Fender Decals On Non-Fender Basses

[aborgman]

Aren't you carrying the water by owning their products?

Carrying water is a little more than just ever monetarily supporting them.

That being said - I own a Fender and some Disney stuff, but they were all bought second hand. I've never bought anything new from Fender, and I can't recall ever buying anything new from Disney.

"Carrying water" has an implication of "Doing the work for", and in this case it's "arguing for big businesses repeated manipulations of IP law".

 

[eSmith]

for limited times to authors and inventors

Ya, looks good like that on paper, and the spirt of it gets everyone to agree to it but the reality is a far cry from what you quoted there.

"Authors and Inventors" is defined as a company name that never dies no matter how many generations of employees go through it. And limited time is over 99 years (How many 99 year olds do you know?) And the courts are constantly granting extensions so what you wrote and what is real do not resemble each other at all.

Whats the point of everyone having the knowledge to do something they will get sued into the poorhouse for doing? This is good how? I'm thinking unless your the one doing the sueing it isn't.

So, rather than saying that "if you want to profit from something do it well" the government Says, "do as crappy a job as you like and for a fee we will ruin anyone who tries to enter the market and compete against you by offering better value"

Thats IP law for you.

-eSmith.

 

[aborgman]

How exactly is Fender making a "mockery" of intellectual property law?

The same way most other companies are -

1) Using their money to change what should be a time limited function to a perpetual one.

2) Using lawyers/lobbying to drastically increase the scope of what falls under IP protections

 

[Gort]

You got nothing either hey Gort......

Try actually saying something to counter what I said, we all know you don't agree, you just haven't given a valid reason why.

I've responded previously with corrections to your erroneous assumptions. Basically you're just talkin' trash.

 

[scotch]

The same way most other companies are -

1) Using their money to change what should be a time limited function to a perpetual one.

2) Using lawyers/lobbying to drastically increase the scope of what falls under IP protections

So,.. 50-60 years to you equates to "perpetual"?

You've never tried to make a living off of your own creative ideas, have you?

 

[aborgman]

You see those giant pics of cars up there? Here's a tip: they are not actually what they say, they are recreations.

How about you say something about it rather than ignore it?

Ford Cobra Replica

Austin Healy 3000 Replica.

Marshall Stack Replicas

1969 Chevy Yenko Nova Replica

 

[Diogenes]

Absolutly he was. Has anyone considered that I might not give a crap? Other than I get a more amusing reaction when I spell it one way over the other.

And in EVERY case, everyone knows exactly what I am referring to so although I may not have satisified everyone on an Aesthetic level, I have surly satisfied the far more important criteria of communication which is the only real purpose of the written language. If I get the ideas out of my head and into yours communication was successful regardless of the spelling of it all.

-eSmith.

Ohkayh than... u surly did learnt me a lessun.

 

[Burlington]

Thanks Aborgman I'm interested what the argument will be that they come up with about things like this. To me, it is no different than replacing a headstock decal.

 

[eSmith]

Scotch, where are you getting 50 - 60 years from? The current limit is 99 years PAST THE LIFE OF THE AUTHOR.

Current lobbying attempts are looking to increase it to 120 years AFTER THE INVENTOR DIED.

This is NOT a good thing and I don't support it at all.

Never put a fake decal on anything in my life but I cretainly do not care that others do. The LAST thing to cross my mind is that Leo's great grand children might actually have to get jobs.... oh the horror!!!!!!

(In Truth Leo's family most likely gets little or nothing, the laywers and exec's that never played an instrument in there lives get the bulk of it, That is who SMCD and GORT are so protective of.)

-eSmith.

 

[aborgman]

So,.. 50-60 years to you equates to "perpetual"?

So 50-60 years equates to "limited"?

I mean - technically a term of "the life of the universe" is limited.

Repeatedly changing the terms just as someone (who just happens to be a huge donor) has IP that is about to run out on the other hand...

The original 14 year protection provided in the 1790 copyright act was in accordance with the Constitutional mandate.

We're now up to "life of the autor + 70 years" (for a private author) and "120 years after creation or 95 years after publication, whichever is shorter" for corporate works.

...and everytime a Disney copyright is about to run out, the term gets extended yet again.

Copyright terms have been extended 11 times in the past 50 years.

You've never tried to make a living off of your own creative ideas, have you?

I used to work for one of the biggest IP companies in the world, and have been involved with dozens of patents... so, try again.

