• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Chinabacker 4005

Status
Not open for further replies.
really guys, enough with the laws and international knowledge, this is talkbass, not talkaboutlawsinsteadofbass

LOL! Really? Trying to steer where an internet discussion goes? When a thread is started involving counterfeit basses, well that is going to part of the discussion and rightfully so.
 
Woah, I'm digging those toaster pickups!

I've been looking at those for months now. I would like to have one in a "natural" finish. The good news is that hardly anyone out there will be able to smugly pontificate to you how it will NEVER sound as good as the REAL DEAL, since there are so very few of them out in the wild, and practically none of them being used today because of their insane valuation due to rarity. I'm still unsure as to the reliability of ordering from China. Your recourse if it's wrong, or delivered broken is almost nil, since return shipping is on YOU. In almost every case, return shipping is cost prohibitive. I want to hear from a TB member who has actually gone through the process and received one of these "4005" models before I attempt to get one myself.

Though not a Ric copy, I ordered a double neck from China just over a year ago. I got custom options so it took around a month for the seller to have it ready to ship and then surprisingly only 4 days to arrive from China. I am very impressed with the quality, especially for the price. The only area they cut corners on was with the pickups, but those are easily replaced.

20150709_154427.jpg
 
The entire bass shape and look is trademarked, not just the logo. Buying one of these is theft.

You want a bass that looks like that? Buy a Rickenbacker. They own the exclusive rights to sell you one.

Actually buying counterfeit goods (even intentionally) is not illegal. Knowingly selling counterfeit goods is.

Invalid Link Removed

"Is it Illegal to Buy Counterfeit Goods?

In the U.S., federal law protecting trademarks makes it illegal to knowingly traffic counterfeit goods, which includes the production, sale and transport of such goods. The U.S. Department of Justice, however, has stated that federal law doesn’t prohibit an individual from buying a counterfeit product for personal use, even if they do so knowingly.

The maximum penalty for first-time offenders trafficking in counterfeit goods is 10 years in prison and a $2 million fine. For second-time offenders, the penalty is 20 years and a $5 million fine. In addition, if a corporation traffics in counterfeit goods, it can be subject to a fine of $15 million."
 
Actually buying counterfeit goods (even intentionally) is not illegal. Knowingly selling counterfeit goods is.

Invalid Link Removed

"Is it Illegal to Buy Counterfeit Goods?

In the U.S., federal law protecting trademarks makes it illegal to knowingly traffic counterfeit goods, which includes the production, sale and transport of such goods. The U.S. Department of Justice, however, has stated that federal law doesn’t prohibit an individual from buying a counterfeit product for personal use, even if they do so knowingly.

The maximum penalty for first-time offenders trafficking in counterfeit goods is 10 years in prison and a $2 million fine. For second-time offenders, the penalty is 20 years and a $5 million fine. In addition, if a corporation traffics in counterfeit goods, it can be subject to a fine of $15 million."
Yeah, we have already covered this ground. It is not enforced in any way in the US - but it is illegal in various other countries as it should be. But the DoJ says you are free to contribute to organized crime, property theft, and human trafficking to your hearts content. Live it up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PortlandBass77
Yeah, we have already covered this ground. It is not enforced in any way in the US - but it is illegal in various other countries as it should be. But the DoJ says you are free to contribute to organized crime, property theft, and human trafficking to your hearts content. Live it up.

The DOJ doesn't write the laws, they enforce them... there is no law against buying counterfeit goods so legally the DOJ can't do anything about it.
 
You got me there. It was just starting to sound like every other thread about it fake basses, and I had hoped for more information about the basses, and maybe some non-counterfeit options.
The non-counterfeit options are essentially to save up a ton of money and buy a used 4005, or buy a similar but non-copy instrument from another builder. You could probably contact a custom builder and have them build a bass that, while similar to a 4005, will cost less. You could even get Rickenbacker toaster pickups for it, since they sell those separately.
 
