prowla

As pointed out earlier, I linked the trademark law. Are you saying that it is OK to knowingly sell an item which has a false and unauthorised trademarked log on it? Using your clear knowledge of the law, can you please point me at the written legislation and/or case law which states that?

Do you think it is OK to knowingly sell items falsely bearing other companies trademarked logos?

That explains the shift to theft over trademark law.

Do you think that is is OK to falsely use another company's brand when selling something?

Yes it is, as I explained. You are trying to have a different argument (ie. quoting the theft act to support a spurious argument).

Thanks for your support!

I'm nearly ready for another fry-up!

The existence of the fake logo itself is a deception; saying it is a fake doesn't get around that.

The fact that they have the logo is a deception and is illegal. The fact that they have Fender in the title but are not is a deception, regardless of the subsequent description. Simple answer is to just not use that company's brand.

I only went back through this month's bass sales and found a number of items bearing false logos and Fender in their titles.

But it is still illegal.

You are picking which laws (and rules) you wish to apply. Links to counterfeit/trademark law have already been provided, along with links to site rules covering copyright/trademark.

Well, one the one hand, who said I did? And on the other hand, if the mods stance is that they will react to reported infringements, then isn't that a requirement?

It is still a fake even if you say so. "Come and get yer genuine fake Rolex watches, Gucci handbags - roll up, roll up!".

Intentionally selling an item titled Fender which is known to have a non-genuine Fender logo.

Yep.

Intentionally selling a fake item.

Utter baloney - that is not what I said at all! The mods adopt a light-touch and don't monitor/vet everything - that is a perfectly valid way of running a web site and is in no way a criticism. Please don't try and twist my words.

Cool - the rules are there - it's been established. A number of infringements have crept through because the mods don't police/vet everything (ie. are not heavy-handed) and nobody flagged them. Actually, just pointing out the rules on post #2 would've sorted it. It's been an interesting discussion.

The issue is about deceit, you are right, and selling an instrument with a fake logo on it is deceit. You are the one who is acting like a control freak, wanting to define your own set of rules which somehow trump the site rules and the law of the land. Luckily you don't define either, and furtunately never will.

Don't start with the fish fingers again, old bean!

Hahahaha - that was a good 'un!

Well, you haven't read all of the thread then; there have been some in agreement and the rules covering it have been cited by the mods. All that's left then is a group of people arguing that it's OK to turn a blind eye to the rules (which have been quoted and linked) and the law (which has also been quoted and linked). If you've got some time over the hols, try watching 12 Angry Men - it's a great movie.

I swear I looked there! https://www.basschat.co.uk/rules/ rule 6.c

Bloody fat fingers (will correct!).