I also reckon that's way over the line. But this is what inspired it:
You come to the Tokai forum for advice. It's given, and then you start suggesting that Tokai were dishonourable fakers (and not worth the money, but that's another story). And, by implication, that our ownership is in some way quasi-legal and dishonourable. That's where the reaction is coming from.
Bear in mind that copyright laws are *not* universal. There are a lot of people who feel that the way they work in Japan is a lot better than the way they work in most "Western" countries - in which the claims to stimulate innovation have precious little evidence behind them (and Japan is known as a country with a ferocious history of innovation).
Tokai did not try to pass off their products as anybody else's.
They did not violate the laws of their country.
They made products that the original manufacturers - at the time - chose not to continue with ('50s and '60s style, high quality Gibsons and Fenders) and were unavailable, despite massive global demand.
Only after Gibson and Fender realised that Asian companies were meeting this demand, did they choose to replicate their original designs rather than continue to use their monopoly on those products to force people to buy more cheaply made versions of their own originals. That was the effect that Western copyright was having. Lower cost versions of those instruments, ignoring customer demand.
So you'll find few here who agree that Tokai was dishonourable, and a great many, like the response above, who are actively angered by the suggestion.
One final note. Tokai got their "comeuppance" for copying Fenders. That would be when Fender contracted them to make most of their Japanese line during the nineties. That was their "payback" for their "dishonourable" ways.