/cgl/ - Cosplay & EGL

>>8161053
here we go again with the
>are you okay with replicas?
no
>how about like this?
no
>or like this? you okay with replicas now?
no.
>how about now?
NO!

>>8161075
OP here.
I am not okay with replicas either, and WOULD normally buy the original items, but i hate hate hate the designs.

And I'm not going to buy a brand dress just to cut it up and make it into something else.

So I guess I'm just SOL based on the fact that AP chose to make fugly dresses out of pretty fabric.

>>8161081
imo, using replica fabric for a dress is still a form of a replica. just dont anon.
ap didnt chose to make "fugly dresses" your opinion is yours, understand people like the cuts and they make theyre clothes for everyone. not just you and your taste. if you dont like the cut, thats just too bad. move on friend.

This is discussed every so often. I personally wanted some replica fabric to make curtains, but some kind anon showed me the consequences of that (the scale was just way too off to look good as curtains).

People who dislike replicas because they are art theft are still going to hate replica fabric. No one really has an "art theft" problem with dress construction replicas. The underlying problem with using replica fabric is that you are still paying money to someone who rips off a brand's designs and sells their designs for a profit. Buying replica fabric is just giving replica makers business.

If people have a problem with replicas because they hate the "imitation of brand" thing, or they get really upset because they feel that other people wearing/buying inferior or slightly off versions of a dress they worked really hard to get devalues the original dress, then they probably will be more cool with you using replica fabric to make a dress with a completely different style/cut.

Ultimately, other people will always have opinions, and trying to get people to validate your choices might mean that you personally don't think that it's a good idea.

>>8161053
Are you fat? Or just cheap? Of both?
Otherwise I find it hard to believe that your tastes are so elevated that nothing readymade from brand suits you.
You say you 'understand why' but replicating the fabric is why they are hated. The art theft, logo misuse. It wouldn't matter what you made with it.

I'm anti-replica to the point of my vagina having its own separate function dedicated to producing large amounts of sand when the topic comes up, but I see nothing wrong with making one for yourself as long as you don't support the replica companies by buying the fabric from them. Buy a replica dress (or two, depending how much fabric you need to make what you want) secondhand, that way your money isn't helping support art theft.

Seconding this >>8161100

Gonna add, a lot of the places that do replicas do shit construction, so either you buy the fabric and DIY it yourself, or else you'll end up with a worse dress, because they will fuck up the construction.

If you really wanted a replica that badly, just get it and wear it, don't flaunt it because you'll never get 100% acceptance.

>>8161132
this.

it'd be like downloading music.

replicas are bootlegs, and bootlegs are shitty as fuck because they hurt the company by paying others.

>>8161053
The fabric is the part that is the problem. It doesn't matter what you do with it, it matters that the fabric is illegal.

So, make the same cut in whatever non replica fabric, or make whatever cut in whatever non replica fabric, but don't use replica fabric

>>8161124
I don't think she's even saying that nothing from any burando fits her. Personally I'm comfortably within the range to fit pretty much every brand except VM, and I still hate the cut of those sack dresses.

Also, OP, just buy the skirts. That's what I did.

TBH I'm pretty against replicas but I don't see the problem with someone making a dress for themselves.

>>8161185
Neither do I as long as they don't use fabric with stolen designs and ripped off brand logos.

>>8161155
you seriously don't download music for free?
seriously?
you can honestly say that?

>>8161284
But what if they get the fabric from a replica they buy secondhand? It's not like they're giving any money to support the replica companies.

>>8161286
... where are you getting that from? They're using that example to say it's not as big of a deal as bootlegs, not saying anything against it.

>>8161287
Then they have a used replica that's still a replica? No1curr, many don't like replicas ever. That's just the way it is and it's not going to change. Replica fabric isn't going to magically become legit, no matter the source. She can buy and make whatever she wants. No one is saying otherwise. But she's asking what people think.

>>8161286
Different anon, but no, I don't. I pay $10/month for a spotify subscription.

>>8161319
> I pay $10/month for a spotify subscription.
I'm pretty sure spotify doesn't give any money to the artists kek.
You're basically paying someone to pirate it for you gj

>gonna get hate for this but
am I the only person here who doesn't care if other people buy replicas or not? Why is this even an issue? It's their money.

