rather than ethics -- hence its a grey area.

I don't think that people have an issue if I grabbed a blank fig, slapped some paint on it and then either traded it for another fig or someone pays me a few bucks for it. Happens all the time, besides, this is impossible to regulate and monitor anyway. So it's a slippery slope. Where is there a line crossed? What is the volume or dollar amount that needs to be passed here?

Next, I have always submitted that I was, have been and will be a MARVEL fan from the beginning. It was my kids who re-introduced me to LEGO and when they started the Super Heroes line -- hook, line and sinker -- I was all in. I have every official MARVEL fig produced (aside from the ridiculous SDCCs). Now here comes the critical point. LEGO (and by association MARVEL) have, in fact, created their own worst nightmare when it comes to setting the tables for bootlegs to flourish with this ridiculous policy about SDCC exclusives.

I mean let's think about it for a moment. They know that there is voracious appetite for these exclusives. They only print a minuscule amount, and then they go for hundreds of dollars on the secondary market. OF COURSE someone is going to step in and provide supply to this untapped demand -- its Econ 101!

If I were LEGO, I would simply alleviate this problem by circulating into general production exclusive figs -- even if it is a full year later -- and signal to the market that this will happen. That way, this will all but eliminate the scalpers and will drastically reduce the demand for bootleg SDCCs (heck if I knew I could get the SDCC figs later on BrickLink why would I waste time on bootlegs)? And to further the point LEGO hasn't lost a single dollar as a result of bootlegs. As I have said, I have every official fig. LEGO is the gold standard and I fully understand that. Nothing will replace this.

Finally, as a MARVEL fan, my goal has been to re-create the most complete MARVEL universe possible. That's through official figs, MOCs, and yes, customs of all shapes and sizes. LEGO/MARVEL are not going to be putting out characters like Fantastic Four or Punisher or throw back figs like classic Hawkeye. That's fine, someone will. And frankly, if I am a MARVEL / DISNEY exec -- I love it! In the grand scheme of things -- if I weigh the pros and cons of potential lost revenue vs. the free marketing I am getting from collectors and fans alike that keep my brands and characters in the minds of people, fans and new fans, they are laying the groundwork for me to grab the really big dollars later -- big official LEGO sets or a movie or movie merchandise. It's more than a wash -- I would secretly encourage it. The worst thing in the world isn't copying -- heck its an affirmation that people love your stuff! No, the worst thing in the world is apathy. People just don't care or people like something else. The worst thing in the world is becoming irrelevant -- becoming a Beanie Baby or Cabbage Patch Doll. At least this way your product, your characters, your brand is continually being kept in the minds of fans and future fans and that is free marketing -- which is like gold.

So, in the end I don't think the issue or answer is black or white.

Edited September 17, 2015 by agoodfella77

[crossmr]

Whether the license holders choose to act over it is actually irrelevant.

Actually it's not. One of the facets of trademark is that you need to defend it to prevent it from being diluted. Which is why you often see companies that go after things that someone may consider trivial or who are so picky about things like language (legos for example..)

If a trademark becomes sufficiently diluted you lose a lot of legal power to enforce it. Google and Kleenex would have a hard time standing up to certain court challenges over usage of their names as generic words. Where I grew up, everything was a kleenex regardless of the brand and google is synonymous with "do an internet search" for something at this point. Trademark and design patents are what protect look and feel in this case and if Marvel (not Lego, they don't have standing on Marvel IP to sue in their stead) do nothing to protect their trademark it is relevant, because it becomes weaker and weaker to the point where they can't really enforce it.