Fake logos on instruments

[prowla]

I noticed today that another bass forum I frequent has instituted a policy of no sales of fake instruments, ie. ones which are manufactured with, or have subsequently had applied, logos of a different manufacturer; the most common one being Fender (because aftermarket waterslide logos are easy peasy), but there are also the ones which are produced as fakes (the "Chibson"s, etc.).

Some of them can be quite difficult to spot, as the "ebay weird & wonderful" forum often highlights.

Would it be an appropriate policy to institute here too?

As a corollary, it's illegal in the UK to sell an item bearing the trademark of another company, but some folks seem to think it's alright, buyer beware, it's OK if you say it's a fake, or it doesn't apply to personal sales.

I think that, in allowing them to be sold via here, the site is tacitly approving forgeries.

[Hellzero]

It's just like announcing a fake price to simply attract people, it's simply stupid, boring and legally the item must be sold at the lowest mentioned price...

[stingrayPete1977]

I can't see the Limelight fans being keen on the idea of banning fakes, lol.

[Cato]

A lot of people who put together bitsas or build or commision replica instruments don't seem to feel that the instrument is complete without the 'correct' logo.

I've personally never seen anyone trying to pass such an instrument off as genuine on the BC marketplace and, given the level of scrutiny that every instrument in the marketplace comes under from casual browsers, let alone serious potential buyers, I seriously doubt anyone would be able to get away with trying to sell a replica as genuine for more than a couple of hours before getting called out.

[Lozz196]

Yep, if anything the items I`ve seen for sale on here with fake logos have so clearly been pointed out only someone not willing to read all of the ads could ever have claimed to have bought items being sold under false pretences. I do see where the OP is coming from though, it`s a valid point and maybe something that should be considered by the mods, and maybe put to the forum for guidance/opinions.

[Pinball]

I agree all Stingrays, G&L's, Fenders, Gibsons, Laklands and guilds made out side the USA should be banned as they aren't the real thing..tongue firmly in cheek

Edited December 26, 2017 by Pinball

[ZilchWoolham]

Like previous posters, I don't think there's a problem with sellers on BC trying to swindle anyone with fake Fenders, but it could be a problem further down the road, since we don't know what will happen once it's changed hands a couple of times. I'm perfectly fine with people playing and owning instruments with fake logos, but I don't think you should sell them on with the logo intact, even if you advertise them as such, simply because the next owner might not be as honest as yourself. 

[Woodinblack]

45 minutes ago, Pinball said:

I agree all Stingrays, G&L's, Fenders, Gibsons, Laklands and guilds made out side the USA should be banned as they aren't the real thing..tongue firmly in cheek

Although obviously there are G&Ls and Fenders made outside the US (I don't know about the others), are / were there ever any gibsons produced outside the US? I wondered that as I assumed there weren't but gibson seem to be making a deal of saying Gibson USA now, rather than just Gibson, which would seem odd if they were all USA.

[wateroftyne]

So... we ban the sale of overt replicas, and allow only the sale of either genuine basses, or the surreptitious sale of fakes.

I'm really not sure what the benefit of this approach is...?

 

 

Edited December 26, 2017 by wateroftyne

[Hellzero]

Isn't it a no Rickenbacker sale place for that reason ? I mean fakes and as there are even more fake Fender's than fake Rick's, why not be logical all the way up to the end of your idea !?!

[ead]

1 hour ago, stingrayPete1977 said:

I can't see the Limelight fans being keen on the idea of banning fakes, lol.

To be fair Limelight basses are not advertised as anything other than a Fender replica and have the Limelight brand and serial number on the reverse of the headstock in indelible marker under the lacquer so pretty hard to shift I imagine.

I think the difference is intention to decieve; as a Limelight owner I am fully supportive of any action against deliberate fakery.

[mickster]

As far as BC is concerned, I think its sole ethical duty boils down to whether there's an intention to deceive a prospective buyer. The OP first raised this earlier today on an ad placed by a BCer for his Limelight Jazz bass. That bass is clearly being sold as a Limelight - not an original Fender - and as such imo there's clearly no intention to deceive a buyer. They know they're buying a Limelight, not a vintage Fender.

And imo there ends BC's (and the buyer's) responsibilities. To claim that they must also be responsible for any future selling of that bass, possibly long after they sold it here, is nonsense. You wouldn't expect someone to be held responsible for the correct & legal resale down the line of, say, a car they sell tomorrow on autotrader, so why would you a bass?

As for the ethics of putting Fender stickers on non fender basses; personally, I'm not remotely arsed about whether some huge corporations trademark is being infringed, and i'm surprised that anyone who isn't a corporate lawyer acting for one of those corporations could give a hoot either. Are we all gonna start acting as unofficial trademark policemen for private corporations we have no connection with? Seems a bit weird and cult-of-Apple like to me...:)

[wateroftyne]

20 minutes ago, Hellzero said:

Isn't it a no Rickenbacker sale place for that reason ? I mean fakes and as there are even more fake Fender's than fake Rick's, why not be logical all the way up to the end of your idea !?!

It's a no-Rickenbacker sale place because Rickenbacker aggressively defend their intellectual property.

[Hellzero]

That's sure, they had my ads deleted a long time ago when I was selling through eBay some real parts of my Rick...

[stingrayPete1977]

47 minutes ago, ead said:

To be fair Limelight basses are not advertised as anything other than a Fender replica and have the Limelight brand and serial number on the reverse of the headstock in indelible marker under the lacquer so pretty hard to shift I imagine.

I think the difference is intention to decieve; as a Limelight owner I am fully supportive of any action against deliberate fakery.

