Fake logos on instruments

[prowla]

Just now, discreet said:

Good, can I go and have my lunch, now? The label says 'Lobster Thermidor', but I suspect it may be own-brand fish fingers...

Imagine you bought a tin of Heinz beans and it turned out they'd stuck a label on a cheaper brand!

(Lunch time for me too - fried up leftovers and some pickle!)

[discreet]

1 minute ago, prowla said:

Imagine you bought a tin of Heinz beans and it turned out they'd stuck a label on a cheaper brand!

Um... that's pretty much what happens, only the cheaper brand are... cheaper. Supermarkets don't have their own baked bean factories obviously, they are all canned in the same place - only the labels are different. The perceived value of baked beans is in the premium label, which is what you pay extra for. The beans themselves are largely the same.

[T-Bay]

Do Fender do beans? Marshall do (or did) phones so anything is possible. If they do would each bean have a waterslide transfer?

[Woodinblack]

2 minutes ago, discreet said:

Um... that's pretty much what happens, only the cheaper brand are... cheaper. Supermarkets don't have their own baked bean factories obviously, they are all canned in the same place - only the labels are different. The perceived value of baked beans is in the premium label, which is what you pay extra for. The beans themselves are largely the same.

Not in the case of Heinz. I always had supermarket beans but my wife only had heinz. So obviously we had to get Heinz, but I didn't really like them as much as the supermarket beans we used to get (got used to them now). I guess not enough sugar / salt / E numbers for me!

[discreet]

3 minutes ago, T-Bay said:

...would each bean have a waterslide transfer?

No, they get blown off.

[wateroftyne]

Hmm... here's a C&P from grocerchat.co.uk:

NO FAKES

Let's try to make this 100% clear.  

We have rules on Grocerchat. You should read them *before* posting, and re-read them as often as necessary to be able to remember them so that you don't break them.

Regarding "Fakes" specifically, Rule 10 states;
Do not post baked beans for sale that are not what they appear to be (fake, counterfeit, etc). 

We will not - we can not - allow the forum to be used for advertising baked beans that are not what they appear to be.  If you're selling baked beans and your photos show, or your description says, that its got a label on it that shouldn't be on it (ie it was added retrospectively and not by the copyright holder), then it falls foul of the rule and is NOT allowed.

Disclaimers in the description do not offset the visual evidence.  It doesn't matter if you say that it's NOT Heinz (which is the most affected brand).  An inappropriate logo on the tin still makes it appear to be something that it's not.

For the avoidance of doubt, if you've put a genuine Heinz label on a non-Heinz tin, our legal advice is that the item as a whole is still considered a fake and so we can't allow it to be advertised here as a complete tin.  

For the further avoidance of doubt, I've referred to "Heinz" only as an example because that's the brand that's most commonly affected. but it applies to all brands equally - HP, Tesco, etc.

In future, ads that breach this rule and show or refer to labels that shouldn't be on the tin/s being sold will just be removed.  Members who repeatedly breach this rule will lose their ability to use the grocerchat.co.uk.

[mcnach]

33 minutes ago, prowla said:

OK - I'm not a self-appointed forum prefect (which is personal), but this is an issue, as exemplified by the two threads I've linked here (one discussing a fake spotted on ebay and one discussing the Limelight here) and further, as also mentioned, another site (The Fretboard) has instituted a no fake logos policy.

Therefore I've started a discussion here, and mostly that's what is going on.

From my perspective, I don't think that Fender logos belong on non-Fender instruments and that selling instruments with them on should not be condoned/endorsed, not least because it is illegal.

There have been, and will continue to be, discussions about the rights and wrongs of selling fake logo'd instruments (there was another of a shop in Thame a while back).

However, I don't own/operate/control this site and you, the mods, do and I respect that.

But this is a valid conversation to have and there are opinions on both sides.

 

You insist on how it is *illegal* to use a logo for brand X on an item not made by brand X... but is that really the case? I very much doubt the police would show any interest whatsoever if I tell them my neighbour's guitar has a Fiddler logo when it isn't really a Fiddler. I think the crucial point is deception: passing something as something else in a commercial transaction. Which is why you see these Ford Fiesta 1.0 with twin exhaust and racing/turbo logos on them... and there are even body kits to pass a Honda Civic as some kind of sporty BMW. It's only illegal if you try to sell it as something that it is not.

To tell someone that he's committing a crime while playing his Fender-logo Squier is... ridiculous, in my opinion. I sympathise with the notion of making it difficult for those who try to sell A as being B, but I don't think the ban you propose is sensible, as its target falls far from its intended objective, the way I see it. Unless you personally don't like the 'incorrect' logo on instruments and feel so strongly that you'd like to force everybody to do as you do.

