Canadiens Knockoff Crusade

[IceCap]

Yeah, that's about right. The ones in my neck of the woods go between $100-200. Definitely not for $300-400.

[WSU151]

FWIW, the authentic Reebok jerseys cost a retailer $150 and the replicas $50, before any quantity discounts are considered.

Is that before customization? I would assume so, but I honestly don't know.

[letterform]

You can easily download FLAC and ALAC songs, which (as the name implies) are lossless, and also >320 kb/s bitrate songs, which while inferior to original recordings by measuring equipment, would be difficult for even the most discriminating audiophile to thumb his nose to. Also, many audiophiles are going back to phonographs, specifically due to the "too perfect" sound of digital recordings, so in some cases, the lack of perfection is a virtue.

Speaking as a pseudo audiophile I can attest that the trend is NOT to consume product currently sold by the major record labels - be it CD's or MP3's. This is because the music industry has been overly compressing digital music to the point where the music becomes distorted and loses its dynamic range. It is the antithesis of the goal of the audiophile. Audiophiles will instead seek out specific older CD pressings (and vinyl) - often from the 80's. The other trend is to download homemade flac "needle drops" from rare record pressings recorded with very expensive esoteric equipment.

As fas as vinyl is concerned, audiophiles don't listen to it because CD's are "too perfect". CD's are considered technically inferior in terms of resolution by many audiophiles. Vinyl is obviously warmer and does not have the cold bite that CD's do. Of course if you've only heard vinyl through your average tin can record player and don't know what a tube amp is you really have no idea what vinyl actually sounds like.

As far as Audiophiles not being able to thumb their noses at MP3's are concerned ummmm sorry but you have no absolutely idea what you are talking about. People that listen to MP3's may not be able to notice a difference but that is only because they don't have an ear (and more importantly a system) for high resolution music and they don't really care about quality.

Audiophiles are like the members of this board that obsess over details while the people that listen to MP3's are average people that don't notice the difference and just want to rock out.

[BBTV]

Not to legitimize intellectual theft, but suppose one was to say that the conterfeit product, due to its lower cost, allows more people to obtain a jersey which promotes the team in question, thereby raising the awareness of the organization in the eyes of potential advertisers?

Discuss.

Like BBTV said earlier, arguments like this are pointless to try and make because no one here has access to the pertinent information.

Besides, it completley misses the point. Counterfeiters are in clear violation of the law. They're profiting off of a brand they had no part in creating and off of intellectual property they don't own. It's a clear cut case, in my opinion.

I'm going to go ahead and say that the team doesn't look at things like jersey sales as a method of promotion (at least not a team as established and relevant as the Canadians), but simply as a revenue stream. I'd guess that for an established team (think Canadians, Penguins, Red Wings, Flyers, Leafs, et al) it's like a 5% / 95% split between merchandise as a form of marketing vs. strictly revenue.

Your question is legitimate, I just think that the team doesn't care about any "raising of awareness" and is way more concerned with the illegal production of un-licensed merch.

[walby2]

Like BBTV said earlier, arguments like this are pointless to try and make because no one here has access to the pertinent information.

Besides, it completley misses the point. Counterfeiters are in clear violation of the law. They're profiting off of a brand they had no part in creating and off of intellectual property they don't own. It's a clear cut case, in my opinion.

Well then, it is really such a simple non-issue, isn't it?

Since the law is so crystal clear, I guess all the Canadiens, the NHL, Reebok and anyone else adversely affected by this counterfeiting activity has to do is go down to the local strip mall and hire a lawyer to write a threatening letter or two claiming damages for intellectual property theft. Then they can all sit back and figure out what to do with the money while they wait for the cheque to arrive in the mail from the counterfeiters who have realized the error of their ways...because THAT will stop the problem.

Yeesh.

[Brass]

The replica NHL jersey I own doesn't have a fight strap to compare (No. 6 on the link) -- must be a fake even though I bought it at the Florida Panthers' arena.

No real replica has a fight strap. If it's replica material and has a fight strap, it's fake.

I guess it's hard to enforce the end of counterfeiters when technically the team itself sells discount knock-offs. (And I agree that too much was made of the sloppy lettering. Happens at the corner sports store all the time. Doesn't mean its a fake -- although I usually notice.)

If you go to some corner store and get the wrong font, without clearing it with them ahead of time, you get what you deserve. "Too much" isn't made, because the real jerseys won't have subpar lettering and fonts.