The DOJ doesn't write the laws, they enforce them... there is no law against buying counterfeit goods so legally the DOJ can't do anything about it.
Technically you are an accessory to a crime if you knowingly buy counterfeit items because there is a law against selling them. You are correct that the DoJ doesn't write laws. They have simply stated their position on the matter. There are also plenty of laws on the books that that DoJ simply chooses not to enforce as well.
 
And why don t the fender fans raise hell over all of the blatant fender knockoffs put out over the last 40-50 years? Almost every maker has one(or had one) and some receive praise for being as good or better than the original? I myself would not buy a POS like a fakenbacher (or whatever you want to call it) but if you want a potentially useless bass, go for it. It just seems hypocritical that people who knock them are fine with using other copyrighted or patented material.

That would be an issue if Fender had done something to protect the shape of the Precision and Jazz bass. As it is they only trademarked the shape of the headstock.

On the other hand, RIC has trademarked several design elements in their instruments (I couldn't tell you anything about the 4005 as it's a model I've only briefly heard of, much like the old 3000).

I stated this in another thread on the subject of counterfeiting and I'll reiterate here. While I can't and won't tell you not to buy them the Chinese Rickenbackers ARE counterfeit even if the TRC is removed. Why? Because it still copies the "crested wave" design you'll find in all 4001/4003/4004 bass guitars.

Final note, you won't see me frothing at the mouth because of these counterfeits, I won't berate anyone who buys one because I don't have the right to. Have a wonderful day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sartori
Technically you are an accessory to a crime if you knowingly buy counterfeit items because there is a law against selling them. You are correct that the DoJ doesn't write laws. They have simply stated their position on the matter. There are also plenty of laws on the books that that DoJ simply chooses not to enforce as well.

As much as I generally agree with you on the ethics of buying counterfeits, you are dead wrong about it being an accessory to a crime. At least in the US. No such law here. One reason for this might be that a purchaser of a knockoff might be a victim. We try to not punish victims here. Or if a person knowingly buys a counterfeit, although some may find it ethically objectionable, its not something that should involve the legal system. All as it should be, IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rockinrayduke
That would be an issue if Fender had done something to protect the shape of the Precision and Jazz bass. As it is they only trademarked the shape of the headstock.

On the other hand, RIC has trademarked several design elements in their instruments (I couldn't tell you anything about the 4005 as it's a model I've only briefly heard of, much like the old 3000).

I stated this in another thread on the subject of counterfeiting and I'll reiterate here. While I can't and won't tell you not to buy them the Chinese Rickenbackers ARE counterfeit even if the TRC is removed. Why? Because it still copies the "crested wave" design you'll find in all 4001/4003/4004 bass guitars.

Final note, you won't see me frothing at the mouth because of these counterfeits, I won't berate anyone who buys one because I don't have the right to. Have a wonderful day.
Indeed. Fender didn't do a good job of protecting their designs back in the day, and as a result, they became public domain. Preventing that is exactly why Rickenbacker so fanatically pursues anything they perceive as trademark infringement.
 
As much as I generally agree with you on the ethics of buying counterfeits, you are dead wrong about it being an accessory to a crime. At least in the US. No such law here. One reason for this might be that a purchaser of a knockoff might be a victim. We try to not punish victims here. Or if a person knowingly buys a counterfeit, although some may find it ethically objectionable, its not something that should involve the legal system. All as it should be, IMO.
I think the reason the DOJ doesn't pursue the buyers is that would require proving that they knew it was a counterfeit. And that's difficult to do without also likely prosecuting people who legitimately did not know and so were victims, which would be a worse outcome.
 