[Dad3353]

41 minutes ago, prowla said:

...From my perspective, I don't think that Fender logos belong on non-Fender instruments and that selling instruments with them on should not be condoned/endorsed, not least because it is illegal....

Have you a practical way of identifying fake headstock logos (or any other trademark-protected stuff...) before the ad is posted..? Who decides, if such an 'infringement' is identified, if it's a genuine or a fake..? What happens to the ad in the meantime..?
The practicalities of this make it such that, in my opinion, any image of any bass (or amp, pedal or whatever...) must be precluded. Have you a better, workable solution that protects both the site from legal action and a Buyer from being misled..? If so, what is it..? Genuine question, not 'nit-picking'. The Ric solution was the best we could come up with (with much regret, but things is things...); must we adopt the same approach for all trademarks..?

[prowla]

4 minutes ago, mcnach said:

 

You insist on how it is *illegal* to use a logo for brand X on an item not made by brand X... but is that really the case? I very much doubt the police would show any interest whatsoever if I tell them my neighbour's guitar has a Fiddler logo when it isn't really a Fiddler. I think the crucial point is deception: passing something as something else in a commercial transaction. Which is why you see these Ford Fiesta 1.0 with twin exhaust and racing/turbo logos on them... and there are even body kits to pass a Honda Civic as some kind of sporty BMW. It's only illegal if you try to sell it as something that it is not.

To tell someone that he's committing a crime while playing his Fender-logo Squier is... ridiculous, in my opinion. I sympathise with the notion of making it difficult for those who try to sell A as being B, but I don't think the ban you propose is sensible, as its target falls far from its intended objective, the way I see it. Unless you personally don't like the 'incorrect' logo on instruments and feel so strongly that you'd like to force everybody to do as you do.

I've posted the links which say so.

[discreet]

12 minutes ago, Dad3353 said:

...must we adopt the same approach for all trademarks..?

Don't see how you can do that without imposing a blanket ban on all bass guitar ads. Not good for BassChat - or its members - or its sponsors. As said earlier, the Rickenbacker (there, I said it) situation is unique in that the company's CEO is well-known for being extremely litigious. As far as I know, FMIC have not yet contacted this forum regarding copyright issues and given their track record, are very unlikely to do so.

Edited December 27, 2017 by discreet
Grammar

[mcnach]

6 minutes ago, prowla said:

I've posted the links which say so.

 

I did check the links on IP you posted, is that what you referred to? If so, you're over-interpreting terribly.

I have a stronger position accusing you of defamation if you call me a criminal than you have if you see me at the Tickled Trout playing a bass with a fake logo and you report me. After 5 pages... it looks to me you like cornflakes for breakfast so why would anybody else have bacon and eggs? Cornflakes is the healthier choice. 

[Dad3353]

4 minutes ago, discreet said:

Don't see how you can do that without imposing a blanket ban on all bass guitar ads. Not good for BassChat - or its members - or its sponsors. As said earlier, the Rickenbacker (there, I said it) situation is unique in that the company's CEO is well-known for being extremely litigious. As far as I know, FMIC has not yet contacted this forum regarding copyright issues and given its track record, is very unlikely to do so.

The argument advanced was that, the Ric case notwithstanding, all trademark infringements are trademark infringements, and could, potentially, get the whole site into trouble. The Ric solution was in response to a real threat of such action. If this same threat exists for other trademarks, then surely, whatever the consequences, a similar approach is needed..? Unless there's a better, sure-fire way..? That's what I'd like the OP to suggest: his solution, to see if it really does comply. If so, it could certainly be considered.

[prowla]

3 minutes ago, Dad3353 said:

Have you a practical way of identifying fake headstock logos (or any other trademark-protected stuff...) before the ad is posted..? Who decides, if such an 'infringement' is identified, if it's a genuine or a fake..? What happens to the ad in the meantime..?
The practicalities of this make it such that, in my opinion, any image of any bass (or amp, pedal or whatever...) must be precluded. Have you a better, workable solution that protects both the site from legal action and a Buyer from being misled..? If so, what is it..? Genuine question, not 'nit-picking'. The Ric solution was the best we could come up with (with much regret, but things is things...); must we adopt the same approach for all trademarks..?

As I've said, the Rickenbacker one is a special case, because they are protecting the entire design as IP; therefore anything which looks remarkably similar to a Ric is in scope. And lso as previously mentioned, I think it is relatively easy to spot a Ric bass copy/fake, as none of them quite get it right.

I think that in Ric's case, perhaps the baby was thrown out with the bathwater, but I can understand why the approach from Rickenbacker was perceived to be belligerent and the decision as-was was taken.

Of course I would not suggest a blanket ban of all brands for which there might be a copy a-la Rickenbacker, as that would clearly mean that nothing could be bought and sold!

