The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

What is morally wrong - official football merchandise or unofficial merchandise?

Poll

What is morally wrong?

I watched Barely Legal Grafters on iPlayer last night http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06ygkk3/barely-legal-grafters - it's a documentary that painted some ticket touts and tax dodgers in a fairly positive light. Which was actually interesting.

One man who sold fake football t-shirts and got arrested for it said he didn't think what he did was morally wrong. My immediate reaction was, but it is though isn't it, then I got thinking... is it?

On the one hand you could say: the football club invests lots of money into its team and has a right to own its image and then sell it for a high mark up to fans.

On the other hand you could say: why does should anyone own the right to the image of a football club, and shouldn't any fan be able to create their own clothes and potentially sell it to other people? Creating a free market where the best ones do better at the best price without a monopoly.

So I put it to you TSR, what is the more morally wrong? A football club selling official merchandise and stopping everyone else from selling fake outfits, or someone selling fake merchandise.

Also try thinking with and without the law applied - how does that change your thinking? Should a law stopping counterfeit merchandise even exist?

Scroll to see replies

Neither's morally wrong, because your morals are defined by your own views - what's morally correct for me might not be for you, and so on.

The law should exist, because copyright exists, but then the copyright laws should be overhauled anyway.
buying a fake club shirt is a big no :colonhash:
Reply 3
Avatar for Arkasia
Arkasia
19
Selling any form of Spurs merchandise is morally abhorrent.
Original post by Mayhem™
buying a fake club shirt is a big no :colonhash:


Why?
Original post by Mactotaur
Neither's morally wrong, because your morals are defined by your own views - what's morally correct for me might not be for you, and so on.

The law should exist, because copyright exists, but then the copyright laws should be overhauled anyway.


Morals are set by the society you live in no?
Original post by Captain Jack
Morals are set by the society you live in no?


If it were so, everyone would have the same views on issues like euthanasia, which they clearly do not.
Original post by Captain Jack
Why?


To me buying a football team shirt(at least of a team you support, which in my opinion is what makes most sense) is like a way of being part of the team; you've contributed funds to the club, and the shirt is a reward for your commitment, I wouldn't feel the same pride If I wore a fake shirt instead of a 'real' one.
Selling fake merchandise is earning off of the football club without permission. Same as a illegal film copy.
Original post by Mactotaur
If it were so, everyone would have the same views on issues like euthanasia, which they clearly do not.


But we debate those because as a society there are some things we do need to reach a consensus on to decide where it lies morally. For instance, murder and theft. Euthanasia is discussed a lot because some people think it is a person's right, others do not. It's currently against the law, but a large enough group of people believe it is morally right and wish to change the law and thus declare that by this society's structures, it is morally right.
Original post by Mayhem™
To me buying a football team shirt(at least of a team you support, which in my opinion is what makes most sense) is like a way of being part of the team; you've contributed funds to the club, and the shirt is a reward for your commitment, I wouldn't feel the same pride If I wore a fake shirt instead of a 'real' one.


Original post by Vikingninja
Selling fake merchandise is earning off of the football club without permission. Same as a illegal film copy.


Why does a football club deserve so much money? Surely paying tickets to cover the cost of a salary is enough?
Using names of players and club logos should be illegal without permission of the club itself.
Original post by SonOfTheGun
Using names of players and club logos should be illegal without permission of the club itself.


Why?
Original post by Captain Jack
Why does a football club deserve so much money? Surely paying tickets to cover the cost of a salary is enough?


Wanna hear a cool fact about the real World? Every businesses goal except for a charity is to earn as much profit as possible, if they can earn earn as much as possible from something THEY OWN then they can.

This argument is ****, with your idea then people can also earn money from fake movie and game copies.
Original post by Vikingninja
Wanna hear a cool fact about the real World? Every businesses goal except for a charity is to earn as much profit as possible, if they can earn earn as much as possible from something THEY OWN then they can.

This argument is ****, with your idea then people can also earn money from fake movie and game copies.


It's not my idea, I'm not leaning either way. I'm just asking about people to open their minds and have a debate about morals. No harm in questioning stuff.

I get why the football clubs do it. But when footballers are paid such extortionate amounts of money, you do have to ask where morals come in.

I'm interested in people's opinions on morals, not business sense.
Original post by Captain Jack
It's not my idea, I'm not leaning either way. I'm just asking about people to open their minds and have a debate about morals. No harm in questioning stuff.

I get why the football clubs do it. But when footballers are paid such extortionate amounts of money, you do have to ask where morals come in.

I'm interested in people's opinions on morals, not business sense.

So what about morals? It's illegal so he shouldn't be doing it.
Soon you wont be able to take pictures of building for copy right style reasons. They literally own the flipping light :sad:
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Vikingninja
So what about morals? It's illegal so he shouldn't be doing it.


This post is about morals.
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
Soon you wont be able to take pictures of building for copy right style reasons. They literally own the flipping light :sad:


Sometimes I even wonder if music artists have a right to recordings, and artists to copies of their work. I think there are two sides to that argument.
Original post by Captain Jack
x


I watched this on iplayer last night as well. I don't think either are morally wrong to be honest. Obviously the latter is legally wrong but legality doesn't = morals.

I felt sorry for the guy who went to court for it- as he said, he was selling the shirts to people who probably can't afford the real deal so it gives them a chance to purchase the kit. As long as they know it's not genuine then what's the issue? It's a supply and demand thing.

I buy fakes of things in Turkey/Thailand, I don't think the seller is morally wrong, I think they're economically savvy.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you