"As someone (one of the few on this list, from what I can tell) who has been on all three sides of the reader/magazine staff/manufacturer- advertiser fence I could easily share some stories and a few facts on this topic. And I was fully prepared to until someone -- at the end of diatribe about ethics and honesty in reviews -- actually had the gall to suggest that someone should make cast resin copies of the car sides in question and sell them."
I wrote the post you're referring to. I meant in tongue in cheek. But for arguments sake let's suppose I didn't.
Why should I have to pay for the part of the model that I can't use?
How about I offer resin sides using the car sides as a master to anyone who wants to kitbash a model of it and send Trix a royalty payment for the part of their kit I'm using. Say $5.00 for each pair of car sides I make and sell.
If the maker is unethical enough to not to provide what he was advertising, a model of car X, then why should he profit from anything more than the part of it which he did actually provide?
How is receiving full payment for something you didn't deliver in any way ethical? Why shouldn't you be paid only for what you actually did deliver?
