Name: 下手前先停看聽！你應該買名牌仿冒品嗎？ (Should You Buy Fake Designer Products?)
Uploaded: 2018-09-10T21:01:10.000Z
Duration: 6 min 7 s

Designer labels can be alluring as heck, but they're also expensive as heck.

設計師品牌可說是超級吸引人，但它們也貴得嚇人。

The price of a designer handbag can reach far into the thousands of dollars, which for most people, is out of the question.

一個設計師設計的手拿包最貴可以達到幾千美金，多數人是買不下手的。

Unless you have, you know, like a fetish for credit card debt.

除非你有，你知道的，就像是信用卡卡神一樣。

Those who can't resist the call, will sometimes turn to counterfeit designer goods as a solution.

那些不能拒絕這些慾望的人，結果導致有些人會選擇去買設計師的贗品。

Maybe the stitching's not straight, maybe the logo's a little off, but from far away who can tell the difference?

有可能接縫處沒縫直，有可能 logo 掉一點，但遠遠看誰能分辨出差異？

Recently, during one of my descents into the dark depths of the internet.

最近，在我的網路的厭世同溫層裡。

I noticed a lot of people discussing this issue with like a lot of passion.

我注意到有好多人在討論這個話題。

I decided to dive deeper, not only into the ethics of purchasing counterfeit goods, but also the trend of copying and stealing designs across the fashion industry.

我決定要深入了解些，不只是買這些贗品的道德感，也有這些時尚產業的抄襲、瞟竊設計的趨勢。

I think designer stuff, designer apparel, is great.

我覺得設計師的產品、服飾很好。

I think that knock off ones are sometimes dope, too.

I mean, people buy them and it's just another source of making money.

我的意思是，人們買他們且這也只是賺錢的一種方式。

I mean, at the end of the day, I guess copying someone else's work is an immoral thing.

我是說，一天從頭到晚，我想抄襲其他人的作品是件沒道德的事。

As a consumer, I don't really care as much.

身為消費者，我真的沒管太多。

You don't know where you're getting them from, like, you don't know who's making them, you don't know if the people who are making them are getting paid enough.

你不曉得你從哪買到他們的，就像，你也不知道是誰製作的，你也不知道那些製作的人有沒有拿到應得的酬勞。

It like does make these high end brands accessible to people who wouldn't be able to afford a $4,000 handbag.

這種行為就像讓無法負擔高端品牌的人能更簡單到手一個 4000 美金的手提包。

From a consumer standpoint, it doesn't matter to me whether you have a fake designer good or not, but I think ethically, it's probably wrong.

從消費者的角度來看，對我來說我不在乎你是否有個設計師的仿冒品，但我覺得，以道德感來說，這應該是錯的。

Growing up in Memphis, there was a place called Third Street and they would sell like fake Jordans, fake designer bags, like fake everything.

我在 Memphis 長大，那裡有一條叫做第三街 他們會賣假的喬登鞋、假的設計師包款跟所有仿冒的商品。

They would always get roasted at school, so where I'm from, that's frowned upon.

它們在學校會被嘲笑，所以我對我來自的地方常不甚喜歡。

Like, I feel like that's my biggest thing with it.

You can still be a bad bitch, I support it.

你也能當個性感的壞女人，我說得算。

Okay, so it seems people have a variety of opinions.

好，這似乎每個人都有不同想法。

The most common argument against that I've seen is that counterfeits are stealing.

我看過最普遍的爭論是，贗品到底是不是瞟竊。

Some argue that fashion is art, and copying designs is theft.

有人爭論說時尚是門藝術，且抄襲是偷竊。

Those in favor argue that the markets aren't the same.

Whoever is buying counterfeit goods knowingly would never buy the high end version.

有人內行的買贗品，他就永遠不會買正牌。

So they're not necessarily stealing any potential business.

所以他們並不需要偷走其他潛在的商業計畫。

所以我很好奇，好吧，我們來查清楚吧！

Turns out, counterfeiting goods is often intertwined with other, more illicit, crimes.

結果是，仿冒品常常跟其他不法的罪犯纏在一塊。

According to a fact sheet published by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, the business of counterfeit goods has been linked to illicit drugs, corruption, and money laundering.

根據聯合國藥物及犯罪中心資料發行表單上發布的了一項事實，贗品市場早已跟販毒、貪污跟洗錢被歸類在犯法行為中。

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development estimated that imported fake goods around the world were worth $461 billion in 2013.

經濟發產組織預估全球進口仿製品的價值，在 2013 年是 461 百萬美元。

Though footwear is the most copied type of item, medicine, automotive parts, and electronics are also counterfeited.

雖然鞋子是最常被仿的款式，藥、汽車跟電子器材也常被仿冒。

And what's more, the money used to purchase these goods can support like criminal activity.