Furthermore, the reasoning listed is "Purchasing a counterfeit jersey may support unlawful labor conditions and organized crime." Then in the FAQ, they mention that their own replicas are produced overseas and "the quality of Reebok?s replica jersey is far superior to that of any counterfeit jersey currently on the market." But not the authentics. It's still a fake. So you can trade your fake for $50 toward a better fake and that's OK?

No, no, no. You're getting "replica" and "authentic" jerseys totally mixed up.

[Eye]

Furthermore, the reasoning listed is "Purchasing a counterfeit jersey may support unlawful labor conditions and organized crime." Then in the FAQ, they mention that their own replicas are produced overseas and "the quality of Reebok?s replica jersey is far superior to that of any counterfeit jersey currently on the market." But not the authentics. It's still a fake. So you can trade your fake for $50 toward a better fake and that's OK?

No, no, no. You're getting "replica" and "authentic" jerseys totally mixed up.

Right, but why can't the Canadiens convey what they want to say without blurring what they are trying to describe? Nobody should be the slightest bit confused between what an authentic and a replica is after reading the article.

[CubsFanBudMan]

The replica NHL jersey I own doesn't have a fight strap to compare (No. 6 on the link) -- must be a fake even though I bought it at the Florida Panthers' arena.

No real replica has a fight strap. If it's replica material and has a fight strap, it's fake.

I guess it's hard to enforce the end of counterfeiters when technically the team itself sells discount knock-offs. (And I agree that too much was made of the sloppy lettering. Happens at the corner sports store all the time. Doesn't mean its a fake -- although I usually notice.)

If you go to some corner store and get the wrong font, without clearing it with them ahead of time, you get what you deserve. "Too much" isn't made, because the real jerseys won't have subpar lettering and fonts.

Furthermore, the reasoning listed is "Purchasing a counterfeit jersey may support unlawful labor conditions and organized crime." Then in the FAQ, they mention that their own replicas are produced overseas and "the quality of Reebok’s replica jersey is far superior to that of any counterfeit jersey currently on the market." But not as good as the authentics. It's still a fake. So you can trade your fake for $50 toward a better fake and that's OK?

No, no, no. You're getting "replica" and "authentic" jerseys totally mixed up.

Let me try to clarify, because I know my take is a bit different, and I didn't do the best job explaining it.

First, I know the official replicas don't have a fight strap. I know my Panthers replica is official. My point was that the Canadiens sell jerseys that do not pass the tests outlined on their step-by-step checklist. Some kid digs out his Christmas gift and has to ask his parents why he got a fake because there is no fight strap to compare. Or turns it inside out and it doesn't pass the picture test (although they clarify the replica difference in the text), which brings me to...

Second, I revised this sentence:

"Then in the FAQ, they mention that their own replicas are produced overseas and 'the quality of Reebok’s replica jersey is far superior to that of any counterfeit jersey currently on the market.' But not as good as the authentics."

So by their own admission, the replicas that Reebok produces and the Canadiens sell are still a fake, but a better fake, so you should buy that? The mission should not be "how to spot a fake" but how to spot a non-Reebok replica or authentic jersey, because that seems to be the true point.

Finally, as far as lettering, I just don't think the team can or should police that. We know what looks right and doesn't, but most people don't care, as evidenced by "Jeter" on thousands of Yankees jerseys. To suggest that turns a Reebok authentic into an instant counterfeit... I'm not buying it. (It might ruin it, IMO...) I personally wouldn't choose the sloppy lettering route, but I don't think the Canadiens will corner the market on it. My point was that it's a big jump from the overseas counterfeiters they condemn and the guy who just got a bad lettering job down the street. You say "you get what you deserve," but it's not the fans raising the complaints here, it's the team.

So how about the guy that jumped on the bandwagon in 1993? How do those authentics hold up to the 2010 test? How about the jerseys from the '80s? To attempt to create a culture of real fans vs. fake with a call of "let's retire these jerseys" might be the wrong approach.

[Brass]

CubsFunBudMan, I just don't see what point you're trying to make, so I'll answer the best I can.

You can still tell the difference big time between a replica and a Chinese "authentic". Some things like the color of the jersey and the lettering are close, if not exactly, like the authentics. Just because the replicas aren't as "good" doesn't mean their fake by any standard. Should the Canadiens address this? Possibly have another section where you can compare replicas, too? Absolutely. But are they fake just because they're not on the website to compare to? Absolutely not. I don't even know how you came to that thought. Usually, it's not an issue of bad lettering, because those awful lettering jobs are 99.9% of the time on counterfeit jerseys. Also, what do you mean by jerseys in the 80's and 90's? Are you saying that the Canadiens, since they don't address it on their site, consider those counterfeit? Now you're just going overboard. The website can't do everything for you. You have to do some homework on the subject, too.