But in the case of other guitar brands, they've really only got their logos and some fine detail of the design (eg. Gibson's "moustache" headstock), so Fender-shaped instruments; I would think that a policy of disallowing them and removing offending ads when flagged (much in the same way as removing offensive posts) would be a lightweight and practical approach.

Squiers with Fender logos applied, Chibsons, etc.; they are simply a deceit.

(I've not idea what's going on with Limelight, as they should be standing in their own right; I remember Peter Cook's Mighty Mite range in the 70s - he never felt the need to put "Fender" on them!)

[discreet]

9 minutes ago, Dad3353 said:

If this same threat exists for other trademarks, then surely, whatever the consequences, a similar approach is needed..?

That's what I'm saying, I wasn't aware of any such threat from owners of other trademarks. Have FMIC contacted BC on the subject?

[discreet]

8 minutes ago, prowla said:

Squiers with Fender logos applied, Chibsons, etc.; they are simply a deceit.

Surely not if there are properly described as such so that the buyer is in no doubt about what they are buying? The issue (if any exists) is one of intention. If you intend to sell a Squier with a Fender decal on it as a Fender, then that is clearly wrong. To sell a Squier with a Fender decal on it described as 'a Squier with a Fender decal on it' is not, and many such Squiers (and bitzas) have been sold on this site without issue.

In any case, the Fender/Squier thing is like the baked-bean situation. Many Squiers I've played have been at least as good, if not better than, many Mex and even US Fenders I've played, so it really just becomes a branding and marketing issue...

Edited December 27, 2017 by discreet
Add paragraph

[Dad3353]

7 minutes ago, prowla said:

...

But in the case of other guitar brands, they've really only got their logos and some fine detail of the design (eg. Gibson's "moustache" headstock), so Fender-shaped instruments; I would think that a policy of disallowing them and removing offending ads when flagged (much in the same way as removing offensive posts) would be a lightweight and practical approach.

Squiers with Fender logos applied, Chibsons, etc.; they are simply a deceit.
...

This, then, seems to be the crux of the matter. You are suggesting that, for any ad posted, if someone (anyone..?) spots a purported 'fake', they should Report it, and the Mods or Admin immediately remove the post. Is that a fair description of your suggestion..?

Edited December 27, 2017 by Dad3353

[wateroftyne]

4 minutes ago, prowla said:

I would think that a policy of disallowing them and removing offending ads when flagged (much in the same way as removing offensive posts) would be a lightweight and practical approach.

And what problem would this approach solve? How would it improve the Basschat experience?

[prowla]

16 minutes ago, mcnach said:

 

I did check the links on IP you posted, is that what you referred to? If so, you're over-interpreting terribly.

I have a stronger position accusing you of defamation if you call me a criminal than you have if you see me at the Tickled Trout playing a bass with a fake logo and you report me. After 5 pages... it looks to me you like cornflakes for breakfast so why would anybody else have bacon and eggs? Cornflakes is the healthier choice. 

I don't think I ever said that.

Selling an item which is counterfeit is illegal.

If someone sold me Kellogs Cornflakes and they turned out to be cheapo brand bran flakes augmented with sawdust, then I'd have a problem.

[discreet]

2 minutes ago, wateroftyne said:

And what problem would this approach solve? How would it improve the Basschat experience?

It would allow BC's do-gooders and busybodies to twitch more curtains and dob-in perceived 'criminals'. Hang out more flags! 

[prowla]

9 minutes ago, discreet said:

That's what I'm saying, I wasn't aware of any such threat from owners of other trademarks. Have FMIC contacted BC on the subject?

But that's not what I'm saying.

[discreet]

2 minutes ago, prowla said:

If someone sold me Kellogs Cornflakes and they turned out to be cheapo brand bran flakes augmented with sawdust, then I'd have a problem.

Um... again... as a product, cornflakes are much of a muchness. The boxes however, differ wildly and so do their prices.

[discreet]

3 minutes ago, prowla said:

But that's not what I'm saying.

That comment was intended for Dad3353.

[prowla]

6 minutes ago, wateroftyne said:

And what problem would this approach solve? How would it improve the Basschat experience?

It would help prevent mis-selling and misrepresentation.

[prowla]

3 minutes ago, discreet said:

Um... again... as a product, cornflakes are much of a muchness. The boxes however, differ wildly and so do their prices.

Well connoisseurs of cornflakes might dispute that, but they are definitely different from bran flakes.

 

(And that comment was intended for mchach :-) )

Edited December 27, 2017 by prowla

[Steve Browning]

1 minute ago, prowla said:

It would help prevent mis-selling and misrepresentation.

I think the crux is that there isn't any (as has been explained). Any attempt would be called out within a very short space of time.