Copycat?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/17/arts/design/17frieze.html?ref=arts

So I was reading this article in the New York Times today and along with the review of this art fair there was a particular bit on this one artist who is re-creating mini versions of Jeff Koons' balloon dogs. I believe the direct quote is, "I’m making a copy of a copy”. Now that is funny to me, I think that it is in interesting idea and I am totally on board. Koons' balloon dogs were hands down my favorite pieces in his Chicago exhibition last year and further I saw a photograph of one of his balloon dogs being shown in Versailles which was one of my favorite images of contemporary art. People get so mad sometimes that Koons' pieces can be reproduced, that the same pieces can be showing in exhibitions across the country or world at the same time. I think its interesting- he really puts it in our face to consider why we crave the special nature of an original when we live our lives surrounded by reproductions, embracing reproductions. I find that the reason Koons' work is so strong is because his pieces are impeccably made- I spent many a day trying to find a flaw on his balloon dog and let me tell you I came up with nothing. Now I know that he has a whole team of studio assistants and lets be honest he probably has little to do with production but I like to think that he is the one who demands , the stunning perfection of his pieces are absolutely part of his work. Therefore I was all excited that this artist in this NY Times article was throwing all of this back in his face, in our face as consumers, etc., even talking about how these mini versions of other famous works are a popular item to buy- just like our obsession with souvenir ships. All of this was incredibly funny to me until I saw the image of these balloon dog reproductions!
http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2009/10/16/arts/20091017-frieze-slideshow_7.html

Ok so those are the molds and then they are dipped to make the final piece but those aren't perfect, those don't have the same sensibility of Koons' work- if you are making "a copy of a copy" you have to really copy it otherwise it completely falls short. The way that we look at copying is so widespread these days with plagiarism in academia, the music industry download situation, bootleg movies, etc. This article makes me want to look closer at what it means to copy because this artists work is so not copying but it is claiming to be. What does it really mean 'to copy'?