Fake logos on instruments

[Jimothey]

3 minutes ago, kodiakblair said:

Squiers are built by Cort so there's no Fender factory involved .

But Cort are licensed to make Squier (by Fender) for Fender and brand them as a Fender product so aren’t you just splitting hairs?

[stingrayPete1977]

45 minutes ago, Jimothey said:

I agree with you and I can’t remember who else said it but if Limelight use all genuine Fender parts to make the guitar then surely they can put a Fender logo on it because it is technically a Fender so I’m struggling to see what the problem is!?!

They don't, they are made of generic off the shelf kit stuff anyone can buy. 

[kodiakblair]

10 minutes ago, Jimothey said:

But Cort are licensed to make Squier (by Fender) for Fender and brand them as a Fender product so aren’t you just splitting hairs?

It's splitting hairs any way you look at it. Some folks believe unless they leave Corona it's not a real Fender.  Would you class the licensed Hipshot Ultralites as Hipshots ? They're sold with the word "licensed" on the packet so there's no mistakes can be made or inferred.

[Jimothey]

8 minutes ago, stingrayPete1977 said:

They don't, they are made of generic off the shelf kit stuff anyone can buy. 

Anybody can also buy genuine fender parts off the shelf so what’s your point? So  what makes it a Fender guitar is it where it’s built of the parts it’s built from???

[prowla]

1 hour ago, lurksalot said:

I would take "gain" as being "added" value due to the incorrect labelling in this instance 

You could be right.

[prowla]

55 minutes ago, Roger2611 said:

Still confused, my Strat was built by me from parts, a genuine Fender 1962 reissue Jap neck, a Fender Japan body, a set of Fender custom shop 69 pickups, Fender bridge, Fender tuners, Fat Boy plastics, Callum block, is it a Fender, well all the parts suggest it is, would I sell it as a Fender, no I wouldn't, I would describe it as a collection of parts, would I be deceiving anyone with it....hopefully not, should it be banned from sale because all the parts (even though most are genuine Fender) never met one and other until they came together on this guitar.....I struggle to accept that a Callum block or Fat Boy plastics should tip any balance as Fender have on many occasions fitted none Fender parts to their guitars (The Khaller? Trems of the 80's guitars, Kluson tuners etc)

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.

[prowla]

1 hour ago, Steve Browning said:

Now you're just getting tedious. Not a single person has stated anything to the contrary.You prefers Rics you say?

Are you arguing for the sake of it?

[Jimothey]

So if a fender guitar is made in a fender factory by fender employees using fender parts and they don’t put a fender logo on it then its not a fender guitar?? Just to be clear I’m asking the question not making a statement 

Edited December 28, 2017 by Jimothey

[jazzmanb]

Well you could buy a Fender and upgrade/downgrade everything but the neck and be in the clear and thats not misleading or build a licensed top class bass with a transfer and be a conman

The P AND J Basses are imitated beyond belief in hundreds of forms.People probably see me and my Sadowsky and think shame he couldnt afford a Fender.

As long as people are honest i don't see a problem.At the price range we are talking ,how it plays will be more important

I Put an all parts 70s neck on my fretless Jazz and its superb,the logo finishes it off

[fretmeister]

2 minutes ago, prowla said:

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.

Fender's official position is that if a person buys 100% of parts directly from Fender and assembles it themselves then it is still NOT a Fender as it has not been assembled and quality checked by a Fender employee or otherwise authorised person. It is NOT a "Fender guitar" it is a "guitar assembled from 100% genuine Fender parts"

 

 

I love these discussions - full of "what about...?" and "I don't agree with it..." and "The law is an donkey..." type posts.

So what?

 

The law is the law and it applies to all.

 

1:  Making your own instrument with a Fender logo is legal.

2: Selling an instrument with a logo on it that shouldn't be there is ILLEGAL

3: DISCLAIMERS / EXPLANATIONS / DECLARATIONS of "it's not real thus I'm not passing off..." DO NOT MATTER and do NOT make the an illegal item legal again. The law is VERY specific. You might be honest but the next person might not be. It's far easier to remove the half-hearted "limelight" sharpie note from the back of the headstock than take it off the front. Your personal honesty about an illegal item is irrelevant. It is the item itself that is illegal.