[CubsFanBudMan]

I guess you and I see this "crusade" differently. That's fine.

My point is that technically the Canadiens sell lower-priced knock-offs, too. They just call them replicas. We have been conditioned to not think of them that way because they are licensed, but I doubt if the Canadiens found a counterfeit jersey that was near-perfect, they'd suddenly be OK with it and tell the fan to keep it. They don't care about the quality of the color, logo or fight strap (!). They care that they aren't getting the money. And that's fine, but just say so. They sell an inferior product to the authentics and are fine with it.

If they are doing a fakes-for-cash program, I'm saying fans would be justified to bring in their old replicas and get the $100.

Like I said, my opinion on this is out there, but I think it is valid.

Again, I use their own words: "the quality of Reebok’s replica jersey is far superior to that of any counterfeit jersey currently on the market." Translated: "We make a better counterfeit, so buy ours."

Or this one, from the same page suggesting fans give their jersey the "water test":

"Try pouring water onto the front of the jersey. If the water falls off the jersey, it’s real. However, if the water is absorbed into the fabric, it’s fake."

...followed by the unfortunate disclaimer:

"Canadiens replica jerseys do not feature this technology."

I didn't call their replica jerseys "fake." They just did.

[IceCap]

Like BBTV said earlier, arguments like this are pointless to try and make because no one here has access to the pertinent information.

Besides, it completley misses the point. Counterfeiters are in clear violation of the law. They're profiting off of a brand they had no part in creating and off of intellectual property they don't own. It's a clear cut case, in my opinion.

Well then, it is really such a simple non-issue, isn't it?

Since the law is so crystal clear, I guess all the Canadiens, the NHL, Reebok and anyone else adversely affected by this counterfeiting activity has to do is go down to the local strip mall and hire a lawyer to write a threatening letter or two claiming damages for intellectual property theft. Then they can all sit back and figure out what to do with the money while they wait for the cheque to arrive in the mail from the counterfeiters who have realized the error of their ways...because THAT will stop the problem.

Yeesh.

What exactly is so difficult to get? Producing and selling counterfeit jerseys is illegal. They're infringing on the copyrights of a legal entity. You can try and dress up the purchasing, manufacturing, and selling of counterfeits as this pseudo-populist movement against the "evil" corporations all you want, they're still in violation of the law.

My point is that technically the Canadiens sell lower-priced knock-offs, too. They just call them replicas. We have been conditioned to not think of them that way because they are licensed....

Sorry, I don't buy that. Replicas are officially licenced by the team and league, and are produced by the official supplier, currently Rebook. By definition they aren't counterfeits.

[CubsFanBudMan]

My point is that technically the Canadiens sell lower-priced knock-offs, too. They just call them replicas. We have been conditioned to not think of them that way because they are licensed....

Sorry, I don't buy that. Replicas are officially licenced by the team and league, and are produced by the official supplier, currently Rebook. By definition they aren't counterfeits.

I had just edited my post to include this:

Or this one, from the same page suggesting fans give their jersey the "water test":

"Try pouring water onto the front of the jersey. If the water falls off the jersey, it’s real. However, if the water is absorbed into the fabric, it’s fake."

...followed by the unfortunate disclaimer:

"Canadiens replica jerseys do not feature this technology."

I didn't call their replica jerseys "fake." They just did.

By definition, a replica is a lower-priced imitation of the authentic.

[IceCap]

And?

A counterfeit is a copy made of an existing product and sold without the consent of the rightful holders of the copyright. A replica is not a counterfeit.

[CubsFanBudMan]

I've got two more:

"Counterfeits are not genuine, but have been made to look exactly like genuine ones in order to deceive people. Synonym: fake"

"made in imitation of something else with intent to deceive"

Now, the Canadiens certainly label their replicas as such, so I'll give you that. There is no intent to deceive, but I found no definition that mentions copyright or rights holders.

All that aside -- the Canadiens' mission is to "spot a fake," yet their own replicas fail the tests they provide. That's my point. I understand if you disagree with me having a problem with that.

[BBTV]

I'll agree that the Canadiens didn't do a good job with the wording and graphics associated with this campaign, and it does sort of imply that anything other than a licensed "authentic" is a fake, but that doesn't change what is and what isn't a fake.

"counterfits are not genuine, but have been made to look exactly like genuine ones in oder to deceive people..."

"Genuine" in this case means "licensed". Whether it's a "replica" or an "authentic" (and remember, those terms are simply marketing terms, not necessarily to be taken literally, since in a literal sense, both are "authentic", while even the "authentic" is really a replica).