>>8161327
I'm pretty sure they disclose their pay structure on their website and pay royalties. You can read about their algorithm here: http://www.spotifyartists.com/spotify-explained/#royalties-in-detail

All of their music comes from the record labels directly, and can be pulled by those copyright holders on termination of their contracts

>>8161350
Imagine your friend is a really good artist. They sell prints of their artwork for $5 at craft shows. One day, another table pops up selling inferior prints of their artwork for $2.50.

Wouldn't you be upset on behalf of your friend?

It's the same idea. Lolita brands are extremely small companies. It's been estimated that some replica makers make larger runs with the artwork than some brands do, and with lower quality materials and fewer expenses, they may be making a higher profit off of the artwork. This, understandably, upsets the artists who are being ripped off, and their fans, of course, find it very distasteful that people support the people ripping off the work of their favorite artists.

>>8161327
is this bait or are you really that stupid

why the fuck do you give a shit about /cgl/ says OP? Do whatever makes you happy as long you can sleep with the fact you just destroyed an entire company by purchasing a knock off.

>>8161100
Agreed.

>>8161350
>not seeing how people profiting off of stolen work is an issue
Nigger, are you being for real?

>>8161383
I know this is gonna sound batshit, but after years of pro-replica people just not getting this or caring, I'm officially at the stage where I actively wish they would just die if one thorough explanation isn't enough to make them see.

>>8161383
>Lolita brands are extremely small companies.
KEK.

>>8161495

(nta) I don't really care about the attitudes of pro-replica people, I just come in and post an explanation in replica threads now and again for the benefit of newbies who might be lurking and reading. At least they should have the idea that replicas are a controversial topic and sometimes actively hated on.

Personally I think at least half the replica threads are started by bored people or trolls, it's one of the topics guaranteed to get replies and insults flying. Not like we haven't beaten this topic to death and beyond in last week's thread already.

I really hate the cuts of misty sky and cosmic too. Even the skirts look shit, so I totally understand OP.

I would say go for it.

I don't get the >but the brand suffers from art theft
shit. If this would be true AP would habe been closed a long time ago. There are so many SC and MP replicas out there, which is a shit ton of money AP could have made if they just would produce on demand.
>implying that scalpers don't hurt the business too

>>8161319
>http://time.com/3554468/why-taylor-swift-spotify/
>paying for spotify
Might as well just pirate the music yourself kek
You're basically paying for someone to pirate it for you :~)

>>8161488
That not our issue technically . Other anon is going by a "your money,you buy what you want " perspective.
I think theres not a win situation. People will get mad if I cut up a brand dress.
Are the people buying replicas affecting the big brands? People usually buy them because they arent real and want the look .Most people coming from the ready-made clothing society don't care about the artist and buy things based off price and if celebrities are seen in them( logo show-off-y this like uggs,NF,beats by dre ...).

>>8161736
>>8161286

Honestly this "argument" was bad to start with

>person pirates music, calls you scum for buying replicas
>person pirating music is scum for pirating music
>you're scum too for buying replicas
>you're both scum

Honestly just because the person pointing their finger at you is a bad person doesn't mean you're somehow an angel now. It just means you're both terrible people.

This is cgl by the way, so if you want to argue the ethics of downloading music /mu/ is the right board for it, not cgl.

>>8161750
Wait, hm. WHO will get mad at you if you cut up a brand dress as long as you do NOT whine later when it won't re-sell? And why wouldn't you just tell them to mind their business, it's your legit dress?
If you buy a replica or replica fabric, face up to it - there will be people who look down on you for it. There's no way to spin it so they won't. It's really that simple.

>>8161780
>WHO will get mad at you if you cut up a replica dress as long as you do NOT whine later when it won't re-sell? And why wouldn't you just tell them to mind their business, it's YOUR replica dress?
If you buy Brand or Brand fabric, face up to it - there will be people who look down on you for it. There's no way to spin it so they won't. It's really that simple.
That can go both ways. My family would think somethings wrong with me it I bought a 300+ Dress even if I was financially well off. I'm pretty sure I'm looked down upon on a daily basis by slightly judging strangers for much smaller things(pink hair streak,taking a bus,Horrible mind blindness).

