Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In with Google

Become a Subscriber!

Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!

Read more...

Erm fickle bunch aren't we

What's Hot
1356

Comments

  • fretmeisterfretmeister Frets: 23966
    impmann said:
    .

    I read some of the outpourings about the sale of partcasters and "fakes". And some of the opinion on here is flawed.

    For example - the La Cab type thing I have for sale has a Fender neck from a Lite Ash Tele. It still has a Fender logo on that neck as it is a Fender neck, likewise the bridge has Fender stamped into the saddles as that was how it was made. I'm not purporting it to be a Fender guitar - its not - but it does have Fender parts in it, which are not fake. Therefore it is NOT a fake as I am not trying to pass it off as such... However, some have said that it cannot be sold as such because it shows the Fender logo on the headstock... RUBBISH.

    Some on here seem to believe that a guitar has to be made in the Fender factory by Fender employees in order to have that logo on the headstock. That's bollocks, frankly. And this business about mitigating the chance of a new owner doing something improper with it when they come to sell it - that isn't my problem (or anyone else's either), nor can it ever be in law. For example, you don't sell a set of bolt-croppers and then can be responsible for their use in a robbery. 

    Leo Fender designed the Strat and the Tele to have a neck that can be replaced by a service engineer - hence the bolt on nature - when it wore. To that end Fender themselves make replacement necks that can be retro-fitted to a Fender guitar by anyone who can wield a screwdriver. The two parts of the guitar (the Fender made body and the Fender made neck) were both made in the Fender factory and therefore it is fair to say that the guitar is a Fender guitar. IT IS PART OF THE DESIGN therefore this interpretation cannot be applied.

    Extrapolating that still further, if you then had an all-original 1957 Fender Strat and needed to adjust the truss rod, the action of you removing the neck to make that adjustment means that the neck had not been installed by a Fender employee... therefore using this draconian interpretation of the law its no longer a Fender instrument. Really? I think not.

    As with all things in law, it is an *interpretation* of the statutes that people can work to - and the law is *deliberately* written so it can be interpreted in different ways, so it is never absolute.

    Back to the guitar in question - good luck to the seller, I'm sure its very nice.
    No one has said that (bold)

    But Fender UK told me that it can be advertised as a "Guitar made from Fender Parts" but cannot be called a "Fender Guitar"

    Replacing a damaged neck means it is a "Repaired Guitar" - you certainly can't call a 2005 US Strat a 2005 US Strat if the neck is from 2014.


    No law was "deliberately" written to have different interpretations. It's just that the people writing the laws are not as smart as those who actually work in the justice system.


    Let's put it another way - Basschat got a letter from Rickenbacker about them allowing the sale of Rickenfakers - with Rick logos AND WITHOUT (other brand names on it and advertised as such, but with the Rick headstock shape etc)

    Basschat spent real money on legal advice on the subject and based on that advice decided that they wouldn't be allowed to be sold on the site anymore.

    Ricky have protected their intellectual property far better than Fender have in the past, which is why Fender style bodies are everywhere, but no Headstocks or logos.




    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • fretmeisterfretmeister Frets: 23966
    Little bit from Trading Standards


    In summary

    1: Using a logo / trademark that doesn't belong to you is illegal unless you have actual permission or a licence to use it
    2: Using a disclaimer does not stop you being prosecuted. Disclaimers do not apply in Trade Mark / Copyright.
    3: Counterfeit goods cannot legitimately be sold - even with a disclaimer.

    It doesn't matter a flying what our individual thoughts about the reasonableness of the law is. It applies to everyone.


    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 3reaction image Wisdom
  • TTonyTTony Frets: 27346

    But Fender UK told me that it can be advertised as a "Guitar made from Fender Parts" but cannot be called a "Fender Guitar"

    So, in this specific instance, everything is fine since the guitar in question is not being sold as a "Fender Guitar", it's being sold as a Bill Nash guitar, although a more accurate description might be a "guitar assembled and finished by Bill Nash from components not made by Bill Nash"

    ?
    Having trouble posting images here?  This might help.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • TTony said:
    So, in this specific instance, everything is fine since the guitar in question is not being sold as a "Fender Guitar", it's being sold as a Bill Nash guitar, although a more accurate description might be a "guitar assembled and finished by Bill Nash from components not made by Bill Nash"

    ?
    I suspect the problem is going to be the headstock decal ;)
    <space for hire>
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • TTonyTTony Frets: 27346
    The Ricky story is interesting too.

    It suggests that the important aspect is not what the law states, nor how it might be interpreted and argued by lawyers.  The only important bit is how aggressive the company is in protecting its assets.  