還有，那些買商品的錢可以用來響應一些犯罪活動。

In his TED Talk, counterfeit investigator Alastair Gray says there is even a significant link between the purchasing of counterfeit goods and terrorism.

在 TED 論壇中，仿冒品調查家  Alastair Gray說，在買仿冒品跟恐怖主義之間甚至還有個重大個關聯。

Fake products are sometimes more profitable to sell than drugs with a potentially smaller risk of penalties.

因為有時候仿冒品比藥的利潤更大，且被判刑責的機率小許多。

Who knew buying a fake Gucci could be so intense?

誰曉得買個假的 Gucci 包包會搞得那麼緊張？

Okay, so don't buy fake designer goods from criminals.

好，所以不要從罪犯手裡買仿冒商品。

But what about when big name, fast fashion retailers copy designs?

但如果是大品牌、快時尚零銷商抄襲設計呢？

Forever 21 has faced numerous lawsuits from big names like Gucci, Diane von Furstenberg, Puma, Anna Sui, Adidas, et cetera, for selling nearly similar designs.

Forever 21 就因為賣相似的商品，面臨很多大品牌，像是 Gucii、Diane von Furstenberg、Puma、Anna Sui、Adidas 等等的訴訟。

Why would they even need to file lawsuits you ask?

你又問為什麼他們還需要去打官司？

Business Insider provides an explanation, stating that by nature, fashion items serve a purpose which means they are exempt from copyright laws.

Business Insider 提供一個解釋，他們認為自然而然地，時髦的物件配有免除著作權法律的傾向。

The article goes on to include a quote from Dwayne Morris Law Firm partner, Chris John Campbell who says, "to be protectable by copyright, an item cannot be functional... The argument has always been that fashion is not protectable."

文章中包含一個法律事務所合夥人 Chris John Campbell 的論述，他說：「想被著作權保護，這一個商品是不能有用途的⋯⋯這個爭議一直以來就是在於時尚是不被著作權保障的。」

You, probably like me, had never heard this before.

你，或許跟我一樣，從沒聽過這說法。

Because something that is utilitarian and functional cannot be copyrighted, it makes sense why different types of clothing are typically not considered to need copyright protection.

就因為某個事物是功利主義又有用途的便不能以著作權保護，這也合理說明為何每個不同風格的衣服都被認為不需要著作權的保障。

After all, the basic purpose of clothing is to prevent people from being naked, to keep us warm, et cetera.

畢竟，服飾最基本的意義是讓人們免於裸露，並讓我們取暖等用途。

However, when part of a design is independent of its function, for example, a decorative belt buckle, it can theoretical be protected by copyright.

但是，當某部分的設計獨立於他的功能，舉例來說，一個裝飾的腰帶，理論上應該可以被著作權保障。

And while it's difficult for normal folks to have much of a stake when one giant company is fighting another giant company over stripes on a jacket, these thefts have set a dangerous precedent.

且對一般人來講，在面臨跟大企業因夾克上的條紋打官司時根本沒有這麼多資產跟著耗，這些竊盜犯都是有前科的。

Smaller artists and retailers have been the victim of similar thefts.

小型設計師和零售商就是這些相似竊盜下的受害者。

And they don't always have the resources to fight these companies effectively.

且他們並不是永遠有資源去有效率地和大公司打仗。

Most people I spoke to thought it was okay to buy copied designs if they were copied from a large company, but not from a smaller, less established artist or brand.

大部分跟我聊過的人都覺得，比起跟小型、不知名的設計師或品牌，若是跟大公司買仿冒品的話就沒什麼問題。

We don't look at fashion the same way we do say "ART".

我們沒有將時尚視為一種我們認為的「藝術」。

Wearing fashion is, for some people, an expression of oneself.

穿搭時尚對有些人來說，是種表現自我的方式。

So, to me, it seems like designers are really selling art.

所以對我來講，設計師真的很像在銷售藝術。

A fast fashion house that makes a cheap version of a designer jacket is not likely to have that kind of arrangement.

快時尚將一個設計師做的夾克變得廉價並不一定要有這種套路。

No matter what stance you're taking on this issue, it's important to make decisions with your money and your life while backed by information.

不論你怎樣看這個議題，當擁有這些資訊後，怎樣花費你的錢和生活是很重要的。

I recommend researching what you're buying, who you're buying it from, and where your money will go.

我建議你搜尋一下你都買了些什麼，從誰手上買到，然後你的錢會去哪。

What you do does have an effect on the rest of the world and that effect can be positive or negative.

你的每個舉動都對這世界有影響，不論是正面或負面的影響。

I know you got a good one sitting up there in your skull all wrinkly and gray, like a saggy elephant.

我知道你有顆好使的腦袋，又皺又灰，就像隻鬆懈的大象。