Cato

I'm guessing that an ironic thread was in danger of losing its irony.

I can see why i remembered that Maruscyck. Stunning finish.

If memory serves @mcnach has or had a couple of precision type basses that were fitted with Jazz pickups.

Obviously her Madge feels the same way. Every year that the standard ex Prime Ministerial honours are withheld from Blair is like a personal slap in the face from the Queen. Long may it continue.

Reading about his career it seems fair enough. Just about every big name in UK hip hop credits Wiley with either giving them their big break or helping them out early in their careers. He seems very highly respected within that community and no less deserving than anyone else who's been key in the development of. given music genre.

The honours list can tell you quite a lot, especially when you look at those people who haven't got one. When a long serving Prime Minister such as Tony Blair is repeatedly snubbed for a basic knighthood, let alone the more esoteric awards such as the 'Order of the Garter' which ex PMs normally get as a matter of routine (even John Major is a member) it tells you that he his very much on HM's naughty list.

The conventional wisdom is to use flats, as much because they do less damage to a fretless board than rounds. That being said a lot of really famous fretless work from the likes of Jaco and Pino was all done with rounds.

That's for FMIC to decide. You can't bring an IP case to court on someone else's behalf.

Exactly. I can't believe that anyone genuinely believes that Fender does not know about people rebadging instruments as 'Fenders' or adding logos to replicas. There an absolutely shedload of online sellers offering fake Fender water slide decals for a start, that would be a logical place to start any legal crackdown. For whatever reason they are choosing not to take action, either against individuals or companies. The idea that joe public should have to stand up for them to stop them being taken advantage of is, quite frankly, bizarre.

I seem to recall that there was another level of weirdness to that one, along the lines of because the owner had acquired the bass in a private sale rather than though an approved dealer, John Hall was so e how implying that he may not be the legitimate owner of the bass, or something along those lines.

She stormed off during the 'should I use compression in conjunction with my Bare Faced cabs?' unpleasantness a few years back. We've not heard from her since.

Gobsmacked. I wept tears of empathetic joy when I read that thread about you being reuinted with your long lost love. I mean obviously any Jazz bass is superior to any Precision of any era... But even so.

How am I supposed to look at my fretting hand and a music stand at the same time?

You've not sold the white 70s P you were so over the moon at getting back a couple of years ago?

I think they stopped selling them in the UK around 2014/15? Nice to know it might still be possible to get a new one.

I believe the problem with John Hall and Ric was that the BC site owners simply couldn't afford to go to court for the test case which would have decided exactly what the legal responsibilities of a third party marketplace are in regards to selling copies/replicas/modded instruments. Which John Hall knew when he decided to issue his threats against a relatively tiny website rather than one of the really big online marketplaces. As far as I know, no such test case has so far been undertaken in the UK, so the responsibilities of the market place in those scenarios is still legally undefined.

I a shop selling Smokey Bacon popcorn the other day. That's just wrong, isn't it?

I'm inclined to go with the ex copper when he's talking about the law.

I'd say that was for Fender to decide. If someone puts a genuine a genuine Fender Jazz neck on a genuine Fender Precision body should they then have to remove all the Fender branding because the resulting instrument wasn't assembled in the Fender factory?

None of those are being advertised as Fender made instruments. In the case of the fretless with the block inlays and the fenderbird they are designs which Fender has never had in production in the first place. There is clearly no intention to deceive in any of those adverts, they are all completely transparent about the origins of the instrument concerned.

Always happy to educate the masses on the technicalities of tinned food. It makes me think that my summer of pallet truck racing, conveyor belt surfing and clean up hose fights in the factory wasn't entirely wasted.

I used to have a summer job in a cannery. Amongst other delights we made beans for one majorish brand (either HP or Daddy's, my memory fails me) as well for three supermarkets and a couple of budget lines. The recipe and cooking instructions did actually vary slightly for each different line, though, as far as i could tell, not being a bean connoisseur, the same type and grade of beans were used in all products.

Has anyone warned our brethren on Table Chat about these issues? After all there is a huge market for reproduction and replica antique furniture, which could be potentially passed off as the genuine article by an unscrupulous seller to an unwitting buyer. Perhaps all furniture sales should be suspended whilst the issues are considered?

I've withdrawn the post because it's a bit of a legal minefield, but the long and the short of it is that it comes down to intention. If the seller is intending to deceive the purchaser then there is definitely a criminal offence, otherwise it's not quite so clear cut, especially not pertaining to one off private sales between individuals where neither party raises a grievance. I would bet money that Fender are fully aware of the activities of Limelight and other similar companies and that conversations have taken place between them, possibly involving lawyers. Until those conversations are made public, the rest of us will have no idea what kind of agreement was reached.

In some cases, quite a big number.