Like many consequences of life's decisions, I doubt this one ever gets much thought. The sheer number of threads debating the "gray area" of cloning/ethics should attest to how ill-defined this topic is in the collective consciousness. But ignorance is no excuse. When you buy a clone, you steal from yourself. Here's why. You vote with your money, and when you cast a "vote" for a knock-off, someone else loses a vote. Namely, the original designer who did the creative work. Eventually, the cloner wins and the original thinker loses. What is the long-term outcome? Sameness, uniformity, conformity, status quo. By "voting" in favor of cloning behavior, you're helping to put an end to new designs. Cloners don't design new things. They copy what is already popular. If the only people producing pedals were cloners, there would be no new designs, ever. Every "new" pedal would be the same as the "old" pedal, the only thing to change would be the marketing. Perhaps this is okay with you. Perhaps this is what you want? Not me. I enjoy variety, I find it a necessity. Every time you buy a clone, you diminish the number of choices you can make in the future. Do you want to sacrifice your ability to choose? So the next time you "vote" with your money, how about thinking first, and deciding if you want "more of the same" or a little of the spice of life? Thanks for listening, Alex (EarthTonesAudio) *** Some clarifications: 1. By "clone" I mean a copy of something that is in current production. Clearly if the original is out-of-production, there is no conflict between re-maker and originator, only a conflict of ebay/secondhand markets. 2. Let's state, for the record, in all seriousness, that all pedals are luxury goods, not a fundamental need of life like food or shelter. Therefore, no pedal is "cheap" and no pedal is "expensive." Any price is justifiable because no one needs a pedal to survive. This nulls and voids any and all justifications for cloning based on price.