Tricky Terminologies in Branding

I’ll state this as plainly as I can. This article does not talk about choice, nor aim to curtail your right to buy products made from stolen intellectual property. It’s about Gunpla, its branding, and why bootlegs are not 3rd party Gunpla.

The Bandai vs bootlegs debacle has been going on ever since the first bootleg came out, I have a few posts here regarding it, and has continued to drag on with the emergence of social media. The issue won’t die because every year there are new people getting into the hobby, poisoned by friends, co-workers, enemies or family, or at least every time there’s a new Gundam series being aired. There will always be a kit line that follows (or even precedes) it, and you can be sure bootlegs won’t be far behind. It’s become so bad that, a lot of people, who feel entitled to have a hobby despite their means, will openly scream that they’ll just wait for the bootlegs, because buying Bandai is so expensive. They rather buy 10K worth of bootlegs instead 10K worth of Bandai kits. They also claim that the brand doesn’t matter, which is where things become complicated for them because bootlegs are not brands.

The Nitty and the Gritty

Let’s get a few things out of the way first.

The term bootleg came from the practice of smuggling illegal booze (moonshine) in people’s boot legs, hence the term. It was later on appropriated by the music industry to connote selling and distributing music that was illegally recorded and reproduced. It has since then become the blanket term for the sale and distribution of anything that is produced without license from the parent company of the IP being produced, as such, fake accessories and apparels are also bootlegs. Regardless if the accessories are using the IP brand as a deliberate fake, or a distorted version of it (SHARP calculators had once a fake/bootleg version which spelled SHRAP), those in and by itself are bootlegs.

Bandai owns the Gunpla™ or Gunpla® franchise, and along with its sister/daughter company Sunrise, the Gundam© trademark. When Bandai sued TT-Hongli and subsequently won, those bootleggers (and others that came after them) thought, “okay, we won’t use the Gundam trademark anymore, and we’ll just come back from the ashes with a new 'brand' and replace the term Gundam with fighter.” That alone should have been enough for anyone to figure out that what TTH is doing is illegal. 

Two Guesses what that ® symbol at the end means

I’ve read a lot of comments claiming that they understand copyright, and that if a bootlegger comes up with a kit that Bandai hasn’t produced yet, it’s an original design and is not a bootleg.

Oh, but it is a bootleg. This is one of the biggest misconceptions in this issue. So as long as the design came from Sunrise and/or Bandai, it’s an infringement of both copyright and trademarks owned by Sunrise and Bandai, and therefore are technically bootlegs. Even resin kits, like G-Systems, and plastic kits, like Mechanicore, who do their own rendering of familiar designs, from scratch, are unfortunately, bootlegs.

In branding, it’s a little bit more complicated than dropping a trademarked name. Let’s take Coca-Cola, for example.

Part of Coca-Cola’s trademarks are the tradenames Coca-Cola and Coke, as well as the trademark shape of the Coke bottle. You won’t see any other softdrink brand using the same names and the same bottle shape, because you can rest assured that Coca-Cola’s IP and legal department would come down hard on whoever does that.

That act of copying any recognizable identity of a popular brand without permission, for profit, is infringement. If the infringer mass produces products based on the look of that IP, in part or in full regardless of intent, that act is bootlegging.

In the case of Gundams and Gunpla for that matter, both terms are owned by Bandai and Sunrise retroactively to apply to the anime series, or as the case may be, film and graphic novel/comics series, as well as any kit line produced thereof (edit: this also includes accessories, like shirts, mugs, keychains, et al). Gundams have a trademark look that is mainly distinguishable on the head: those distinctive V-Fins, with or without the gems and the goatee, which are often red. Further, there is this tidbit about Intellectual Property that a lot of people are confused with; copyright is by virtue of creation. So, the design of any single Mobile Suit is automatically a copyright of Sunrise and Bandai at the moment of conception. Of course, the artist who designed a particular MS would either have a shared copyright with Sunrise/Bandai, or, an exclusivity clause, meaning, any design an artist renders while in their employ belongs to Sunrise and Bandai.

It sounds ominous and unfair, I know. I had the same sentiment back when I was a budding artist, unwilling to share my work with anyone, but, as I matured as an artist and a Designer, learning about the legalities of intellectual property, those artists in Japan are being well-compensated for their work. But, more on that later.