    That could lead to "Fender Inc" allowing a not-Fender-with-a-Fender-logo guitar to be sold one day, but after Mr Corporate Lawyer moves from Rickenbaker to Fender and implements Ricky policies at Fender, "Fender Inc" objects to the same guitar being sold the following day.

    ?
    Having trouble posting images here?  This might help.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • fretmeisterfretmeister Frets: 23966
    TTony said:

    But Fender UK told me that it can be advertised as a "Guitar made from Fender Parts" but cannot be called a "Fender Guitar"

    So, in this specific instance, everything is fine since the guitar in question is not being sold as a "Fender Guitar", it's being sold as a Bill Nash guitar, although a more accurate description might be a "guitar assembled and finished by Bill Nash from components not made by Bill Nash"

    ?

    No.

    The logo does not belong to Nash or to Mr Gassage. Therefore it is a counterfeit item.

    The "not being sold as a fender" is a disclaimer attempt and does not protect from prosecution.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • tone1tone1 Frets: 5112
    So how did Chandlers sell it without issue?
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 2reaction image Wisdom
  • MegiiMegii Frets: 1670
    edited December 2014
    A while back, I bought a Mighty Mite neck to use for my walnut body partscaster strat. It came with a card saying various things, but the jist was that it was

    a) definitely NOT a Fender neck, but b) was an officially licensed by Fender replacement part - especially re use of the headstock shape, and as such could only be used to replace an existing neck on a Fender/Squier guitar. All seems very strange - would such a resulting guitar still be considered a genuine Fender - I guess probably not, since it wouldn't conform to any specific model, and the neck isn't made by Fender. In which case what is the point of having "officially licensed" replacement necks in the first place?

    And what about people like Warmoth, who make loads of necks with Fender headstock shapes, most of which are used for partscasters, and Fender doesn't seem to mind this at all? The whole thing seems a bit batty.

    Needless to say, I ignored the card, and made my partscaster (I have no intention of passing the guitar off as a Fender, or putting a decal on), but I live in constant fear of the Fender lawyers coming to get me.
    2reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • fretmeisterfretmeister Frets: 23966
    TTony said:
    The Ricky story is interesting too.

    It suggests that the important aspect is not what the law states, nor how it might be interpreted and argued by lawyers.  The only important bit is how aggressive the company is in protecting its assets.  

    That could lead to "Fender Inc" allowing a not-Fender-with-a-Fender-logo guitar to be sold one day, but after Mr Corporate Lawyer moves from Rickenbaker to Fender and implements Ricky policies at Fender, "Fender Inc" objects to the same guitar being sold the following day.

    ?

    Doesn't work like that.

    Fender failed to protect their body shapes in the past. Their opportunity to do so has now gone. Ricky have aggressively protected their shapes for ever, thus they still have the ability to do so.

    The law requires effort to protect your designs, if you don't make the effort then you lose.

    Fender does continue to protect their headstock shape and logo.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • fretmeisterfretmeister Frets: 23966
    tone1 said:
    So how did Chandlers sell it without issue?
    Either they had permission from Fender, or they just got away with it because no one reported them.

    I'm sure Fender get thousands of reports all the time, and I'm sure they will prioritise the large dealers / makers rather than the single sale used guitar crowd.

    But Trading Standards are always on the lookout for easy wins. So TR goes after the shop, but in the process confiscates the guitar and destroys it.

    The buyer of the guitar then has to sue the shop for their money back and the shop will argue that the buyer knew it was not a Fender and made themselves complicit.

    The guitar is worth under £10,000 so falls into "Small Claims" so each side pays several grand to their lawyers but the winner doesn't get to reclaim his costs so no one wins.


    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • TTonyTTony Frets: 27346
    Hope you're not busy with real work today @fretmeister!


    TTony said:

    But Fender UK told me that it can be advertised as a "Guitar made from Fender Parts" but cannot be called a "Fender Guitar"

    So, in this specific instance, everything is fine since the guitar in question is not being sold as a "Fender Guitar", it's being sold as a Bill Nash guitar, although a more accurate description might be a "guitar assembled and finished by Bill Nash from components not made by Bill Nash"

    ?

    No.

    The logo does not belong to Nash or to Mr Gassage. Therefore it is a counterfeit item.

    The "not being sold as a fender" is a disclaimer attempt and does not protect from prosecution.


    I'm missing something here.


    I understand that Bill Nash doesn't own the logo, and he can't put a F logo on a neck that isn't a genuine F neck.  That would clearly be counterfeiting.