Bit of sandpaper and a can of laquer, ten minutes max. Lol

[kodiakblair]

Fake logos don't faze me in the slightest,if it makes folk feel better about their bass all to the good. I did hear of one fella fitting a 'Made in the USA' neck plate to his MIM,swore it played better 

[skankdelvar]

Quote

Would it be an appropriate policy to institute here too?

No.

[gjones]

Selling a fake on Basschat, is a very difficult thing to do. There's just too much collective knowledge on here. 

 

 

 

[prowla]

20 minutes ago, kodiakblair said:

Fake logos don't faze me in the slightest,if it makes folk feel better about their bass all to the good. I did hear of one fella fitting a 'Made in the USA' neck plate to his MIM,swore it played better 

I recently saw something advertised elsewhere as "upgraded" with a Fender logo.

[prowla]

1 hour ago, mickster said:

As far as BC is concerned, I think its sole ethical duty boils down to whether there's an intention to deceive a prospective buyer. The OP first raised this earlier today on an ad placed by a BCer for his Limelight Jazz bass. That bass is clearly being sold as a Limelight - not an original Fender - and as such imo there's clearly no intention to deceive a buyer. They know they're buying a Limelight, not a vintage Fender.

And imo there ends BC's (and the buyer's) responsibilities. To claim that they must also be responsible for any future selling of that bass, possibly long after they sold it here, is nonsense. You wouldn't expect someone to be held responsible for the correct & legal resale down the line of, say, a car they sell tomorrow on autotrader, so why would you a bass?

As for the ethics of putting Fender stickers on non fender basses; personally, I'm not remotely arsed about whether some huge corporations trademark is being infringed, and i'm surprised that anyone who isn't a corporate lawyer acting for one of those corporations could give a hoot either. Are we all gonna start acting as unofficial trademark policemen for private corporations we have no connection with? Seems a bit weird and cult-of-Apple like to me...:)

The thing I don't understand is why people do it.

I once inherited a company car for a few weeks where the fool who had it before had stuck a "Turbo" sticker on the back; it was a clunker.

The thing about BC's responsibilities is that they do not end there; websites cannot claim a hands-off approach, especially when they demonstrate a willingness to arbitrate on other similar matters (ie. Rickenbacker).

With regard to the ethics of faking Fenders there was one just today where it seems that somebody on ebay has bought one. (The thread itself turned into a nice sideline about UFO, though!)

As for protecting brands rights, I've no affiliation with the companies, but I do feel a duty of care to the potential buyers; I'm at the stage where I don't trust things with Fender logos.

And heck, some of the fakes/fogeries may stand up in their own right; the saddest thing of all is seeing a vintage Tokai with a Fender logo on it.

 

[KingPrawn]

This is great. I feel like I’m embroiled in some type of conspiracy. My life has just got interesting. I’m selling the bass in question on the forum. The original sale line I put up was “ Fender Jazz with limelight love” Another chatter pointed out that this may be throwing others of the sent. 

ill be perfectly honest, when I bought this bass I thought it was a fender jazz reissue that had been pimped by Limelight. I honestly thought that’s what they did. Like some people do with cars. Once I had read upon the company I realised I’d made a genuine mistake. So changed it immediately.

Im not sure of the legality of logos etc. i completely agree about not promoting the sale of fake instruments in any way. I don’t think it’s the quality of the bass as the Limelight is stunnng to play and I own genuine vintage fender jazzes. It’s the intent to decive that would damage the site. Maybe it’s an issue for the powers at be need to consider ( wait until I’ve sold my Limelight first please)

I do believe in the integrity of BC Members. I’ve been buying and selling on here for years and have never had anything but good experiences.  I’ve often relied on the comments and knowledge of other members to inform my decision and increase my own knowledge  I’ve always felt I can post questions  Maybe we need a section to “Ask the experts”

 

[kodiakblair]

@KingPrawn

All very lauable but who's the "experts" and what qualifys them ? Will they denounce folk based soley on photos ?

I don't believe BC has a problem with folk selling fakes but I do believe it's a slippery slope when we have self appointed judges. Just this morning over on Talkbass an ebay seller with 99.7% positive feedback from 4000 odd sales was getting dragged over the coals over what may have been a simple mistake. All on the strength of 1 disgruntled poster.

 

[KingPrawn]

6 minutes ago, kodiakblair said:

@KingPrawn

All very lauable but who's the "experts" and what qualifys them ? Will they denounce folk based soley on photos ?

Good point. I don’t know? I was just wondering aside from the BC Community are there well known or those acknowledged as experts in various areas, who could offer objective advice if someone needed advice  it may be impossible to provide, if so it relies on integrity and honesty  

 

 

[kodiakblair]

I've heard of experts in both the antique and art world making mistakes so it's a difficult thing. The way it works on Talkbass is pretty messed up. Somebody will pose the question " Is this Real ?" and a whole bunch of folks answer "Fake". Some will give reasons but 90% just pronounce their verdict. Then conveniently ignore follow up posts if taken to task.

 

Afraid I don't have an answer either, I was only voicing my concern. Anyway GLWTS 

[discreet]

Are we already suffering from too much holiday time on our hands, or what? I say every Fender bass made after 1965 is questionable - because Leo sold the company to CBS in that year and thus they were no longer made by him. Thhp! 

Maybe we should have a member vote on it? And should the site owners go nuts and say we can list only 'genuine' Fender basses on BassChat, I'll be more than happy to PhotoShop the decals off mine before posting the pictures. And subsequently PM any prospective buyers to tell them that it still has a Fender decal on it. How''d you like THEM apples, ladies?

This is first-world-virtue-signalling-snowflake-problem stuff, people. If you're determined to worry, there are far more important things to be worrying about. If you really think the possible misuse of guitar decals is any sort of an issue, I would suggest you thicken your skin somewhat, get out a bit more and start enjoying life.

Edited December 27, 2017 by discreet