So, in terms of branding, copyright and intellectual property are not really as simple as the main terminologies and the look that was created, but the overall terminologies used within a creative production. Let’s take the Gundam SEED series for example.

In Gundam SEED, we have 5 main Mobile Suit designs. Now, the term Mobile Suit (and herewith, Mobile Armor) in itself is unique within the Gundamverse, which indicates a huge, human piloted mechanical robot, and is thus a copyrighted term. In Gundam SEED, the main Mobile Suit, or the Protagonist Mobile Suit, for simplicity, is called the Strike. The word strike alone isn’t a Sunrise/Bandai copyright, meaning, if you have an idea for a mecha design (take note, I didn’t use mobile suit), you can name it Strike all you want, and Bandai won’t come after you, even if you make gazillions out of it, so as long as the look of the mecha you’re designing doesn’t look like a Gundam.

Are you following so far? Good.

We now have,

• The series name, a) Mobile Suit Gundam SEED, and the main Mobile Suit, Gundam Strike, but, we’re not done yet. Gundam Strike is still the Strike’s generic callsign. We still have its mechanical and technical designation, GAT-X 105. Now, this mechanical designation is probably an abbreviation of something, but that’s not really important at the moment.
• Next, we now have a Mobile Suit design called b) GAT-X 105 Strike Gundam (or any other iteration), which appears in Mobile Suit Gundam SEED.
• All that’s left is c) the design of the MS itself.

GAT-X 105 Mobile Suit Strike Gundam

Now, the Strike Gundam can appear and have appeared with slightly different markings and detailing, but, it’s still the Strike. As such, the designation itself can be amended. The one on the left is the original base design of the Strike, the one on the right (front and back) is the one in Gundam Evolve, which is rather close to if not exactly the same as the PG version. So, we can simply put it as GAT-X 105EVO Mobile Suit Strike Gundam Evolve, but, it’s still very much the Gundam SEED Strike even if we drop the EVO tag.

There we have it. A complete brand study. Well, it’s not really that complete yet. With the release of the SEED anime series, kits of the 5 main MS designs (Strike, Aegis, Blitz, Buster and Duel), plus, other MS designs were also released. For simplicity, let’s stick with the Gundam Strike, and I’ll choose the Strike RM kit as an example.

Gundam Strike RM Manual Cover

Based on what i mentioned previously, we have

a) Mobile Suit Gundam SEED, the name of the series.
b) GAT-X 105 Strike Gundam, the designation of the MS design
c) The design of the MS itself.

So, if any which one of those information is copied, it’s an infringement of Bandai’s copyright and trademark. Now, I keep repeating that on purpose, because a lot of people still can’t wrap their heads around those two terminologies. Copyright and Trademark, though related, aren’t really mutually exclusive. Copyright applies to any written, drawn, recorded form of ideas, either in analog or digital. The Anime Series Mobile Suit Gundam is a copyright of Sotsu • Sunrise. Trademark applies to any visual, audio, formula, design, schematics that a company applies for exclusive use, or for licensing to third parties*.

So, any kit you see that has one or all of the information above, but, does not carry the Bandai branding, is a bootleg. A bootleg is not a brand, that’s why it’s called a bootleg, which is in other terms, a fake. It’s straightforward in Bandai’s case.

But, bootleggers are becoming creative, and when I say creative, they are being devious, exploiting loopholes that make it seem they’ll get away with infringement. It’s worthwhile to repeat that this is the reason why most bootlegs now have fighter instead of Gundam on the plagiarized boxes. Dragon Momoko in turn started designing their own packaging design and boxes, thinking that it lessened if not eliminated the infringement that they have committed. DM’s biggest mistake was claiming copyright over the designs by slapping the © mark on their boxes. Compound that with their penchant for pre-empting Bandai releases, Bandai came down hard on them, harder, compared to what happened to TTH, with the Bandai vs DM court case publicized over social media. It was clear that DM didn’t understand Intellectual Property, or, if they did, they just didn’t care, much like most of those who brandish the fact that they buy bootlegs, and criminalize the evil, monopolistic Bandai empire who never listens to them (just in case some idiot tries to misquote me, I am being sarcastic).

*Third Party

This terminology is the most confusing yet, confounding a lot of people who keep using the term to connote any bootleg kit. In Gunpla manufacturing (or any kind of manufacturing for that matter), Third Party is a legalese term.