All legality aside would you rather see a coord with a dress made from replica fabric, but sewn in a different cut or the same cut but in a publicly available fabric that's similar and they aren't claiming it's real AP et al.

>>8161780
But the whole looked down-on/stuck it up makes since. Considering people try to pass fakes as real.
>>8161724
I agree .Brands are the first the first to show up when people research for Lolita clothes so the effort to replica hunt means the buyer is actively unwilling to patronize the brands.

>>8161819
Yes but she was asking. I don't go around spouting my opinion un-asked but there will always be replica-haters who will dislike the rip-offs no matter how she tries to spin it.

I don't ask anyone if I can buy my brand or care if they don't like it that my dresses are $300+. Lots of my non-lolita stuff is just as expensive. If people are judging, they can judge privately, I'm not disrupting a hobby trying to gain acceptance of a fake piece. Just like you wouldn't expect people who buy LV to accept a knockoff owner if you were to join a designer handbag club with a fake bag. You'd be asked to leave the group.

>>8161830
But the legality can't just be conveniently 'set aside' when replica print fabric with the original design and the company logo is itself illegal. You aren't even making sense.

>>8161852
Okay then throw the legality back in if judging something on aesthetics alone is such an aneurysm-inducing concept.

>Go to meet
>Girl with replica Misty Sky fabric sewn into different cut
>Girl with dress in exact Misty Sky cut with generic blue sky fabric

Wat do. I'm not trying to prove any points here I'm just curious.

>>8161852 Look-alike. Misty sky fabric looks just like any other cloud pattern fabric. I can have a sky pattern printed on fabric and happened to have it designed like misty sky.

>>8161864
Ignore the replica-chan, as usual. Probably ask other girl about her dress.

>>8161871
A look-alike won't be a direct copy nor will it have the words 'angelic pretty' scattered across it like Misty Sky does. That isn't a print replica.

>>8161081
Choose different brand dresses. It's not that hard.
If these are your dream prints, buy them and alter them. It's not that hard.
Buy the skirts instead. It's just.not.that.hard.

>>8161843
I'm aware of that aspect of it . I speak as a lone lolita so I tend to forget about the comm.

>>8161874

I think that's the point anon is asking: How would you feel about a non replica that has a print which looks close to the original (but isn't a direct rip), using a design that looks suspiciously close to the original.

Pic related. BTSSB Alice Chess original on left, Infanta's version on right. The print is completely different but similar, even the lace is totally different. But the cut is the same.

>>8161884
I think that's ok. I might not like it much if the close copy was derivative of my favorite brand print but I wouldn't think of it the same as I would a replica, that it shouldn't be at all.

>>8161053
No.

The only circumstance I feel is ok, is if you own the dress, scan the print yourself, pay for the printing of fabric, make the item yourself, and for only personal use. No selling. No buying fabric from replica makers. No replicating the original designs. It has to be something completely different.

Currently making a quilt with my dream dress prints with an embroidered Baby logo in the middle in this method. It's not leaving my house, I'm scanning dresses I already own, and I'm never selling it. I will pull it apart and make other home furnishings before I would sell it.

>>8161518
>KEK.
Are you actually a retard or are you just ~trolling~?

>>8161736
>Music is art, and art is important and rare. Important, rare things are valuable. Valuable things should be paid for.
She still got all her singles up on youtube though. Kek.

>come into this thread expecting cool shit people have made with replica fabric and ideas
>instead get anti replica faggots being just as obnoxious as pro replica faggots
Losers.

>>8161852
I can assure you that, "legally" concerned, brands will not go after someone for making a dress replica that only they intend to wear and not sell for profit. Logo included. Stupid girl.

>>8161053
You don't understand why if you don't get that replicas OF prints are the most hated. The fact that the print was replicated is the issue. Design replicas tends to be more debated than print replicas.

All the circle jerking about how awful replicas are aside, what are some good places to buy replica fabric?

>>8162043

That doesn't make it any less illegal, though

>>8161750
Very very few people will care that you altered a brand dress. Most people who have a thing about altering do because it annihilates resale value, but if you're okay with the fact the dress would be worth half (if not less) than what you paid for it, go for it.

