schweatty

iTrader: (2)

ugh, this arguement again!

my arguement is similar to some of the other arguements made in the post. it is not the responsibility of the consumer to regulate the theft of intellectual property. the only the responsibility the consumer has is to themselves. specifically, its the onus of the consumer to thoroughly research products before purchase them ("buyer beware"/ "you get what you pay for" etc...) it is the responsibility of the government institutions established by the people to regulate intellectual property.

im not saying that i side with the replica companies, because i dont. i am saying that the major design firms are not completely innocent in this arguement. they need to establish ownership of thier intellectual property in a legal format. specifically, organizations like SEMA who are their to protect the interests of their members. if SEMA isnt doing enough to stop this practice, maybe they should focus a little less on arguing with the DoT and a little more on protecting the products that pay their members dues.

Cannysage

iTrader: (29)

hmm interesting topic.. I'm about 50/50 on this one. My authentic veilside suxx ballz cuz the deck flaps around like a flag. My TK front's corner's don't align correctly and I paid close to 1k. It's a huge let down to buy an expensive part and it's not doing it's thing. My do luck rear fitment was beyond incredible.. that's how ALL authentic stuff should be. I may go with a Nimso V2 wing replica... I feel like I'm getting burned by authentics.

Only fake item I've ever bought was a rubics cube. I've never even bought a 2nd hand car in my life - nothing more than 5 miles on the odo, and I've bought many cars in my lifetime. . I usually will never take chances with non authentic stuff.. I'll see how it goes.