If you're simply arguing that their campagn is poorly worded, then OK. But if you're arguing that licensed replicas are really counterfeits, then I think you're really off base there.

[IceCap]

I've got two more:

"Counterfeits are not genuine, but have been made to look exactly like genuine ones in order to deceive people. Synonym: fake"

"made in imitation of something else with intent to deceive"

Now, the Canadiens certainly label their replicas as such, so I'll give you that. There is no intent to deceive, but I found no definition that mentions copyright or rights holders.

All that aside -- the Canadiens' mission is to "spot a fake," yet their own replicas fail the tests they provide. That's my point. I understand if you disagree with me having a problem with that.

I'm sorry, I just don't accept your position. The dictionary definition mentions that counterfeits are made to imitate genuine products with the attempt to deceive. As you yourself pointed out the replicas are marketed as such, and are priced accordingly. They aren't trying to pass the replicas off as authentics.

As far as copyrights go, the dictionary may not mention copyrights in their definition of "counterfeit," but as far as the legal definition goes, copyrights play a huge role. Since replicas are sold by the entities that hold the copyrights and are made by manufacturers that hold the licences granted to them by the entities that hold the copyrights they aren't counterfeits.

They aren't made to deceive. They're sold and made by the holders of the copyright and licence. They're not counterfeits.

[CubsFanBudMan]

Fair enough on both counts. I know my position is weird, and I don't think replicas are counterfeit. But the elaborate parameters they set up for this "crusade" puts their own product in that category.

It took me three wordy posts to narrow my point down to one line, but I'm sticking with it:

The Canadiens' mission is to "spot a fake," yet their own replicas fail the tests they provide.

Carry on.

[walby2]

What exactly is so difficult to get? Producing and selling counterfeit jerseys is illegal. They're infringing on the copyrights of a legal entity. You can try and dress up the purchasing, manufacturing, and selling of counterfeits as this pseudo-populist movement against the "evil" corporations all you want, they're still in violation of the law.

Nice straw man. You're the only one talking about "evil corporations" here.

In any event, we all know the counterfeiters are in the wrong, legally speaking. No one is disputing that, so why do you keep bringing it up?

Rather than repeating yourself, why not explain how counterfeit jerseys are supposed to disappear because they are a "violation of the law"? Do you really think the counterfeiters are going to stop satisfying market demand because of a crisis of conscience brought upon them by one of your posts?

[IceCap]

What exactly is so difficult to get? Producing and selling counterfeit jerseys is illegal. They're infringing on the copyrights of a legal entity. You can try and dress up the purchasing, manufacturing, and selling of counterfeits as this pseudo-populist movement against the "evil" corporations all you want, they're still in violation of the law.

Nice straw man. You're the only one talking about "evil corporations" here.

You're the one calling for a "day of reckoning" for the likes of Rebook and the RIAA, as if them making money off of their brands is somehow a bad thing. You're "not to defend the counterfeiters, but I'm going to defend the counterfeiters" shtick seems rather silly.

In any event, we all know the counterfeiters are in the wrong, legally speaking. No one is disputing that, so why do you keep bringing it up?

Because you're trying to defend illegal counterfeiting and illegal file-sharing as some sort of noble populist movement?

Rather than repeating yourself, why not explain how counterfeit jerseys are supposed to disappear because they are a "violation of the law"? Do you really think the counterfeiters are going to stop satisfying market demand because of a crisis of conscience brought upon them by one of your posts?

I think the Canadiens, NHL, and Reebok are completley in the right to go after those who are illegally taking advantage of their brands and copyrights. Will this stop the counterfeiters? No. As long as there have been successful brands there have been those bottom feeders who will attempt to cash in on them through counterfeiting. Trying to stop counterfeiting is like trying to end drug use. It's not going to happen. Still, the holders of the brand's copyrights have every right to try and defend their brand's integrity.

[Gothamite]

walby2, I think you're confusing "clearly wrong" with "easily solved."

I don't think anyone is suggesting that counterfeiting can be stamped out with a wish and a wave of one's hand. That does not mean that the Canadiens should stop trying.

The first step is to educate the public, trying to ensure that the first group of people who may buy fakes (those duped into doing so), stop. Cut down on the fraudulent purchases, and take a bite of the criminals' profits.

I applaud the Canadiens for this move. Is their page a little clumsy? Sure. But that can be improved. And this is one fight which is definitely worth fighting.

Again, I'm shocked that anyone on these boards, of all places, would defend theft of intellectual property on any grounds.