>Are the people buying replicas affecting the big brands?
Yes. A lot of people who buy replicas have the mentality of "I'm just gong to wait until a replica comes out" if they want a super popular AP print and replica companies will sometimes release the knock-off at the same time as a new release. This pretty much only applies to AP since the other brands aren't replicated nearly as much. Also, AP tends to attract a lot more newbies and immature underage kids since they're the most popular, which are the people most likely to buy replicas.

And honestly, even if they didn't have any negative effect on sales at all, that doesn't change the fact it's still art theft. The major brands have all spoken out against them and asked people not to support their prints being stolen. Still buying them, despite this, is pretty shitty.

>>8161766
Not trying to condone pirating, but it's very different from replicas because the people uploading the music aren't making money off of it.

>>8161830
>the same cut but in a publicly available fabric that's similar and they aren't claiming it's real AP et al.
This one, obviously. There's nothing wrong with doing that.

What to do if you like the print, but hate the cuts:

>find similar fabric or print similar fabric yourself via spoonflower
>and not just scan from the dress itself JFC
>take it to a seamstress
>now you have a dress you like without infringing copyright or paying some scum for infringing copyright

This solution might be a bit problematic if you want a particularly intricate print, but all you listed is plain, generic shit with moons, stars and clouds. Just find it in the kids section.

Hell, taobao brands already make tons of stuff like that and with custom options.

>>8161884
Wow, I never realized how different the designs were for this dress. I actually am probably going to get the Infanta version to hold me over until I have the original since it's not in the art theft category, but the shameless idea rip-off category.

>>8162038
Sorry to rain on your parade that no matter what you're making out of it, fabric out of a stolen print is still fabric out of a stolen print. Not sure why this is so hard to understand?

>>8162120
Quick question on this subject. Is there a reputable known online store like spoonflower that will print on chiffon?

>>8162120
Would it be okay to start a thread to share our home-made lolita prints ?
I'm sure some of us have talents and wouldn't mind sharing.

Also if they put that on spoonflower, they get some bucks back when people buy the fabric, right ?

>>8162070
Your mom's vagina

>>8162134
Seconding this

>>8162100
>Yes. A lot of people who buy replicas have the mentality of "I'm just gong to wait until a replica comes out"

Where do you got that? I've never seen a real and active lolita do that. The main customers a greasy, fatty, weeboo poorfags who will never buy a real brand sock anyway!
They buy replicas for their kawaii pocky tea parties and soon get tired to buy new replicas.

No serious lolita buys a replica and will not go after the real thing afterwards because the quality is so disappointing.

And please explain how the replicas hurt big brands? The only real victims are people like Teija Milla for example.
AP, BTSSB and IW are still selling their shit like burgers and don't lose a single cent on replicas.

>>8162150
Cont.
This thread is full of sandy vaginas who fear about their precious exclusive dress which they bought for 800$ from scalpers.

>>8162150
Different anon, but there's a few girls in my comm who have said they don't bother buying AP if it's something they expect a replica of. I agree that it doesn't really hurt the big brands, but there are people who do this.
>>8162157
Replicas don't really effect resale value. Also, it's only scalping if you're taking something that always sells for a certain amount and then charging up the ass for it. The dresses that cost $800 usually get to be that much because of auctions, so that becomes their set value. That's not scalping.

>>8162150
>The only real victims are people like Teija Milla
Who ?

Is she an indie creator ?

>>8162150
>>8162157


Not that anon but this did happen around 2010, 2011. At that time replicas were completely acceptable on egl and totally okay, but then a trend surfaced where it became common for newbies to say they would wait for the replicas rather than buy the original.

Why do you think replica of Sheep Garden and Little Bear's Cafe exists? Those fugly things didn't sell like burgers, DoL released them to compete directly with AP, while the originals were still in stock on AP's website.

The one that "hurt" the brand directly was DoL's Ashley embroidery jsk. It sold out on DoL's website. On IW's website the beige colourway went on sale.

>>8162137

We've had spoonflower threads before, I don't see why we can't have another one again. We even had two threads where anons were all trying to do nightmare parodies of Day Dream Carnival (although afaik all anons kinda abandoned their efforts afterwards).

I'd recommend you start a completely different thread though, because this one is simply too open to angry/troll posts. Make sure you post Derpy chan, which was a cgl group effort.

