Designer: Not allowed to say  

Good points, Whitespike
I have gone on record here a bunch of times about the tissue thin claims of 'ownership' regarding classic designs. As I've said then, and I'll bore you by repeating now, many of those who claim ownership of a design have done nothing more that copyright the name. That, in my book, is total bull-crap. Anything being made now is a reproduction unless it's made exactly the same as it was when first issued. Beyond that it's all about buying quality. Anyone who buys a cheap, crappy 'knockoff' gets what they paid for anyways, while the more prudent person who buys a well made piece, no matter from whom, gets to enjoy their furniture for life. I am not in favor of disposable anything especially large scale items that are suppossed to last for generations.
However, you make a very good point. Why not buy what you can afford? Why this obsession with vintage? Or copies of vintage? Why not buy a truly modern piece? Something currently being manufactured by the orignal designer or company. Room that are filled in a weekend with stuff bought all at once as cheaply as possible have no soul. They look like the crap they are filled with.
Far batter to take your time, save up your cash and buy a good piece. And it can be a good piece without being a vintage piece. Worthy furniture design did not stop in 1959!
I say buy current modern, buy the best you can afford and the heck with designer labels.

That being said...
I don't want to be labeled a hypocrite. Yes, I do have three pieces that are called classics. A Nelson bench, a Womb chair and two Wasily chairs. The bench and the Womb chair were acquired through an architect friend for what I'd consider to be a reasonable price for an item of their respective qualities. I like the designs and I paid what I thought was reasonable for them. The Wasily's I have are knockoffs from DWR, they offered these when the company first started and before they became Knoll reps. You know, back when Design really was Within Reach! They are well-built and follow the original design quite faithfully. And they were a reasonable price.
Beyond one's taste and style, quality and price is really the only criteria that I think are valid in selecting pieces. Sure if a 'classic' came my way for a price that I could afford and I liked and needed the piece I'd buy it. But no way am I going to pay the insane retail prices that the big design houses charge. The 'trade only' prices are so much lower it's shocking. And you gotta know that there's stil a good margin for the design houses even at the trade price.

I meant to include the link...
I meant to include the link the quotes were from (below). I think the link was too long for the link box...
http://cgi.ebay.com/Modern-Elliptical-table-Arne-Jacobsen-mid-centery_W0...

The "Arne Jacobsen" eliptical table (sic)
...(who's kidding who), it really Eames, is one of those designs that probably can be successfully knockoffed without any reduction in quality.
I know that the Eames had a thing for the Japanese concept of low LOW tables, but at 10 1/2" high, this table is really too low to be a proper coffee table, anyhow.

I agree. The debate tends to...
I agree. The debate tends to focus more on the financial benefits and the legal aspects, and less on the ethical considerations, or the opportunity cost, of buying knock offs.
My advise is always to buy second hand, or if that fails, new originals from trusted manufacturers and dealers.
The latter helps pay for research and development (we want new and better stuff, right?) and decent wages. It is also a way to support up and coming designers.
In a way, I think IKEA is to blame for making people very much unaware of the true cost of manufacturing sustainable products born out of a creative process, rather than disposable products resulting from target costing, purchasing power, and supply chain development.

agreed. i don't own one....
agreed. i don't own one. they weren't successful at everything, like anyone else.

my preference is to buy...
my preference is to buy vintage or used. several pieces i have are not vintage, but are used. i have only bought a couple of items new, and frankly i don't like it as well.... there's something about wear that i like. ultimately, buying second hand is the greenest way ... if you care about that sort of thing.
if you keep your eyes open there are usually good deals to be had. plus, you sometimes end up with something slightly different than planned. this helps create an "acquired and collected" look rather than a homogeneously over-planned look. you'll find interesting pairings of objects that you wouldn't have sought after otherwise.

Lets not
lets not leave the end user entirely out of the equation. Most of us are here have some understanding of engineering, manufacturing, and fabrication processes -its sort of what makes us design geeks.
However, the end user (as is much of the general population) is far removed from any idea of craft or quality of materials. So - to most people - if it LOOKS the same, it must BE the same. Which is why knock-offs exist in the first place. There are some blurring of the lines around quality, but the low quality crap enourmously outweighs the higher quality crap.
While IKEA is partly at faul (as are Target/Walmart etc) I would tend to blame clothing stores and shoe manufacturers as well. Its in these places, literally close to our skin, that people are introduced to the idea that branding - that the name/appearance of a piece - can outweigh it's inherent value/quality/construction. You don't need to be a tailor to know when your designer sweater is falling apart.
So, when your audience is ignorant of what quality is, and relying only on their own visual comparison, and predisposed to a high priced item not necessarily equating to quality, you've got the perfect knock-off buyer.
How many times have you heard someone say "I ONLY paid ### and you'd never know the difference?"

Screw the end-user. We're...
Screw the end-user. We're smarter than everyone. They should just stop breeding inferior people with inferior taste.
Just kidding.
What really surprises me, though, is that I have met several designers that still don't know the difference. It seems like they should have learned some design history or something.
After I sold my Bertoias weeks ago, a friend told me about this "great furniture store with Eames chair copies, you wouldn't know the difference blah blah" and how I should get them instead because they're such a great deal. I hate to sound like a snob, but I just can't do it. And I am surprised that she could. What if someone took one of her ad campaign ideas, cheapened financially and aesthetically, and sold it to her potential client?

Even if you choose to carefully buy second-hand, you can still be deceived
I bid on and won a pair of yellow Bertoia side wire chair on eBay, and even though they're very sturdy and well made, I cannot guarantee that they're real Knoll chairs. Similarly, I bid on and won a Ray Eames Time Life Stool, and even though it looks correct and authentic, how can I be sure? Neither of these have any markings on them.
So even when you try to keep to the real ones, you can often not be totally sure.
Thus far, the only 'for sure' knockoffs I have bought knowing full well that they ain't real are 4 Nelson clocks which I bought off All World and my "Nelson" platform bench which I use as my coffee table. I know that these are knockoffs because the clocks and the bench came in 'made in China' boxes! Besides, in the case of the Platform Bench, I wanted a ebonized one and HM doesn't offer it that way anymore.
I wouldn't trust the bench as a platform for heavy Nelson casegoods, but as a coffee table, it works,.,

Knockoffs are sweet awesome...
I furnished my entire house with Chinese knockoffs for $3.74. I feel good.