I have my eye on this Ric style kit. It's back ordered till next month but looks like it could be a cool project and I would love to have a Kittenbacker.
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Any experiences with Pitbull guitars bass kits?
- Thread starter Spirit of Ox
- Start date
they ship to the United States? I can't find any info about shipping from their site hahah.
It's not called "stigma", it's called "illegal". I somehow doubt that Rickenbacker is just A-ok with these, since they have (edit) not licensed their trademarks to anyone else ever. I personally find these less objectionable than the finished fake products, but that makes no difference legally.
I would not be at all surprised if someone trying to import one of these into the US found the item confiscated by Customs (and the money paid lost).
Last edited:
Sent an email to Rickenbacker, wouldn't be too surprised if those models are listed as "backordered" permanently.
I'm getting kind of sick of people sitting around watching (apparent) crimes being committed and not doing anything about it.
With all due respect, I don't see that much of a similarity to Rickenbacker other than the body shape and a little of the headstock shape. It's not being advertised a Rickenbacker 4003 like the ones on Tradetang. It's just a DIY Bass kit no different than the P, J MM, and Violin shaped kits.
Cool, post some pics when finished. I'd love to see it.
We'll see, I don't imagine Rickenbacker will agree. The body, headstock, and pickguard all appear to be infringing to me.
Then again, if Ric says it's ok, well...
Also, the fact that the kits also infringe on other trademarks doesn't make it ok. Do you really think whoever is building these paid for the licenses? I seriously doubt it.
I'm curious to see what Ric says. It's a little bit of a grey area. They could threaten to sue if there is no cease and desist or they may find it non threatening since the bass isn't being advertised as a Ric but bears resemblance to the shape of one.
I just don't see a victim in this "crime" beyond Rickenbacker, I also think the type of person that would buy this kit wouldn't/couldn't buy a real Rickenbacker. I therefore doubt that this kit puts any kind of dent in Ric's pocket, just seems a little petty to me to tattle, I'm sure Rickenbacker is already well aware of this kit's existence anyway. It's not even close to the same quality and standards as a real Rickenbacker, different construction and parts, sure you could supply some authentic Ric upgrades, but it will still never be a real Ric. It also doesn't say Rickenbacker anywhere on the instrument, so it's not being sold as the genuine article under false pretenses. IMO this kit offers something that when finished will look similar to (but still noticeably not) a Rickenbacker to people that will possibly never be able to afford the real thing.
Exactly, the pickups, bridge, and neck/body construction is completely different. Just bears a similar look to the Ric.
Which is a trademark violation. Plain and simple.
Hey OX
Be sure to check the Pitbull build forum. It's full of people that actually have a helpful opinion
I'll be keeping an eye to see how yours progresses.
Be sure to check the Pitbull build forum. It's full of people that actually have a helpful opinion
I'll be keeping an eye to see how yours progresses.
The whole ric thing boggles me a bit. I understand their right to enforce trademark, but it seems short sighted. Whoever builds a kit like this is not going to end up with an instrument that plays or sounds like a ric. Those that do probably admire the tone and playing of great players who do play rics, not simply the general look of the bass. I want to look like Chris Squire, but sound like Chris Squire playing an SX is probably a really small demographic. Thus things like this are probably more like ric gateway drugs, only enhancing the buyers ric gas, not sating it.
As an example, remember when cheap copies drove Fender out of business?
As an example, remember when cheap copies drove Fender out of business?
You know what a crime is? Buying two new RIC basses who have peeling finishes and being told that you have no warranty on the finish of one because you modified it, and the other because the one year warranty had expired on the finish by the time I bought it brand new. As a result I don't feel the need to police their trademarks for them.
Last edited:
I don't even know why you feel so strongly about this. Obviously, no one actually able to buy a Rickenbacker would ever buy this kit.
Sending them an email makes you a real party pooper, too. Wow
In my opinion, anyway, a person actually being able to build and play the bass it wants and use it for artistic purposes is far more important than something as abstract and absurd as a patent/trademark/whatever on what basically is the shape of a piece of wood.
Last edited:
