prowla

As has been noted and repeated - the rules are already in place. People who are posting the fakes/counterfeits are breaking the site rules (which they signed up and agreed to on joining).

So I guess it had a fake TRC.

I think it's so rife with Fender-alikes that they have to choose their battles. The likelihood of them pursuing a BC-er through the courts for selling counterfeit items is probably quite low.

I do recall commenting on one this week where someone was trying to sell a Chickenbacker for more than its new price - was that it? There was another thread recently on FB where someone bought a Rickenbacker bass from a mate; sadly we had to inform him that it wasn't a genuine Rickenbacker. Given the choice, I'd rather help make sure some schmuck doesn't pay over the odds for a fake, as opposed to supporting or turning a blind-eye to someone selling illegal goods.

And that is an opinion to which you are entitled. However, it is still illegal.

Well, whether it's worthy of debate is plainly evidenced by the fact that we're on page 22 and you're participating! The fact is that selling a Limelight with a Fender logo on it is illegal; the laws have been quoted and linked and an ex-policeman has initially argued against, but then come back and posted that yes it is illegal. Whether someone has been intentionally duped is not entirely the question, but it is an illustration that illegal items are being sold; a few other similar items were also listed, showing that the sale of such illegal items is not a one-off.

The nuclear option was not the intent. For reasons already covered, the Ric solution does not apply to other brands, ie. because Ric police their entire design as IP, whereas others do not; therefore anything that looks like a Ric is in scope, whereas anything that looks like a Fender is not. ebay and other sites have such a policy, but they still sell items, so there's no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater; their process is to react to alerts from members and/or interested parties. As you've pointed out, the rules already exist anyway, and also you've said that flagging up these illegal items will be actioned. I think that the numbers are maybe 1%, so it's not like this is a haven of counterfeiters plying their wares. So no, I don't think the Ric solution should be applied across the board.

Putting a fake logo on a bass and selling it is illegal - that's the point!

You are inventing things there and exaggerating to the point of being ridiculous.

Yep (and possibly to sell it for more money!)

Cort are contracted by Fender to manufacture certain models in their range and to produce them with the authorised logos. The trademark issue is in the use of unauthorised logos.

OK - there was a more recent string of comments suggesting that a Limelight was made exclusively from Fender parts, which had also possibly been covered before; I was just underlining that (or at least intending to).

Well, you are highlighting the fact that there are several different aspects to the illegality of fakes. The fact is that it is illegal to sell an item which bears an unauthorised trademark, regardless of intent. Adding in the intent to deceive the buyer then brings in a further illegality.

Yes, precisely.

If you want them that way for your own enjoyment, then it's your choice. However, if any of those items you describe there are sold with Fender logos then they are illegal. Selling an illegal item as a fake does not make it honest, as detailed already.

Are you arguing for the sake of it?

Did the neck come with a Fender logo? if so, then it was put there by the manufacturer and belongs there. I don't think anybody has suggested it should be banned from sale and I think describing it as a partscaster is appropriate. I've got a partscaster: Warmoth (licensed) neck, Fender body, Fender tuners, Fender nut, Fender temolo bridge, Fender knobs, 3rd party pickguard & pickups, CTS pots. It's more Fender than not, but it's not got a Fender logo. If I were to sell it, it would be described as a partscaster with a parts listing.

You could be right.

Which is great. But they are not Fenders.

As I mentioned, if that had been clarified on post #2, we probably wouldn't be on page 19!

Squier (by Fender) is Fender's junior brand, so a 3rd party "upgrading" it by changing the logo is an an unauthorised use. Doing so with the intention of selling it for more money is deception.

The conclusion (from the mods), as I read it, was that the existing site rules already forbid it, but items will only be removed if someone alerts them.

If they use Fender parts then the neck comes with a Fender logo on the headstock. But I think someone posted that they don't.

My guess is the gain is the money at the point of exchange, independent of any overall p&l considerations, ie. before you had an item and no money, after you have gained money. I expect the legal term is established.

I've only got three, but they are all great instruments and I wouldn't chose any other bass on the planet over them. I've seen some of the stories of folks issues, but haven't had dealings with Rickenbacker myself (mine were all bought used); as far as the UK goes, you wouldn't have to deal with Rickenbacker for warranty issues anyway.