    But if he's made a guitar out of F parts and then sells it as a Bill Nash guitar, clearly made from genuine parts of other manufacturers, how is that counterfeiting?  He's not attempting to pass off his work as that of Fender, nor vice versa.  I interpreted your first point as meaning that as long as he didn't advertise it as a F guitar, all was OK.  

    To be extra-OK, the description could/should be extended to "a guitar assembled and finished by BIll Nash using parts from other manufacturers including Fender".

    Isn't that what your first point means??
    Having trouble posting images here?  This might help.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • fretmeisterfretmeister Frets: 23966
    TTony said:
    Hope you're not busy with real work today @fretmeister!


    TTony said:

    But Fender UK told me that it can be advertised as a "Guitar made from Fender Parts" but cannot be called a "Fender Guitar"

    So, in this specific instance, everything is fine since the guitar in question is not being sold as a "Fender Guitar", it's being sold as a Bill Nash guitar, although a more accurate description might be a "guitar assembled and finished by Bill Nash from components not made by Bill Nash"

    ?

    No.

    The logo does not belong to Nash or to Mr Gassage. Therefore it is a counterfeit item.

    The "not being sold as a fender" is a disclaimer attempt and does not protect from prosecution.


    I'm missing something here.


    I understand that Bill Nash doesn't own the logo, and he can't put a F logo on a neck that isn't a genuine F neck.  That would clearly be counterfeiting.


    But if he's made a guitar out of F parts and then sells it as a Bill Nash guitar, clearly made from genuine parts of other manufacturers, how is that counterfeiting?  He's not attempting to pass off his work as that of Fender, nor vice versa.  I interpreted your first point as meaning that as long as he didn't advertise it as a F guitar, all was OK.  

    To be extra-OK, the description could/should be extended to "a guitar assembled and finished by BIll Nash using parts from other manufacturers including Fender".

    Isn't that what your first point means??

    To put it as simply as I can...

    If he removes the FENDER logos from it then there is no issue on that guitar.


    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • TTonyTTony Frets: 27346
    If he removes the FENDER logos from it then there is no issue on that guitar.

    Understood.


    impmann said:
    For example - the La Cab type thing I have for sale has a Fender neck from a Lite Ash Tele. It still has a Fender logo on that neck as it is a Fender neck, likewise the bridge has Fender stamped into the saddles as that was how it was made. I'm not purporting it to be a Fender guitar - its not - but it does have Fender parts in it, which are not fake. Therefore it is NOT a fake as I am not trying to pass it off as such... However, some have said that it cannot be sold as such because it shows the Fender logo on the headstock... RUBBISH.

    No one has said that (bold)

    But Fender UK told me that it can be advertised as a "Guitar made from Fender Parts" but cannot be called a "Fender Guitar"

    And also understood.



    But your two comments in the above posts seem - to my admittedly non-legal brain - to be directly contradictory.

    Having trouble posting images here?  This might help.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • TTonyTTony Frets: 27346
    (PS - I'm not trying to be argumentative, really!)
    Having trouble posting images here?  This might help.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • impmannimpmann Frets: 12649
    I'm with you there Tony.

    If that neck was made by Fender, it is PERFECTLY entitled to have a Fender logo on it. 
    Never Ever Bloody Anything Ever.

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • JalapenoJalapeno Frets: 6378
    This is a Bill Nash Strat headstock ....

    image
    Imagine something sharp and witty here ......

    Feedback
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • GuitarMonkeyGuitarMonkey Frets: 1883
    edited December 2014
    It probably still infringes Fender's trade mark on the headstock shape
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • TTonyTTony Frets: 27346
    edited December 2014
    Jalapeno said:
    This is a Bill Nash Strat headstock ....

    image
    I just might be - slowly - catching up!
    Having trouble posting images here?  This might help.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • RichardjRichardj Frets: 1538
    It still very strongly suggests on the Bill Nash website that they make their own necks and bodies. Nothing about assembling their guitars from bought in parts.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • fretmeisterfretmeister Frets: 23966
    impmann said:
    I'm with you there Tony.

    If that neck was made by Fender, it is PERFECTLY entitled to have a Fender logo on it. 
    Yes. When it is a neck alone, or is attached to the rest of a Fender.


    But not when it is attached to a guitar that is not a Fender.

    Fender sell replacement necks with logos to be fitted to Fenders only.


    Warmoth and others sell licensed (non-logo) Fender style necks to be fitted to anything you like. Warmoth are not allowed to sell anything with the Fender logo on it.

    The test for a prosecution is actually easy to meet - Could a customer be confused at the point of sale? (Disclaimers don't count)

    If it's got a Fender logo on it - then the chance of confusion is there. End of story.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
Sign In or Register to comment.