It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
(formerly miserneil)
Instagram
And don't get started 'written authentication', there's an interesting debate currently ongoing on a couple of forums about some 'authentication' that may/may not be genuine on a guitar that is reported to be a high value fake.
It's a horrible minefield.
(formerly miserneil)
(formerly miserneil)
(formerly miserneil)
Also an interesting view point that it is commonly accepted that single handedly Slash saved the Gibson Guitar business by playing a 'fake' - Yet Gibson place him on a pedestal and make loads of signature models for him - Surely this is a case of double standards, morals, kettle, pot and black on the part of Gibson
As an aside, how would you feel if you paid good money for a guitar you believed was a Gibson but which turned out to be a fake? While you may reconcile your actions and your conscience by saying that this guitar is as good and any Gibson and that you are not passing it off as a Gibson but nevertheless you are an active participant in the world of fakes and forgeries which causes some people to buy things that are not what they purport to be.
It is dodgy as fuck and I think you probably know that if you are honest with yourself.
I was just suggesting that if it was later sold as a genuine and a big furore started that revealed it as a fake and it came out that the perpetrator got it from you in a legit sale then it could have collateral reputational damage.
Its clear you've worked hard for your well earned reputation - I would say one of the best in the industry - I was merely pointing out a potential and unfortunate possible side effect of the transaction that could cause damage to your reputation... Was just a friendly other opinion
As a dealer I'm really surprised at your stance on this!
imo, a top draw replica, handmade by an expert luthier with their total dedication is a 'real' Les Paul, and way closer to a real burst than anything Gibson currently produce.
Indeed, a replica is way more 'real' than some swirly finish, robot tuner laden, zero fret Gibson, churned out by machine like a low quality sausage, using matchbox quality materials and QC that makes an 80's Skoda look like a Bentley.
Who gives a flying monkeys what 'lifestyle brand' corporation owns the IP?
i own fender and Gibson guitars, and I own replicas. All are great! I'm not going to loose any sleep over it.
If a band releases a cover of a song - even if it's the best cover ever created and it's much better than the original - if they don't have the permission of the copyright holder then legally a cut of the proceeds belong to the copyright holder. That's just the way the law is. Morals have nowt to do with it from a legal point of view.
in the most literal, legal sense, the replicas are indeed fakes.
what I don't understand, is why that bothers people (other than Gibsons legal team).
What bothers me is that they are close enough to the originals for some unscrupulous buggers to palm them off as originals for their own greed.
And to be clear - it's the tw@ts that do this that bother me and not the guitars themselves - just in the same way that cheap arsed rip-off perfume and beach sunglasses salesmen bother me