As much as I generally agree with you on the ethics of buying counterfeits, you are dead wrong about it being an accessory to a crime. At least in the US. No such law here. One reason for this might be that a purchaser of a knockoff might be a victim. We try to not punish victims here. Or if a person knowingly buys a counterfeit, although some may find it ethically objectionable, its not something that should involve the legal system. All as it should be, IMO.
There doesn't have to be a law to be an accessory to a crime. The definition of accessory applies to all laws. The DoJ has simply stated their opinion on this issue and chooses not to consider it a crime. But again, they don't write the laws.

Seriously, can we be done now? People are amply informed now of my view on the subject.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sartori and MCF
The ethics and morality behind selling a counterfeit a fake or a rip off or whatever is a subject that's been done to death.

But it's important that we all understand that buying counterfeit is not theft. Two plus two isn't five, the sky isn't green, and buying counterfeit isn't theft.
Yes it is. (sky above Yellowknife in northern Canada)

3003223.jpg


^^ But believe it or not, the photographer is not a chinese guy, he's from Korea!
 
There doesn't have to be a law to be an accessory to a crime. The definition of accessory applies to all laws. The DoJ has simply stated their opinion on this issue and chooses not to consider it a crime. But again, they don't write the laws.

Seriously, can we be done now? People are amply informed now of my view on the subject.

+1!

Now I'm going back home to my my popcorn and beer!

ou29w.jpg
 
Here's something else to consider: What about a dealer? Rickenbacker (and many many many other U.S. companies) consider retail dealers to be their prime customers. They are not the end users, but they are buying and then selling (and making profit on) instruments that they get from the manufacturers. So now, by extension, the BUYER (dealer) is now part of the network of the distribution of counterfeit goods. The smart ones know this and won't try to distribute counterfeit Ricks because they are liable to have a knock on the door. So, technically, SOME buyers of these counterfeit Ricks can be "prosecuted" under trade laws. Not you or me. But if you buy one direct from China and try selling it on, let's say, eBay, you can be stopped. Rickenbacker also has a solid arrangement with eBay and you seldom see a Fakenbacker on the 'Bay that lasts very long.
 
Here's something else to consider: What about a dealer? Rickenbacker (and many many many other U.S. companies) consider retail dealers to be their prime customers. They are not the end users, but they are buying and then selling (and making profit on) instruments that they get from the manufacturers. So now, by extension, the BUYER (dealer) is now part of the network of the distribution of counterfeit goods. The smart ones know this and won't try to distribute counterfeit Ricks because they are liable to have a knock on the door. So, technically, SOME buyers of these counterfeit Ricks can be "prosecuted" under trade laws. Not you or me. But if you buy one direct from China and try selling it on, let's say, eBay, you can be stopped. Rickenbacker also has a solid arrangement with eBay and you seldom see a Fakenbacker on the 'Bay that lasts very long.
Possesion for sale is illegal even by the DoJ standards.
 
Here's something else to consider: What about a dealer? Rickenbacker (and many many many other U.S. companies) consider retail dealers to be their prime customers. They are not the end users, but they are buying and then selling (and making profit on) instruments that they get from the manufacturers. So now, by extension, the BUYER (dealer) is now part of the network of the distribution of counterfeit goods. The smart ones know this and won't try to distribute counterfeit Ricks because they are liable to have a knock on the door. So, technically, SOME buyers of these counterfeit Ricks can be "prosecuted" under trade laws. Not you or me. But if you buy one direct from China and try selling it on, let's say, eBay, you can be stopped. Rickenbacker also has a solid arrangement with eBay and you seldom see a Fakenbacker on the 'Bay that lasts very long.
I've never owned a chinese counterfeit bass and will never buy one! Never! And I don't care for ebay and their arrangement with Rickenbacker at all. I buy only american basses (except some high end japanese/european basses) and qualitywise all those imported basses from asia are not even close to MIA's (not to mention the uber-crappy chinese knock offs on aliexpress :rollno:). Having said that, DigitalMan is completely correct: Possesion for sale is illegal even by the DoJ standards. :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: DigitalMan
Status
Not open for further replies.