My concern with using spoonflower and doing knockoff prints is that it might still skate too close to the original to be comfortable. In photos it's hard to tell the details that your dress isn't a full on replica. Only thing I can think of is to make it a replica like Derpychan, so it becomes something of a commentary about the dress rather than a knockoff (or something). Would love to hear if others have ideas on how to make a "respectable knockoff" as opposed to a "trying not to be a replica" knockoff.

>>8162192
typo in last paragraph:
*make it a parody like Derpychan

>>8162043
No, they won't, but that's not what OP is asking. She's asking if her own speshul take on replicas can be magically ok with other Lolitas and the answer is (still) 'nope'.

>>8161843
But the difference is an LV club is a club about the brand. Lolita Comms aren't usually AP clubs. I've yet to hear of one anyway.

>>8162215
It still doesn't mean we like (or accept) fakes. Some online comms do ban them outright from being posted and some RL people will subtly or overtly shun/snub replica-chans. Many more silently just look down on them. Many more still just don't like the replicas. It's not as 'accepted' as you might think. It's just not usually bitched about openly. I have heard,
"Should we invite X?"
"Um, she bought that replica."
"Oh, hm."
No invitation.

>>8162177
I'm curious what people think of the replica-chans in your com, Anon?

>>8162130
>blegherehhh muh stolen farbrikzzz!!
That's not the point though?
People make pillows, curtains, sheets, pajamas, and other cool shit out of "knockoff" fabric all the time. It's fun, and ultimately if it's not taking money out of the brand's pockets it doesn't actually matter except in principle.

Are you an idiot? What's hard to understand about that?

>>8162272
Oh well if it's only our principles being compromised then, of course it's ok, right?
No. Supporting people who rip off the fabric means they have more money to rip off more fabric and make more replicas. I would not even buy an original dress from someone if they also make replicas. Tacky rip-off fabric ain't cool for anything.

>>8162227
You're making blanket statements without any proof.

>>8162227
I (and many other people I know) don't buy from indie brands where the owner wears replicas, or makes replicas.

>>8162280
Not that anon, but if you're involved in the lolita community, this isn't exactly a secret.

>>8162215
Angelic Poodle on LJ

>>8162301
I won't buy from an indie who makes replicas. Which indie owners wear them? I'll boycott them too.

>>8162277
>Everyone who makes a knockoff pillowcase is bound to make more!
Stupid logic made by a stupid person. Holy shit. Stop projecting your own greed onto other people. Some people want to create things for themselves and not necessarily leech money off of someone else's idea.
Creating a pillowcase or a set of pajamas is NOT the same as creating an exact replica dress to sell.

>>8162324
The stupid one here is you, anon. It doesn't matter what you make with the fabric, you are still contributing money to art theft by buying replica fabric and thus funding more of it. This is a pretty simple concept.

>>8162315
Just because some people are louder doesn't mean there are more of them. I still don't see any proof.

>>8162316
Then that's fine for them not to accept replica chans. In that community it makes sense.

>>8162227
My comm isn't quiet about its stance on replicas. Replica-chans either learn fast and change or they end up leaving. Some of us have discussed the possibility of banning them altogether with the maintainer and she doesn't seem too opposed to the idea. Hopefully something will come of it.

>>8162328
>buying replica fabric
From who? Fucking spoonflower? They're not the ones stealing the idea. You, yourself, is uploading the fabric sample to their website and selecting which fabric to print on. They are not complicit to theft or else they would have been terminated long ago, same thing with similar fabric printing websites.

Unless there is a specific fabric printer that produces specific knockoff fabrics from brands then your argument is bullshit. It's the individual whose responsibility it falls to keep creations as non-sellable projects, which is in fair use fyi.
I've never seen someone so wrong in my life.

>>8162334
Replica-chans are subtly excluded from some comms and some activities already. This doesn't surprise me. I'm for it. Beginners often have limited funds. Better to be honest about not accepting replicas than letting them waste money, then find out and cry about it.

>>8162345
Most people who buy replica fabric buy from OoJia.

>>8162334
We accept them into our local comm, but, they are considered ita no matter how well they coord the replica and when smaller / private events are planned, they for sure aren't the ones who get the invites.