4: All items with a logo that shouldn't be there (guitars / toasters / pants / handbags etc) become counterfeit the instant there is an attempt to sell. At that point they items can be confiscated and destroyed and the person selling can be prosecuted by Trading Standards and can be sued by the owners of the intellectual property.

5: Individuals who've made a single counterfeit don't usually get in trouble as the trading standards budget is too small.

6: If you have a business based on selling counterfeits - like Limelight - then there is a risk of prison time. Wasn't long ago when a handbag selling lady - selling with disclaimers - got sent to prison for just that.

7: the fact that Fender haven't taken action against any counterfeiters does not mean they approve or even tolerate it - again it comes down to their priorities.

8: "There is no way I'd be able to have one otherwise..." is not a defence. You still haven't got one. You've got a fake. All you've done is helped the counterfeiter stay in business.

 

 

Several other forums have banned counterfeits from being sold at all. I approve of that. I wish it was the case here too. 

It doesn't matter if someone doesn't agree with the law. It applies. If you want the law changed then lobby your MP.  Until that time, selling a wrongly logo'd item is illegal and represents theft of intellectual property owned by others. Fender own their logos and get to decide how they are used. They might well want to allow a stinky poo factory in the derrière end of nowhere to use them - it's their choice. They might decide that only US instruments can use them for a future run. Again that is their choice.

And once again, if you disagree, that does not matter 1 little bit. The law applies.

 

Now, if you want a jurisprudence debate on the nature of counterfeit items then that is different. There's an awful lot of research out there on the impact to employment / income etc and even personal losses and injuries caused by counterfeit products like any item with heating elements not made properly. All products are treated the same. It's very easy to get into a "it's only a guitar" mindset and not think about the fake toaster burning a house down.

 

 

[prowla]

9 minutes ago, jazzmanb said:

Well you could buy a Fender and upgrade/downgrade everything but the neck and be in the clear and thats not misleading or build a licensed top class bass with a transfer and be a conman

The P AND J Basses are imitated beyond belief in hundreds of forms.People probably see me and my Sadowsky and think shame he couldnt afford a Fender.

As long as people are honest i don't see a problem.At the price range we are talking ,how it plays will be more important

I Put an all parts 70s neck on my fretless Jazz and its superb,the logo finishes it off

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.

[Jimothey]

17 minutes ago, fretmeister said:

Fender's official position is that if a person buys 100% of parts directly from Fender and assembles it themselves then it is still NOT a Fender as it has not been assembled and quality checked by a Fender employee or otherwise authorised person. It is NOT a "Fender guitar" it is a "guitar assembled from 100% genuine Fender parts"

 

 

I love these discussions - full of "what about...?" and "I don't agree with it..." and "The law is an donkey..." type posts.

So what?

 

The law is the law and it applies to all.

 

1:  Making your own instrument with a Fender logo is legal.

2: Selling an instrument with a logo on it that shouldn't be there is ILLEGAL

3: DISCLAIMERS / EXPLANATIONS / DECLARATIONS of "it's not real thus I'm not passing off..." DO NOT MATTER and do NOT make the an illegal item legal again. The law is VERY specific. You might be honest but the next person might not be. It's far easier to remove the half-hearted "limelight" sharpie note from the back of the headstock than take it off the front. Your personal honesty about an illegal item is irrelevant. It is the item itself that is illegal.

4: All items with a logo that shouldn't be there (guitars / toasters / pants / handbags etc) become counterfeit the instant there is an attempt to sell. At that point they items can be confiscated and destroyed and the person selling can be prosecuted by Trading Standards and can be sued by the owners of the intellectual property.

5: Individuals who've made a single counterfeit don't usually get in trouble as the trading standards budget is too small.

6: If you have a business based on selling counterfeits - like Limelight - then there is a risk of prison time. Wasn't long ago when a handbag selling lady - selling with disclaimers - got sent to prison for just that.

7: the fact that Fender haven't taken action against any counterfeiters does not mean they approve or even tolerate it - again it comes down to their priorities.

