Chinese knock-off basses

[Engle]

BTW at one time I had the first year model Gibson EB0 , I think 1959 model, had no beveling on the body. It had the same style crappy bridge. In fact the replacement adjustable one, was made to replace those early EB0 bridges. It belonged to my guitar player's dad, I used that thing for a couple of years. Sure wish I could have bought it.
View attachment 3059623

The early 70’s Japanese version of that bridge looks like it was designed by someone who had only seen a blurry picture of the Gibson bridge.

 

[jamro217]

Rather than argue over the semantics of legalese, why not just decide whether or not a third rate instrument based on a stolen design from across the globe is your bass of choice? That's not even factoring in the possibility of it arriving damaged (if it isn't confiscated at the border by Customs, that is), or is just an unplayable POS you now own. Good luck with the return policy and/or warranty. Let's not forget CITES. If you like the idea of an inexpensive bass that is similar to popular models, build a mutt.

 

[Eddie LeBlanc]

@Agni No one is commenting on the non-counterfeits. I think @Eddie LeBlanc is suggesting that I'd Chinese companies would enter the legit market, rather than all the counterfeits, people would happily buy them, assuming they made quality.

Exactly........
Seen too many counterfeit things out there that don't appear to be quality. Just if they'd spend time in developing their own brands, I'm sure they could make quality stuff.

After all, my 18 volt Ryobi Blower and 40 volt String Trimmer are quality tools. And very reputable. Those two items even though Ryobi is based in Asia (headquartered in Japan), they are contract manufactured in China. But I don't think I'd want to buy a counterfeit DeWalt power tool made in China selling for 10% the cost of a real DeWalt. Would you????

 

[Agni]

This debate seems to me to be between two approaches to business. Namely protectionism and competition.
In my opinion, protectionism favours the rich at the expense of the poor.
Competition is the driver of innovation and excellence.
There are perfectly logical arguments to be made on both sides.
If one wishes to see the rich stay rich, and the poor stay poor, then patents are the way to go.
Then, like many manufacturers, you can turn out poor quality and hype up the image -- it's cheaper.
If one accepts that we have got rich on our own industrial revolution, and other countries deserve their turn to improve their lot, then you may see patents and protectionism as negative influences.
I suppose it just depends on what sort of person you happen to be.

 

[buldog5151bass]

This debate seems to me to be between two approaches to business. Namely protectionism and competition.
In my opinion, protectionism favours the rich at the expense of the poor.
Competition is the driver of innovation and excellence.
There are perfectly logical arguments to be made on both sides.
If one wishes to see the rich stay rich, and the poor stay poor, then patents are the way to go.
Then, like many manufacturers, you can turn out poor quality and hype up the image -- it's cheaper.
If one accepts that we have got rich on our own industrial revolution, and other countries deserve their turn to improve their lot, then you may see patents and protectionism as negative influences.
I suppose it just depends on what sort of person you happen to be.

Without patents, people would not invest in products - that's why the concept exists. Drug companies would not develop meds that have saved lives, etc.

The people making most of the money on these counterfeits are the company owners, not the assemble line workers. If anything, their lot is worse, since they do not have laws protecting worker safety.

Companies in China and other places could make products without violating patents and trademarks and provide the same jobs.

Add in one other thing. Before the industrial revolution, the average person was slaving away on a farm, or working for someone else. They were not better off. That's why people flocked to cities - jobs.

In other words, your argument is flawed on every level.

 

[Agni]

Buldog, you might eventually learn how to put your own cards on the table, without sweeping other people's cards onto the floor.
If you reach that level of sophistication, let me know.
It's called opinion, and everyone has one -- they will not always align with yours, but you will be less of bore when you have understood that.

 

[buldog5151bass]

Buldog, you might eventually learn how to put your own cards on the table, without sweeping other people's cards onto the floor.
If you reach that level of sophistication, let me know.
It's called opinion, and everyone has one -- they will not always align with yours, but you will be less of bore when you have understood that.

My cards have always been on the table. I respect law, and I respect the rights of others. Nothing wrong with manufacturers in China (or any other country), as long as they respect the rights of others. I don't like flawed attempts at logic as people attempt to manufacture a reason/justification for buying counterfeits. They don't care about the rights of others - they just want something for cheap. Nothing I haven't said before in other threads.

How's dat?

 

[Agni]

Dat's your opinion. Nothing more, nothing less.