 

[scotch]

Scotch, where are you getting 50 - 60 years from? The current limit is 99 years PAST THE LIFE OF THE AUTHOR.

Current lobbying attempts are looking to increase it to 120 years AFTER THE INVENTOR DIED.

This is NOT a good thing and I don't support it at all.

Never put a fake decal on anything in my life but I cretainly do not care that others do. The LAST thing to cross my mind is that Leo's great grand children might actually have to get jobs.... oh the horror!!!!!!

(In Truth Leo's family most likely gets little or nothing, the laywers and exec's that never played an instrument in there lives get the bulk of it, That is who SMCD and GORT are so protective of.)

-eSmith.

50-60 years is how lonf Fender has had a trademark.

And again, its not about the "rich Fender family" or whatever. Its about the hourly employees, etc that work every day to provide for their families.

 

[Gort]

(In Truth Leo's family most likely gets little or nothing, the laywers and exec's that never played an instrument in there lives get the bulk of it, That is who SMCD and GORT are so protective of.)

The legitimate owner of the trademark is currently FMIC.

 

[THand]

(In Truth Leo's family most likely gets little or nothing, the laywers and exec's that never played an instrument in there lives get the bulk of it, That is who SMCD and GORT are so protective of.)

-eSmith.

Since he sold to CBS and went on to better things(IMO), I wouldn't think they would get anything. They probably hold shares in the company, but I don't have a clue whether really they do or not.

 

[scotch]

No...

Repeatedly changing the terms just as someone (who just happens to be a huge donor) has IP that is about to run out on the other hand...

The original 14 year protection provided in the 1790 copyright act was in accordance with the Constitutional mandate.

We're now up to "life of the autor + 70 years" - and everytime a Disney copyright is about to run out, the term gets extended yet again.

Copyright terms have been extended 11 times in the past 50 years.

I used to work for one of the biggest IP companies in the world, and have been involved with dozens of patents... so, try again.

Your OWN patents?

 

[THand]

And again, its not about the "rich Fender family" or whatever. Its about the hourly employees, etc that work every day to provide for their families.

I would only think the hourly employees are affected if someone chooses not to buy a brand new bass. In that scenario, it hurts the Fender workers just as much when someone buys a real vintage Fender as when they buy a fake, or a Sadowsky, Lakeland or a simple used Fender.

 

[aborgman]

50-60 years is how lonf Fender has had a trademark.

And again, its not about the "rich Fender family" or whatever. Its about the hourly employees, etc that work every day to provide for their families.

At the expense of other employees working for other companies who are being prevented by IP law from making competitors... and at the expense of the consumer who has to pay monopoly prices.

IP law is not a right. It's a privilege granted by the government for the purpose of advancing the state of the art. Should it fail to serve its intended purpose, it can be done away with.

 

[scotch]

Please help me understand you better, Aborgman. You are acknowledging that Fender is still legally entitled to protect it's trademark, yet you still support the right of a counterfeiter to sell it's decals? I admit, I'm confused.

 

[aborgman]

Your OWN patents?

Partially, yes.

A company I formerly worked for, and currently hold stock in, has MASSIVE quantities of patents.

As a stockholder, I'm a partial owner of those patents.

As an employee I had a hand in a number of patents... which I was well remunerated for. Which is a direct refutation of

You've never tried to make a living off of your own creative ideas, have you?

As an engineer, I've done nothing BUT make my living off my own creative ideas.

 

[scotch]

At the expense of other employees working for other companies who are being prevented by IP law from making competitors... and at the expense of the consumer who has to pay monopoly prices.

IP law is not a right. It's a privilege granted by the government for the purpose of advancing the state of the art. Should it fail to serve its intended purpose, it can be done away with.

Fender has no monopoly over electric bass guitars. What the hell are you talking about?!? There are plenty of legal competitors. Hundreds if not thousands of companies are making competitive products. Where's the monopoly? Fender has it's own brand.

 

[scotch]

Partially, yes.

A company I formerly worked for, and currently hold stock in, has MASSIVE quantities of patents.

As a stockholder, I'm a partial owner of those patents.

As an employee I had a hand in a number of patents... which I was well remunerated for. Which is a direct refutation of



As an engineer, I've done nothing BUT make my living off my own creative ideas.

Well, good. Thanks for answering. I admit I'm surprised at your cavalier consideration of other's rights to their own patents, then.