8: "There is no way I'd be able to have one otherwise..." is not a defence. You still haven't got one. You've got a fake. All you've done is helped the counterfeiter stay in business.

 

 

Several other forums have banned counterfeits from being sold at all. I approve of that. I wish it was the case here too. 

It doesn't matter if someone doesn't agree with the law. It applies. If you want the law changed then lobby your MP.  Until that time, selling a wrongly logo'd item is illegal and represents theft of intellectual property owned by others. Fender own their logos and get to decide how they are used. They might well want to allow a stinky poo factory in the derrière end of nowhere to use them - it's their choice. They might decide that only US instruments can use them for a future run. Again that is their choice.

And once again, if you disagree, that does not matter 1 little bit. The law applies.

 

Now, if you want a jurisprudence debate on the nature of counterfeit items then that is different. There's an awful lot of research out there on the impact to employment / income etc and even personal losses and injuries caused by counterfeit products like any item with heating elements not made properly. All products are treated the same. It's very easy to get into a "it's only a guitar" mindset and not think about the fake toaster burning a house down.

 

 

Sorry but unless you are trying to sell the item as the genuine article then it’s not a “counterfeit” it’s a “fake” or “replica”

The definition of counterfeit is : To make a exact imitation of something valuable with the intention to deceive or defraud 

So only fake or counterfeit items can cause injury or are dangerous to the public sorry but that’s utter rubbish you hear of manufacturers doing product recalls all the time because of issues with the product that came out of their factory  

Also you say that Limelight make counterfeit’s which they don’t!!! Be very careful in what you say because that could be classed “defamation”

Edited December 28, 2017 by Jimothey

[prowla]

12 minutes ago, fretmeister said:

Fender's official position is that if a person buys 100% of parts directly from Fender and assembles it themselves then it is still NOT a Fender as it has not been assembled and quality checked by a Fender employee or otherwise authorised person. It is NOT a "Fender guitar" it is a "guitar assembled from 100% genuine Fender parts"

 

 

I love these discussions - full of "what about...?" and "I don't agree with it..." and "The law is an donkey..." type posts.

So what?

 

The law is the law and it applies to all.

 

1:  Making your own instrument with a Fender logo is legal.

2: Selling an instrument with a logo on it that shouldn't be there is ILLEGAL

3: DISCLAIMERS / EXPLANATIONS / DECLARATIONS of "it's not real thus I'm not passing off..." DO NOT MATTER and do NOT make the an illegal item legal again. The law is VERY specific. You might be honest but the next person might not be. It's far easier to remove the half-hearted "limelight" sharpie note from the back of the headstock than take it off the front. Your personal honesty about an illegal item is irrelevant. It is the item itself that is illegal.

4: All items with a logo that shouldn't be there (guitars / toasters / pants / handbags etc) become counterfeit the instant there is an attempt to sell. At that point they items can be confiscated and destroyed and the person selling can be prosecuted by Trading Standards and can be sued by the owners of the intellectual property.

5: Individuals who've made a single counterfeit don't usually get in trouble as the trading standards budget is too small.

6: If you have a business based on selling counterfeits - like Limelight - then there is a risk of prison time. Wasn't long ago when a handbag selling lady - selling with disclaimers - got sent to prison for just that.

7: the fact that Fender haven't taken action against any counterfeiters does not mean they approve or even tolerate it - again it comes down to their priorities.

8: "There is no way I'd be able to have one otherwise..." is not a defence. You still haven't got one. You've got a fake. All you've done is helped the counterfeiter stay in business.

 

 

Several other forums have banned counterfeits from being sold at all. I approve of that. I wish it was the case here too. 

It doesn't matter if someone doesn't agree with the law. It applies. If you want the law changed then lobby your MP.  Until that time, selling a wrongly logo'd item is illegal and represents theft of intellectual property owned by others. Fender own their logos and get to decide how they are used. They might well want to allow a stinky poo factory in the derrière end of nowhere to use them - it's their choice. They might decide that only US instruments can use them for a future run. Again that is their choice.

And once again, if you disagree, that does not matter 1 little bit. The law applies.