>>8162345
Wow, you're so ridiculously ignorant on this subject. The people who buy replica fabric get it from Oo Jia, they don't get it from Spoon Flower. They couldn't if they wanted to, Spoon Flower won't print copyright protected fabric because then they'd be the ones breaking the law.

>I've never seen someone so wrong in my life.
I don't think I need to point out the irony here.

>>8162323
There have been a few accessory makers I've seen at cons over the years. I recognize their faces, but I can't remember their brands

>>8162352
>>8162362
>everyone buys from Oo Jia only
Lol, keep telling yourselves that. You know that's not true.

>>8162368
Not either of the people you're talking to, but they're so right and you're so wrong that it hurts.

>>8162371
You sure showed me, good one anon! Can't argue with your anecdotal evidence :^)

>>8162384
How about read SF's ToS yourself? Or better yet, try to have them print an AP print for you and see how that turns out.

And for the record, you misused the word "anecdotal".

>>8162365
That's a shame, I'd really like to know. I wonder how they'd feel if someone ripped off their designs?

>>8162368
She uses a higher quality printing process and has already bought the real garment, scanned and edited the artwork. So yes, some people, like BJD chan use spoonflower, but not many. It makes no sense to make a full-sized replica via spoon flower, when you would need to buy or borrow something from that series to scan for the artwork in the first place.

>>8162412
>implying you witnessing replica chans buying solely from Oo Jia means every person who uses replica fabric does so isn't an anecdotal statement
Tard.

>>8161877
I could see why a person wouldn't want to try and buy the official prints then alter them, though.

I've lurked around for a bit and it seems whenever someone does it they get a lot of shit from people because they chose to change their purchase to make it fit their needs.

It's one of the things that must make people consider replicas as an option.

>>8162144
There's a joke somewhere here about uterine lining not being appropriate fabric for the creation of all things.

>>8162573
The evidence is that Spoon Flower won't even print the fabric for you, nor would any of the other reputable custom fabric companies because it would be illegal and they're not going to risk their asses so you can be ~creative~ with a stolen design, so replica companies are the only ones who sell it. Far from anecdotal.

>>8162573
You come across as a very tacky and trashy human being

>>8162792
I've paid to have things altered. Honestly it's lower-tier lolita who complain about that and higher-tier lolita who are anti-replica on average.

I'm not gonna be mad when some mediocre lolita is whining because I altered something to look better on me. Bitch, please. It's my dress. If you wanted it you should have bought it when it came out. It's not my problem if other people don't buy things, yet think they have some right to them. Some girls are way too entitled.

tbh there is no difference to me if you're wearing a replica regardless of where you got it from.

if I see someone wearing a replica, it screams art theft. yes it might be more "ethical" to recycle replica dresses by purchasing them secondhand than from oojia/dol/etc directly, but you're still supporting art theft. any spiel about the story behind your dress will go in one ear and out the other.

buying replicas secondhand doesn't hurt brand? if someone purchased a replica and received money, they will probably be more inclined to buy the next FOTM replica dress with that money, which cycles back into oojia/etc rather than the brand itself.

there are plenty of alternatives to replicas. if you don't like the cut, buy two skirts and make a dress that way.

btw i alter almost all of my brand clothes and nobody gives me shit about it. the only people that do are the ones that do it horribly (think tifaret's ctp, i wish she'd shut the fuck up about how she went about altering it too)

Most of western society wouldn't agree with how these brands operate. Here its a "have it your way " life where companies go out there way to please consumers and quantity triumphs . Companies that don't please are boycotted,Example:A&F/size issue. That doesn't go too well when in Japan/asia society wear a store owner will tell you to don't even bother if they see your way too big and it is socially accepted. The brands already seem uninviting/likeable already from a western view. Most people getting into these clothes have no clue how value even works, just "I like that there pretty".

>>8163276
Who really boycotted A&F though?

>>8162272
>knockoff =/= exact copy

JFC when will people finally learn the difference

didn't we once had a whole thread on prints that had art theft in them?
Like copied shoes in one of meta's prints etc.

if you're using one of those prints then go do whatever you want since idgaf about artists who steal themselves.

I would really like to get my hands on the fabric from AP's Cosmic series to replicate Saturn's dress...