Bandai produces plastic kits (Second Party) to sell to consumers (First Party). As such, they require machinery, equipment and materials. They source out suppliers for computers, machines, and plastic beads, and often, they will have more than one supplier at any given time for any given requirement. Those suppliers are Third Party. They are not in any way directly connected to Bandai, but, they have a business-to-business arrangement. Now, as any evolving company would do, they need consistent stock of supplies, so at one point or another, Bandai probably would either buy that company who supplies certain materials to them, they have more control over inventory, or, create a new company, eliminating the need for a third party. Bandai, as we know, fabricate most everything in-house, even the printing and packaging, so the scenario isn’t really far off.

In terms of actual kits being produced, Bandai does not have any third-party affiliates**. A lot of people have been speculating that DM was a Bandai third-party affiliate, because of how close the detail was with Bandai. Master Katsumi Kawaguchi has categorically denied it outright, after an idiot posted a bootleg on his [Kawaguchi’s] wall. Kawaguchi continued to say that Bandai will never resort to giving licensing to third parties when it comes to their kit line, mainly because Bandai has strict quality control.

These same people even rant over DM’s later releases, with add-on details that weren’t on the Bandai kits, as well, as releasing kits Bandai has yet to develop, giving them more ammo to shoot at Bandai’s nefarious schemes, including the much-despised P-Bandai line which a lot of people have developed allergies from.

Add-on parts have been mentioned as 3rd party. Yes, and no. The proper terminology for add-on parts are after-market parts, much like how one buys after-market parts for a car. This is very much a gray area, but, if you’re vying to compete in official Bandai competitions, this is now very much an issue when it comes to your entry. That is why Bandai has been releasing their own after-market add-on parts as well. The same applies especially when you do kit bash.

Now, that doesn’t really mean **Bandai has not had any other companies produce kits for them. If the information is accurate (citation required), Volks, and another company I can’t remember (maybe CVphased), were said to have been licensed to produce C3 event limited 1/144 Messala garage resin kit and a couple of others. But, since these are resin kits, mentioning it is beside the point. 

Resin kits are not Gunpla

Bandai also has production units outside Japan, but for certain specific parts, like the frames for the Metal Build, GFF-MC and HiRM lines are produced in China as well as some of the LED components.

Also, a lot of newbies do not know the difference between Bandai and bootlegs. Whereas it would probably be a little more challenging when built, asking if a kit is Bandai or bootleg, while looking at the box, is a little bit ignorant. If only people start using their common sense, and Google, they’ll know how to distinguish a kit based on its box with these.

If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...

Of course, there are bootlegs now that don’t even have box art, just huge Kanji/Chinese characters or symbols on plain white/black boxes, just so they can avoid, uh, detection by the IP police.

Update: Bootleggers are now using nondescript boxes to package bootlegs, to deter further scrutiny and make it difficult to spot.

Can you guess what's in the box?

In closing, I don’t give a rat’s ass if you buy bootlegs, it’s your money to waste. Heck, if you buy bootlegs because you’re poor, maybe you should rethink your life decisions and live within your means. Prioritize your necessities instead of entitling yourself to a hobby you can’t possibly maintain, because you are poor.

Regardless, do educate yourself, especially when it comes to Intellectual Property, Copyright and Trademark laws, so you can make informed opinions and better yet, informed decisions. You can keep using the term 3rd party to soften your guilt about buying bootlegs, but, hey, , especially when it comes to Intellectual Property, Copyright and Trademark laws, so you can make informed opinions and better yet, informed decisions. You can keep using the term 3rd party to soften your guilt about buying bootlegs, but, hey, bootlegs are not 3rd party, they’re not even brands, that’s why they’re called bootlegs. Just in case you think this article is curtailing your right to choose the Gunpla brand you want to purchase, or, that it’s good that Bandai has competition in this brand war, well, you only need remember one thing: there is no Gunpla brand war, because there’s only one Gunpla brand. All the rest are bootlegs. If you choose to promote and defend bootlegs, you are well within your right, but, you are defending something illegal and criminal. Also, do not expect people to respect your decision to support a wrong thing. There is nothing respectable about bootlegs, both the production and purchase of it.

See the irony there?

Addendum: Not to be outdone and out-shined in defending its IP, Kotobukiya just had its wannabe lookalike “competitor” Petty Armor shut down, in record time. Hasbro has also started going after bootlegs of its IP.

Move it, Bandai! Kotobukiya is hot on your heels.