 

Now, if you want a jurisprudence debate on the nature of counterfeit items then that is different. There's an awful lot of research out there on the impact to employment / income etc and even personal losses and injuries caused by counterfeit products like any item with heating elements not made properly. All products are treated the same. It's very easy to get into a "it's only a guitar" mindset and not think about the fake toaster burning a house down.

 

 

Yes, precisely.

[Steve Browning]

36 minutes ago, prowla said:

Are you arguing for the sake of it?

You reminded us (for the umpteenth time - and just as un-necessarily as the first) that a Limelight is not a Fender and I made the point that no-one had said it was. It wasn't intended as anything other than a statement of fact. I wasn't offering any contrary position to yours.

 

[prowla]

1 minute ago, Jimothey said:

Sorry but unless you are trying to sell the item as the genuine article then it’s not a “counterfeit” it’s a “fake” or “replica”

The definition of counterfeit is : To make a exact imitation of something valuable with the intention to deceive or defraud 

So only fake or counterfeit items can cause injury or are dangerous to the public sorry but that’s utter rubbish you hear of manufacturers doing product recalls all the time because of issues with the product that came out of their factory  

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.

[mcnach]

1 hour ago, Jimothey said:

But Cort are licensed to make Squier (by Fender) for Fender and brand them as a Fender product so aren’t you just splitting hairs?

 

So by that reasoning, is a Fiat 500 a Ferrari then?

[prowla]

2 minutes ago, Steve Browning said:

You reminded us (for the umpteenth time - and just as un-necessarily as the first) that a Limelight is not a Fender and I made the point that no-one had said it was. It wasn't intended as anything other than a statement of fact. I wasn't offering any contrary position to yours.

 

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).

[Steve Browning]

5 minutes ago, prowla said:

 

 

Edited December 28, 2017 by Steve Browning
Second thoughts

[prowla]

1 hour ago, Jimothey said:

But Cort are licensed to make Squier (by Fender) for Fender and brand them as a Fender product so aren’t you just splitting hairs?

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.

[mcnach]

1 hour ago, Jimothey said:

Anybody can also buy genuine fender parts off the shelf so what’s your point? So  what makes it a Fender guitar is it where it’s built of the parts it’s built from???

 

Both. But mostly a Fender guitar is a Fender guitar if the company decides to stick a big juicy Fender logo on it. Because only they have the right to make a Fender guitar, and they reserve the right to source their materials wherever they see fit.

When the company sticks a Squier label on it, with or without "by Fender", then it is a Squier guitar. It's pretty simple. It's funny that some people would call their Squier a Fender... but the genuine Fenders that came out in the 80s with the "Squier series" smaller logo are never referred to as a Squier. You know exactly why. Any reason people come up with to call a Squier a Fender is just clutching at straws to make an instrument somehow seem to belong to a higher tier. 

[prowla]

3 minutes ago, mcnach said:

 

Both. But mostly a Fender guitar is a Fender guitar if the company decides to stick a big juicy Fender logo on it. Because only they have the right to make a Fender guitar, and they reserve the right to source their materials wherever they see fit.

When the company sticks a Squier label on it, with or without "by Fender", then it is a Squier guitar. It's pretty simple. It's funny that some people would call their Squier a Fender... but the genuine Fenders that came out in the 80s with the "Squier series" smaller logo are never referred to as a Squier. You know exactly why. Any reason people come up with to call a Squier a Fender is just clutching at straws to make an instrument somehow seem to belong to a higher tier. 

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

[Jimothey]

9 minutes ago, mcnach said:

 

So by that reasoning, is a Fiat 500 a Ferrari then?

How in any way did I say anything like that!! Fiat is a completely separate company to Ferrari so that’s a bit of a moronic question

[timmo]

Are we still on the merry go round?

[mcnach]

4 minutes ago, Jimothey said:

How in any way did I say anything like that!! Fiat is a completely separate company to Ferrari so that’s a bit of a moronic question

 

Just because you do not understand the question it doesn't make it moronic. 

Fiat owns Ferrari just like Fender owns Squier.  

[Steve Browning]

2 minutes ago, mcnach said:

 

Just because you do not understand the question it doesn't make it moronic. 

Fiat owns Ferrari just like Fender owns Squier.  

But they don't make cosmetically similar models.