"A lot of people here seem to think that these designs should be "accessible".  While I agree with this in principle, the replica market does not pay for any of the R&D, marketing or support to the designer that these original companies did.  If these costs were factored in to the "replica" market, you would have a different pricing proposition.  The knock offs are selling a reproduction of a design they already know will sell with virtually no risk.  If this continues, firstly there is no incentive for companies to differentiate themselves by actually investing in design, and secondly there is a much larger issue that these companies devalue the designer furniture industry - ie. if a consumer is used to paying $200 for a designer stool for the 60s, why on earth would they pay $400 for a stool by a modern designer (who is already making no margin on that figure as they don't have the numbers for mass production.If you asked most people for $10 for a burnt copy of a Michael Jackson CD, they would more than likely say no as it is a pirated copy - even though the quality of the music on that CD is great.  The same goes for replica furniture, even if the quality is great, the one part of the entire cost equation of that piece of furniture that the consumer is NOT paying for the the DESIGN - which ironically is probably their main motivation to want to purchase the piece of furniture in the first place!"